I don't know how this screen works. what aspects of an image on the screen are given to the left/right eye?
Could I take a stereoscopic image and stripe the left and right columns of pixels, and it would work on that screen? or is there something else?
Thanks for your response
Um I'm not sure if this will answer your questions but...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_barrier
Ask Apple.
But here's a good detailed description.
http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-3d/307845-how-3d-works-why-gives-people-headaches.html
http://www.centerpointconnect.com/article/ab9529af/how-does-the-evo-3d-work-without-glasses
the 2nd link is more interesting, but if I put an image that has intertwined stripes of 1 pixel wide for each eye, it will look like gibberish (sort of) on a non-3d screen, but does that mean that it will work without any problem on the evo?
I'm interested in supporting 3d boot screens... that would be badass!, so getting android/sense to recognize 3d or not is sort of what I want to learn about, but not really...
thanks again
jcarrz1 said:
the 2nd link is more interesting, but if I put an image that has intertwined stripes of 1 pixel wide for each eye, it will look like gibberish (sort of) on a non-3d screen, but does that mean that it will work without any problem on the evo?
I'm interested in supporting 3d boot screens... that would be badass!, so getting android/sense to recognize 3d or not is sort of what I want to learn about, but not really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd have to try this (experiment time), but yeah 3D boot screens would rock. I can't think that any kind of special software would be required, but then who knows.
Just note that they'd have to be setup in landscape mode, as that's how the stereoscopic viewing works on this (and most I'd assume) 3D phone.
The newer-style lenticular screens will be much better than the current barrier-type screens
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/20/hitachi-announces-high-res-4-5-inch-ips-display-for-smartphones/
The 3D effect works in portrait mode as well, look at the factory 3D images in gallery in portrait mode, a 3D startup screen would be great!
saltorio said:
I'd have to try this (experiment time), but yeah 3D boot screens would rock. I can't think that any kind of special software would be required, but then who knows.
Just note that they'd have to be setup in landscape mode, as that's how the stereoscopic viewing works on this (and most I'd assume) 3D phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually our phones' screens can display 3D images in portrait, it just cannot take them because of the orientation of the camera.
USSENTERNCC1701E said:
Actually our phones' screens can display 3D images in portrait, it just cannot take them because of the orientation of the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well look at that, you are correct. It's just alot harder to find the right position for it to work (for me at least).
As for the orientation thing, I really hope either HTC or a ROM dev hacks the camera app so that it doesn't prevent 3D picture taking in portrait. There's really no reason for it, as you may want a skewed perspective (like turning your head).
There would be no point in 3D pictures taken in portrait. The perspective difference would be vertical which doesn't match up with your eyes.
playslikepage71 said:
There would be no point in 3D pictures taken in portrait. The perspective difference would be vertical which doesn't match up with your eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're missing the point. When the phone is in a portrait orientation the phone simply will not take a picture in 3D. As the photographer, I want to be able to compose the shot however I want. If I want to take a picture that's mostly in portrait (maybe at a slight skewed angle) knowing it'll be viewed in landscape, I should be able to do that. My equipment shouldn't arbitrarily prevent it.
saltorio said:
Well look at that, you are correct. It's just alot harder to find the right position for it to work (for me at least).
As for the orientation thing, I really hope either HTC or a ROM dev hacks the camera app so that it doesn't prevent 3D picture taking in portrait. There's really no reason for it, as you may want a skewed perspective (like turning your head).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An app won't do it, as the physical location of the cameras is fixed. If you hold your phone in portrait mode, and take a 3D picture, it will indeed be a 3D picture, but you'll have to turn your head sideways to see it in 3D. Otherwise, all you'll see is a 2D image that changes slightly when you rock the phone up and down. Face it, taking a 3D portrait picture and viewing that same picture in 3D portrait is not possible and never will be on this phone.
Edit: You posted your last response at the time I was typing mine. I see what you're saying now. Something that would basically prevent the orientation of the phone from deciding if you can or cannot snap a 3D picture WOULD be nice. I agree. And then allowing the viewer to look at it in either portrait or landscape mode as they see fit.
To answer the OP (since few actually have tried) the gallery app processes a "side-by-side" picture and makes it interlace each pixel column.
It takes this:
LLLLL|RRRRR
LLLLL|RRRRR
LLLLL|RRRRR
and turns it into this:
LRLRLRLRLR
LRLRLRLRLR
LRLRLRLRLR
and turns on the barrier to make all the Ls go to your left eye and all the Rs go to your right eye.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I bet it would be easier to temporarily disable the sensor rather than edit the program.
how will a lenticular display work on a phone? it will always be in 3d, right?
rstuckmaier said:
To answer the OP (since few actually have tried) the gallery app processes a "side-by-side" picture and makes it interlace each pixel column.
It takes this:
LLLLL|RRRRR
LLLLL|RRRRR
LLLLL|RRRRR
and turns it into this:
LRLRLRLRLR
LRLRLRLRLR
LRLRLRLRLR
and turns on the barrier to make all the Ls go to your left eye and all the Rs go to your right eye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
considering this, I always thought that portrait pictures should be allowed. But instead of side by side, using a vertical style. So.
UUUUU
UUUUU
UUUUU
---------
DDDDD
DDDDD
DDDDD
and turns it into this:
UDUDUD
UDUDUD
UDUDUD
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
EricSS619 said:
considering this, I always thought that portrait pictures should be allowed. But instead of side by side, using a vertical style. So.
UUUUU
UUUUU
UUUUU
---------
DDDDD
DDDDD
DDDDD
and turns it into this:
UDUDUD
UDUDUD
UDUDUD
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the problem is that it would be like this:
UUUUU
DDDDD
UUUUU
DDDDD
UUUUU
DDDDD
rstuckmaier said:
But the problem is that it would be like this:
UUUUU
DDDDD
UUUUU
DDDDD
UUUUU
DDDDD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why? The software could correct for that and interlace it however it wanted.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
I downloaded a pic here on the forums .. which has "Left" on one side, and "Right" on the other side.. looking at it.. each eye only sees one. so as it mixes it into 1 picture.. you see it and don't (kinda like when you put your hand over your eye and you see darkness from there, and whatever your looking at) - But when you close the right eye.. you see 'Left' and when you close the Left eye. you see 'Right' .. its great to show people how the technology works...
but here's my question..
if it is indeed showing each other line of pixels.. with it only being one sided like that.. why is the word solid? - when you don't have both pics to form the 3D image, should'nt there be missing lines every other line? - in the words example pic.. they were both solid pics.. which makes no sense, how can it direct a full image. but angling each other row of pixels to a separate eye? - do you see what I mean?
DevXen, try this, pull up a 3D pic on your phone, cover one eye so you see one clear picture. Now, with that eye still covered, slightly tilt the phone left or right until it changes. You've just seen how the barrier works. If there were blank spaces in the individual pictures, you'd see them as well. With the barrier, one eye sees one full picture, the other sees another. It's not actually moving pixels in the images over, it's only what your individual eyes can see due to the barrier.
Related
I found this over at (therootofallevo.com) source link is here, sorry if it has been mentioned here before.
By Fernando Gonzalez
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Obviously one of the biggest aspects of the Evo 3D is the 3D capabilities. Some love it, some hate it, some just don’t care, and some enjoy it but just don’t use it often. Whichever side you’re on, I think we can all agree that sometimes the 3D content can strain your eyes a bit. Some people it’s more than just a strain, it can flat out cause a serious headache. From my personal experience, most 3D content on Youtube looks great and doesn’t bother me at all. Watching actual 3D movies looks incredible. Most of the 3D videos I’ve taken look great too and don’t bother me at all. However, the pictures can be a different story. I notice the pictures don’t align too well. When they don’t align right, that’s when the eyes start to strain. The more unaligned they are, the more your eyes will strain. Want to test it out? Take a picture in 3D, and move the Evo left to right, you’ll see the alignment of the two pictures. You’ll notice the closer together the pictures are aligned, the easier it is on your eyes…
WELL.. there’s an option with the 3D pictures that a LOT of people don’t know about —-
Adjust 3D alignment
I can tell you how much better it is on your eyes after adjusting (huge difference), but nothing is better than seeing for yourself first hand. So here’s a quick guide. It’s extremely easy,
1) Open up your camera (in 3D of course ) and take a picture..
2) Go to the gallery on the bottom left of the camera app
Here’s the demo picture I’m going to use: Notice how insanely unaligned the two picture are. This is the type of picture that REALLY strains the eyes bad. I can’t look at it for more than 2 seconds…
3) Tap the screen and select the icon that looks like a wand with sparkels:
(btw, I think the image tearing is because of the 3D effect)
4) You’ll get this popup and select Adjust 3D alignment
5) Now you’ll get this screen:
The left and right tabs is what allows you to adjust the two images taken. If you tilt the screen over you’ll be able to see both the images. Now here’s the trick. I’ll try and explain this without being confusing.. Because of how the images are taken, its impossible to get everything on both images to align perfect. So the key is to figure out whats your focus point of the picture. In my demo picture, its the box. So you adjust the image until the two images are aligned as best you can on the focus point, the box. You’ll notice outside of the focus point, like the monitor base and the black rag to the right, aren’t aligned that well compared to the box. But that’s fine, because again the focus point of the image is the box. So as long as you align the focus point the image will not only look much better, but it will be a million times better on your eyes
Here’s how my demo picture looked before the adjustment, then after..
While I think HTC really should have done a better job with the Evo 3D being able to automatically adjust the images, the fact that they threw this option in there is something to be very happy about. It’s a great option that can bring the fun back to 3D for those that get headaches and strained eyes. So what do you all think? Has it helped at all? If so, will you be taking more 3D pictures?
Wow probably the most helpful post ever lol. Thanks.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA Premium App
Im glad it helped you out I was looking for info on a tripod since my hands shake so much and found this so since it helped me I knew it would help others here.
I have tinkered with this a bit and the only problem I have with it (although it does make for easier focus) is it leaves an overlap look to the sides of the screen where you adjust the pics from their native locations.
Thanks!
Wow, this really helped with a few of the pix I've taken that were hard to focus on!
One other tip that I've found useful when adjusting this setting is to close one eye. I found that my eyes were trying to focus on the main object (the box in your example) and it made it hard to tell when the pictures were actually aligned. By closing one eye and tilting the screen in such a way that both pictures were visible, I was able to align them much quicker.
-Mark
This is not meant to be a thread about me asking whether I should return my phone. Has anyone else noticed that the top half of.the display is warmer (color temp-wise) than the bottom half? It's certainly not a major yellowing but on a white background it can be seen. Any thoughts?
Return it if it bothers you so much....j/k, can't see it on mine, could it be the light leakage from the leds for the red buttons?
Sounds defective to me.
~John
No problems here. Screen is so much better than the AMOLED screens.
I'll post pics later so you can see exactly what I mean.
jjamesv said:
This is not meant to be a thread about me asking whether I should return my phone. Has anyone else noticed that the top half of.the display is warmer (color temp-wise) than the bottom half? It's certainly not a major yellowing but on a white background it can be seen. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
don't know. Yeah post a pic but pulling up my dialer, which has lots of white, the top and bottom look very purely white.
Just checked mine out. No problems here. May want to swap it.
Ugh. I haven't posted 8 times yet.
I appreciate all of the replies. What I'm talking about is pretty subtle, so I'll be curious to see your reactions to the pic.
I hate to do this, but I would like to post an image.
Here's a pic of my screen using "Screen Test".
http://db.tt/f7U6CK7Y
You can see that it is warmer on the left (top half of screen)
Eh, mine does it a little but not enough to make a fuss about it, barely noticeable.
People are too picky about things. Nothing's going to be 100% perfect.
Not major but it is interesting to look at these manufacturing quirks. Having said that, Nexus has some "quirks" in its display that I found unacceptable. Yet most people don't even bay an eyelash.
jjamesv said:
Here's a pic of my screen using "Screen Test".
http://db.tt/f7U6CK7Y
You can see that it is warmer on the left (top half of screen)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not seeing it. When you say top half of screen do you mean based on landscape or based on the phone's top? The color bar on the half with numbers 3 & 4 is more saturated.
I downloaded that app and mine looks just like yours. I don't see any problem except for that saturation but I don't notice that on anything else so I have to guess that's the way that image is already. I've looked at the white screen and the grey screen as well. Perhaps there's a very, very slight lightness at the very edges of the screen but nothing that looks really wrong.
feralicious said:
Not seeing it. When you say top half of screen do you mean based on landscape or based on the phone's top? The color bar on the half with numbers 3 & 4 is more saturated.
I downloaded that app and mine looks just like yours. I don't see any problem except for that saturation but I don't notice that on anything else so I have to guess that's the way that image is already. I've looked at the white screen and the grey screen as well. Perhaps there's a very, very slight lightness at the very edges of the screen but nothing that looks really wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the guy is looking at the screen at an angle?
feralicious said:
Not seeing it. When you say top half of screen do you mean based on landscape or based on the phone's top? The color bar on the half with numbers 3 & 4 is more saturated.
I downloaded that app and mine looks just like yours. I don't see any problem except for that saturation but I don't notice that on anything else so I have to guess that's the way that image is already. I've looked at the white screen and the grey screen as well. Perhaps there's a very, very slight lightness at the very edges of the screen but nothing that looks really wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I meant top half of the display if it was in portrate mode. That's a little confusing since my pic is in landscape. My sense of it is that the "1" and "3" side, or what would be the top of the screen, is warmer. If I'm looking at a page of text on a white background and I watch a spot as I scroll it up toward the top of the display it will get warmer the higher it moves.
Basically what I'm saying is that the bottom of my display has a higher color temperature than the top, and it sounds like that's pretty consistent with other Rezounds. Overall, I don't think there's a better display out there.
I just checked with Screen Test. I notice your key lights are on in your pic. I wonder if leak from the LEDs down there are making it a bit cooler. On mine, I can just maybe barely hallucinate the light leak on a black background it if I'm testing it in the dark but I still think it looks different than your pic.
Your screen is warmer from the top until about 1/6 of the way down where mine would be cooler from the bottom until maybe 1/10 of the way up. I don't know if there's any potential optical illusion going on but I would guess you have some backlight nonuniformity issue. Maybe try it in different kinds of ambient light and see if it looks anything like leakage from the bottom keys.
HTGamingPC said:
I just checked with Screen Test. I notice your key lights are on in your pic. I wonder if leak from the LEDs down there are making it a bit cooler. On mine, I can just maybe barely hallucinate the light leak on a black background it if I'm testing it in the dark but I still think it looks different than your pic.
Your screen is warmer from the top until about 1/6 of the way down where mine would be cooler from the bottom until maybe 1/10 of the way up. I don't know if there's any potential optical illusion going on but I would guess you have some backlight nonuniformity issue. Maybe try it in different kinds of ambient light and see if it looks anything like leakage from the bottom keys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, if I'm understanding you the two displays are similar in that they're warmer at the top and cooler at the bottom?
If my past experience with LCDS they seem to have had had less variation across the panel.
jjamesv said:
So, if I'm understanding you the two displays are similar in that they're warmer at the top and cooler at the bottom?
If my past experience with LCDS they seem to have had had less variation across the panel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think what s/he's saying is that the capacative button LEDs are on so they leak a bit of light onto the bottom of the screen. You can download Screen Filter and turn them off and see if you still feel the screen is cooler at the bottom. And yes, they felt their screen looked different than yours but that it could be an optical illusion?
Okay now I'm wondering if I'm seeing it on my screen as well so I took screenshots, rotated one of them and putting then up side by side to see if it could be an optical illusion based on there bring different shades of grey nearby.
Well they didn't come up side by side as another post of mine since they're bigger for some reason, but anyway, you can see the dark grey squares of both butted up against each other and they look the same. I agree the white circles around the numbers seem different but perhaps that's the image from the test and not the screen?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
So, I don't have any background or research into this and this is just speculation based on some observations. I might be on a completely other planet with this...
But, I hear a lot of people make the remark about how 3D gives them headaches or hurts their eyes. I'm sure there's a lot to it, but I'm also thinking it has something to do with how our eyes work vs 3d cameras.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Our eyes criss-cross as we look at closer/further objects. If you don't believe me, try looking at your nose or have someone else look at their nose and watch their eyes. This is what we're used to, it gives us depth and the 2 varying angles of what we are looking at.
The Evo 3D, Optimus 3D, and virtually every other 3D camera I've seen has 2 fixed lenses pointing straight out. I understand why - it would be way too difficult to be able to know how much to angle the lenses based on what you're focusing on, it would be costly, and less durable. But because they're pointing straight forward and don't cross, it's really just recording a double image with little difference in the angle. Not to mention, this isn't a natural view.
I'm wondering if this has anything to do with the discomfort of people viewing 3D. I don't really have much of a problem with seeing anything in 3D, but I used to. When I first got my E3D, 3D pictures hurt my eyes, but video was fine. I later got glasses, found out my eyes are a hair pointing away from each other (to the point where it's not noticeable). Now, I have more depth from anything I watch in 3D and the photos don't hurt my eyes. But I do notice a double image effect if I look into the background on many things. I know this is because you can't exactly line up the whole image, but it led me to think about the differences.
Now this doesn't offer a solution and is probably a pointless post, but was an interesting idea that someone might enjoy discussing.
It'll strain your eyes some because they have to focus on the light from the screen instead of where it should be if looking past or in front of it. But, most of the headache is from your brain trying to figure out what the hell you're looking at. So basically people with weak minds get headaches more often.
If you can find 3D pics or videos with a slight border around them it helps out a ton with that. It also makes the 3D effect much more pronounced.
The issue with 3D is the content dictates what is in focus, not you. If you try to only focus on what is already in focus you should be ok. But it is when you try to focus on distant, out of focus objects, which you will never be able to actually bring into focus, that you cause strain
Dont forget the refresh issue too, you dont get your regular 60fps, you get (polarized left) (blank) (polarized right) (blank) and so on, and while you wont consciously "see" the blank screen your brain has to work harder to edit it, this increase strain by quite a bit.
xHausx said:
So basically people with weak minds get headaches more often.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if there is any way to OC our minds
NixZero said:
Dont forget the refresh issue too, you dont get your regular 60fps, you get (polarized left) (blank) (polarized right) (blank) and so on, and while you wont consciously "see" the blank screen your brain has to work harder to edit it, this increase strain by quite a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our screens aren't polarized. Neither are our eyes equipped to handle polarized content.
3D videos are the standard fps for each eye and there's a parallax barrier that decides which image goes to which eye. Take a look at any 3D video, you can clearly see that each eye's image is there, full frame rate
two things happening
One reason for the headaches/eye strain is due a mismatch between where we focus and where we point our eyes.
As stated above, when we look up close our eyes point in (converge) and we bring the near object into focus (accommodate).
This works really well in the real world and helps our brains decide where things are in space.
With artificial 3D, we continue to focus (accommodate) at the screen, but in order to appreciate the 3D, we need to vary our convergence. This mismatch gives some people (about 20% of the population) varying degrees of eyestrain/headaches.
Great thread! Lotta nice info here.
I get eye strains with pictures only but Im okey with the videos.
Seemingly to counter the LCD owners moaning about AMOLEDs vibrant colours Samsung has added an extra mode to the S3 screen settings.. 'Natural'. We now have 4 modes.
Dynamic
Standard
Natural
Movie
There is also a temperature option within the videoplayer itself to further tweak the look.
Which do you prefer?
Natural all the way. Once you use it for a while Dynamic and standard look a little too gimmicky..
Actually prefer standard! Natural and movie look too washed out and dynamic looks too saturated.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII via Tapatalk
Can anyone share a video or pictures of the different modes?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I hate the sharpening artefacts brought by the dynamic and normal modes. Just look at the signal bar. I personally use the movie mode.
The screen set on standard looks the best for me, natural or movie look way too washed out, quite horrible, in fact.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
ooidort said:
I hate the sharpening artefacts brought by the dynamic and normal modes. Just look at the signal bar. I personally use the movie mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was waiting to see the display in real life to buy one.
But does the screen really look thàt bad? Cuz dear god! It looks like Windows 95 without video driver?
Nah in person the screen looks amazing. Dunno what all the fuss is about.
Sent from my LG-P920 using xda premium
fallenwout said:
I was waiting to see the display in real life to buy one.
But does the screen really look thàt bad? Cuz dear god! It looks like Windows 95 without video driver?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, it doesn't have any of the "scanline-ish" stuff you see on the pictures, it's the camera's macro mode.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA
Maybe not the scanlines, but my galaxy s ii with low resolution and dithering can look like a windows 95 machine with only 256 colors when viewing many pictures. Giant blocks of limited colors and shades. They just happen to be very very saturated, and dark.
And thanks for the picture comparison. It was so nicely shot I was debating whether it was a screencap or not. I guess it is still hard to judge though since I am viewing these pictures right now on an IPS monitor. Even if I viewed them on my s2 with superamoled, there's no guarantee with all the image processing from the camera and my phone, but the comparison makes its point in regards to the color differences between the modes.
ooidort said:
I hate the sharpening artefacts brought by the dynamic and normal modes. Just look at the signal bar. I personally use the movie mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only movie mode disables the horrible sharpening artifacts. But out looks way too wash out and too warm. What I do is use power save level 1 in browser.
Wish there was a mode between Natural and Standard. Natural is just a tad bit too washed out, but Standard is way too overexposed.
Can't wait for the devs to do their magic!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Mostly natural but will switch to standard now and then.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
fallenwout said:
I was waiting to see the display in real life to buy one.
But does the screen really look thàt bad? Cuz dear god! It looks like Windows 95 without video driver?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. That's just a crappy photo. The screen is amazing.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Can someone post a video of the different modes, like playing a movie trailer? I wanna see how saturated animated 3d movies are (lorax, madagascar 3) and whether or not live action movies people have natural skin tones instead of alien colored red and orange skin.
cmd512 said:
Wish there was a mode between Natural and Standard. Natural is just a tad bit too washed out, but Standard is way too overexposed.
Can't wait for the devs to do their magic!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Standard is oversaturated, while natural is undersaturated.
I voted dynamic, but i think it depends a lot on the wallpaper you have and its colors. if my wallpaper had vibrant colors I think I'd tone it down
There is however a too high blue tint on the screen. Can this be solved?
I'm really curious to see what devs can do about this and I agree that a mode between 'natural' and 'standard' is needed. Or better yet, the ability for users to set their own custom modes. I wonder too if it will be possible for devs to remove the white shadow that appears around text, especially over grey backgrounds.
With proper tweaking, I think the SGS3 screen will look as good as the one on the HOX but there's still a lot of work to be done...
xdn said:
I'm really curious to see what devs can do about this and I agree that a mode between 'natural' and 'standard' is needed. Or better yet, the ability for users to set their own custom modes. I wonder too if it will be possible for devs to remove the white shadow that appears around text, especially over grey backgrounds.
With proper tweaking, I think the SGS3 screen will look as good as the one on the HOX but there's still a lot of work to be done...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The white shadows around text are sharpening artifacts. That looks bad enough but the sharpening also make text appears grey instead of black and lowers the contrast. Using the level 1 power saving mode in browser turns off the sharpening and improves text appearance but makes the display slightly bluish.
I'm currently experiencing this issue when taking pictures with my P6.
I took this picture of a yellow paper on a green chair. Here's how it looks like from a few feet away:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
However, when I move the camera in closer this is what I get:
The phone is completely unable to handle these color combinations at this range and everything ends up looking like it's in grayscale. I haven't been able to reproduce this with different subjects, but it happens every time under these conditions and my wife's P6 does the exact same thing.
So I'm wondering if this is a known issue with the camera? Is it a fluke? Does it indicate an issue with our camera modules? Has anyone seen this before? We got these off of Swappa, and if this is a hardware issue we shouldn't be expecting to see, I want to look into switching them out sooner rather than later. Any help will be appreciated!
SLJ said:
I haven't been able to reproduce this with different subjects, but it happens every time under these conditions and my wife's P6 does the exact same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you need to sample a wider range of colors and lighting before worrying about the hardware. Sounds like you've just stumbled on a weird color combination. You have the benefit of two Pixel 6 cameras for comparison and based on that alone they're probably Ok.
Use a photo color chart to measure color throughput. Lightning has to be the same color temperature ie same light source for all images. A calibrated monitor should be used. Shoot raw images if possible.
In the images above it looks to me me like the bottom one is under saturated...
The shooting conditions are likely screwing up the color temperature or an other processing parameter like saturation. If you change the distance to the subject that might do it too depending on shooting conditions ie surrounding reflected colors and light sources.
manjaroid said:
I think you need to sample a wider range of colors and lighting before worrying about the hardware. Sounds like you've just stumbled on a weird color combination. You have the benefit of two Pixel 6 cameras for comparison and based on that alone they're probably Ok.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fantastic point, thanks! I tried the same shot again earlier with the wide angle lens and the issue is present, so definitely doesn't seem like a hardware issue. Still not a great situation.
blackhawk said:
Use a photo color chart to measure color throughput. Lightning has to be the same color temperature ie same light source for all images. A calibrated monitor should be used. Shoot raw images if possible.
In the images above it looks to me me like the bottom one is under saturated...
The shooting conditions are likely screwing up the color temperature or an other processing parameter like saturation. If you change the distance to the subject that might do it too depending on shooting conditions ie surrounding reflected colors and light sources.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah changing the distance is how I got the two images above. Hopefully this doesn't show up under other circumstances.
SLJ said:
Yeah changing the distance is how I got the two images above. Hopefully this doesn't show up under other circumstances.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is likely normal and harmless.
Simply post edit and increase the saturation slightly.
Even with pro cams tweaking the contrast curve is a common post edited.
SLJ said:
Yeah changing the distance is how I got the two images above. Hopefully this doesn't show up under other circumstances.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Digital zoom definitely had an effect on color in that one shot. But if your Pixel(s) are working normally you'll likely see better colors at 2x or portrait mode most other times. I haven't studied color much with the Pixel 6 camera but I do think its digital zoom is the sharpest I've ever seen in a phone.
As @blackhawk mentioned, light temperature is a big factor. Here's what happens indoors with the flick of a lamp switch...
The first image was made in diffused daylight coming from a window. The yellow fabric isn't as dynamic as the real thing but it's a reasonable likeness. The second image mixes incandescent orange light with daylight that completely changed the fabric's color. If I take the fabric outside on a sunny day I'd probably get shades of yellow brighter than the real thing.
Which has me wondering... If you do the same 2x shot with a high dose of blue light by enabling the flash, are yellow and green closer to your wide shot, or brighter?
manjaroid said:
Digital zoom definitely had an effect on color in that one shot. But if your Pixel(s) are working normally you'll likely see better colors at 2x or portrait mode most other times. I haven't studied color much with the Pixel 6 camera but I do think its digital zoom is the sharpest I've ever seen in a phone.
As @blackhawk mentioned, light temperature is a big factor. Here's what happens indoors with the flick of a lamp switch...
View attachment 5605927
View attachment 5605929
The first image was made in diffused daylight coming from a window. The yellow fabric isn't as dynamic as the real thing but it's a reasonable likeness. The second image mixes incandescent orange light with daylight that completely changed the fabric's color. If I take the fabric outside on a sunny day I'd probably get shades of yellow brighter than the real thing.
Which has me wondering... If you do the same 2x shot with a high dose of blue light by enabling the flash, are yellow and green closer to your wide shot, or brighter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can play around with that. To be clear though, my two pictures weren't taken with digital zoom, they were taken with the phone itself moved closer to the subject.
SLJ said:
my two pictures weren't taken with digital zoom, they were taken with the phone itself moved closer to the subject.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh, I made an assumption. My samples are 2x zoom.
People take for granted to human eye's and optical cortex's incredible processing power and performance. It's nearly seamless with adaptive learning no AI can match, it's exponentially better.
With cameras you need to learn to see the world through its eye. Learn it's capabilities and limitations and shoot accordingly. This is true with the best pro cams and lens. For what it is the smartphone cams do very well especially if used properly. The same learning curves apply to them as it does to all cameras. Photography is a very complex art form.
It's not the cam that grabs keepers, it's the shooter. Ansel Adams was grabbing incredible keepers with primitive cams well over a hundred years ago. He would have killed for the speed and color of a smartphone's camera.