Related
I was getting a lot of blurry photos because auto-focus required holding the phone steady for longer than usual and the slightest move would cause a blurry photo..
So, I found that turning off auto-focus in the camera settings menu will make the photo snap quicker meaning it is less likely that you'll get a blurry photo because you don't have to hold the phone steady for as long as you do with auto-focus on. Hope this helps!
I haven't had any problems with mine...Photo or video; they all come out looking ok. My wife's phone is fine, too.
Below is indoor low-light from my wife's phone (size reduced, taken tonight).
ummm my pictures dont come out sharp at all example below my nexus one takes amazing pictures compared to my MT4G and they both have 5 megapixal camara
Oh yeah same here it took 4 or 5 shots to take a decent pic with mine today then again I have always had a heck of a time holding my hands steady
This is a test I took in low light, no flash. Doesn't look bad to me, although you can definitely see the noise.
TheManMountain said:
Oh yeah same here it took 4 or 5 shots to take a decent pic with mine today then again I have always had a heck of a time holding my hands steady
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think the auto focus is horrible on this phone IMHO....ive had tons of HTC phones and this is the only phone ive had to take 4 to 5 shots before getting a decent non blurry pic
****************************************
I found a fix (somewhat)! Turn off auto-focus in the camera settings menu.. the photo will be taken in milliseconds, resulting in less bluriness! You can still focus if you want by tapping on the screen or lightly pressing down the camera button. Try it now and let me know if it helps
****************************************
This seems to aide in taking better pics. Thanks!
Aspeds2989 said:
****************************************
I found a fix (somewhat)! Turn off auto-focus in the camera settings menu.. the photo will be taken in milliseconds, resulting in less bluriness! You can still focus if you want by tapping on the screen or lightly pressing down the camera button. Try it now and let me know if it helps
****************************************
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App
my pics come out fine. here are a few of them.
my old treo 650 took better pictures....lol ....now only if we can fix the video recording also..... 720p doesn't mean nothing if all we see is blur and ghosting. hope tmo/htc comes out with a fix for the camera and video.
Aspeds2989 said:
****************************************
I found a fix (somewhat)! Turn off auto-focus in the camera settings menu.. the photo will be taken in milliseconds, resulting in less bluriness! You can still focus if you want by tapping on the screen or lightly pressing down the camera button. Try it now and let me know if it helps
****************************************
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow thank u thank u!! It helped me too....now I'm a picture taking machine
*Sent from my Tmobile MT4G*
i just use the Camara App Vignette. it takes way better looking pictures than the stock Cam App.
Ran a few quadrant test on the optimus 3D and this was the best one, the average was around 2350-ish.
I'll be uploading the linpack scores in a bit.
Linpack is around a steady 35-36
great, could you please tell us more about it?
does it reaslly support tmobile 3g?
how is the 3d display?
plese update us
Well ill try my girlfriends tmobile sim in the phone. I personally have sprint so im not sure update ya in a few hours.
Okay, so I wasn't able to test t-mobile functionality but I'm sure it won't be a problem after devs get ahold of the phone (i currently don't have a sim card in it, nor a gsm card currently available). and as far as the phone itself it's quite enjoyable. The software I have on here is the same they had at CTIA (hell it still has pics from CTIA on there lol) which isn't that stable. But the custom interface is nice and definitely caters to the 3D for the phone with the 3D+ menu. The 3D+ menu you can get to either by pressing the 3D button (where i personally think the camera button should be) or by a shortcut or by a widget which has all the options available. those options they have in the menu are 3D apps and games, 3D camera, 3D youtube, 3D guide (very helpful, ill get into that) and of course the gallery. Now for the 3D itself, as long as you hold it at the right angles and distances it looks pretty damn awesome. I myself hate 3D glasses and don't enjoy 3D movies just for the eye strain, but this seems to be a lot easier on the eyes. It came with a bunch of demo 3D videos, which are awesome and show of the potential quite well. The depth on it is great, I've seen as much as 4 fields of depth (like 4 different objects at different distances). 3D youtube also works very very well. The only thing I don't like about the 3D media is that you get slight scanlines (interlaced) look on it which doesn't really hold you true HD values. But still looks quite great. Now the peeve that I have with the current software (which i'm sure will be worked out in the final release) is taking pictures and videos for yourself. you have to become quite acquainted with the placement of the camera and how it will affect your pictures and videos. As soon as you take a picture the settings are off enough to where it will hurt you eyes, but there is an option to change the 3D formatting (which camera is placed where, i.e. left picture as main or right picture) and the 3D depth adjustment (your best friend) which allows you to manually adjust the lining up of the pictures. In this version of software I've noticed crappy battery life, but I'm sure the new kernels will make a world of difference, the web browsing and 3D gaming (in 3D too, like NOVA in 3D, which is awesome) is very fluid and powerful thanks to the dual-core OMAP4 processor.
So in essential everything works as promised, just wait for the final that they release and you should be blown away. All of my friends reactions, and retail people at staples (cell phone area) were amazed by the quality. The phone is also quite light and the screen is bright as hell.
anymore specific questions? let me know =)
thank you for the description!
can you post a 720p and a 1080p video?
720P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-goLd9HoQZA
1080P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmQiPWnLVIc
Keep in mind this isn't the final software version. Also, sorry about all the traffic noise, lol
How is it possibile.. damn!
From MWC of Barcellona, during the official presentation, it lost ~500 points in Quadrant bench????
At MWC LG show us a 2900 points in quadrant...
Ok by the way...
1) Can you post the original file of videos?
Because I'd like to know how is the original Video bitrate.
2) have you any lag during the game?
3) Can you bench with Neocore? I'd like to know the FPS
4) Can you tell us, how many FPS it does during the quadrant? I'm curious because during the "test of the planets" and the "DNA" it show a really slow FPS...
5) The photos can be taked in 16:9?
6) The Fix of GPS at cold? how many seconds takes?
7) How many seconds for the Boot?
Sorry for a lot of question... but I really wants buy this phone! and i want to know more and more about the 3D.
A REALLY BIG BIG THANK YOU!
Hmm... I hadn't know the previous quadrant score lol.
But I'd be glad to get you those things =D
I also forgot to mention I don't have a micro sd in this phone right now... so the quadrant may not be 100% accurate.
1) I'll do that once I get into work.
2) I've seen no lag, just small framerate drop during cinematics but still extremely fluid. (I've been playing NOVA in 3D a lot.)
3) I ran 3 on Neocore, 57.9 for first run, 58.7 on second run, 57.9 again for the third.
4) Planets it stayed at around 13-14 FPS for the planets and 24-27 FPS for the DNA.
5) As far as the current software that I have, there is not an option to change the ratio.
6) I couldn't trust the true functionality of the GPS since I have to use wifi. But it seemed to get signal quite quickly.
7) 20 seconds to get to splash screen, 30 seconds to load into launcher, 38 seconds to fully load the loader and lock screen.
What do you want to know about the 3D? truthfully from all the reviews I've seen about the two 3D phones (Optimus 3D and EVO 3D) all they say is "it really works!" lol. And it does. But what do you specifically want to know about the 3D?
Thanx for the info and the video posts.
I would also like to see the video clips posted in their original quality, for example a 3D 720p at the best quality setting.
Maybe using http://www.megaupload.com or similar place to upload a clip.
alrighty... well heres the two videos I uploaded to youtube in original format...
720p:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26057377/MOV012.mp4
1080p:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26057377/MOV013.mp4
3D 720p:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26057377/MOV014.mp4
The lighting seems to be more stable w/ the 3D? hmm... but that could just be where the sun is right now, It could have been interfering when I was turning. But anywho, enjoy.
Please could you post the phones current firmware and phone version and date, please
hi, can you sell me the phone ? As the release date is june??
how much time gps need that to catch fix(on cold gps) only with integrate gps?
Many thanks to you joeyrushlow.
- Can we take a look at the Dialer & the Contacts?
joeyrushlow said:
Hmm... I hadn't know the previous quadrant score lol.
But I'd be glad to get you those things =D
I also forgot to mention I don't have a micro sd in this phone right now... so the quadrant may not be 100% accurate.
1) I'll do that once I get into work.
2) I've seen no lag, just small framerate drop during cinematics but still extremely fluid. (I've been playing NOVA in 3D a lot.)
3) I ran 3 on Neocore, 57.9 for first run, 58.7 on second run, 57.9 again for the third.
4) Planets it stayed at around 13-14 FPS for the planets and 24-27 FPS for the DNA.
5) As far as the current software that I have, there is not an option to change the ratio.
6) I couldn't trust the true functionality of the GPS since I have to use wifi. But it seemed to get signal quite quickly.
7) 20 seconds to get to splash screen, 30 seconds to load into launcher, 38 seconds to fully load the loader and lock screen.
What do you want to know about the 3D? truthfully from all the reviews I've seen about the two 3D phones (Optimus 3D and EVO 3D) all they say is "it really works!" lol. And it does. But what do you specifically want to know about the 3D?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you so much!
It seems the LG Optimus 3D have a lot of street to do for going better!
The bench of the Planets and the bench of DNA have really low!
Optimus 3D have the same GPU of Samsung Galaxy, but in the bench the GS is faster then LG OPT 3D.
I hope they do a good work with the driver, because this is the best that they can do... I think I'll buy a LG OPT DUAL.
I've a couple of other question
1) Battery life?
2) The effect 3D is "stable"? because I've read that if you move a little bit, the 3D effect "go away"
3) Volume speakers?
4) How fast is in the net? Flash player is working good?
5) Can it read MKV files at 1080p with the standard player?
6) Can you record a video @1080 with REALLY FAST MOVEMENT of the hand? becuase it seems the LG Optimus Dual have a Bug in the camera... (see this video, and you'll see to much compression! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq0O8mQDTns)
Now i go to see the original video files!
thank you so much!
cheltenham2004 said:
Please could you post the phones current firmware and phone version and date, please
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There ya go.
jaikben22 said:
hi, can you sell me the phone ? As the release date is june??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha no can do, I'm only testing it. I actually have to return it this evening =(
x7nofate said:
how much time gps need that to catch fix(on cold gps) only with integrate gps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't get the GPS to work since I don't have an SD card.
abo_mara7 said:
Many thanks to you joeyrushlow.
- Can we take a look at the Dialer & the Contacts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's a pic of the dialer. Can't get to the contacts for some reason, it fc's.
BadCluster said:
Thank you so much!
It seems the LG Optimus 3D have a lot of street to do for going better!
The bench of the Planets and the bench of DNA have really low!
Optimus 3D have the same GPU of Samsung Galaxy, but in the bench the GS is faster then LG OPT 3D.
I hope they do a good work with the driver, because this is the best that they can do... I think I'll buy a LG OPT DUAL.
I've a couple of other question
1) Battery life?
2) The effect 3D is "stable"? because I've read that if you move a little bit, the 3D effect "go away"
3) Volume speakers?
4) How fast is in the net? Flash player is working good?
5) Can it read MKV files at 1080p with the standard player?
6) Can you record a video @1080 with REALLY FAST MOVEMENT of the hand? becuase it seems the LG Optimus Dual have a Bug in the camera... (see this video, and you'll see to much compression! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq0O8mQDTns)
Now i go to see the original video files!
thank you so much!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Battery life sucks right now... they need to update the kernel and software. Final release will probably much better, and when they release 2.3 for it. It will be much better.
2. The 3D is semi-stable... But yeah it is really easy to lose the 3D angle, but if your stationary it's easy enough to keep the effect.
3. Speaker volume is eh... the quality isn't impressive either. It's not as good as the evo, and the EVO is quite mediocre.
4. The browser is pretty awesome, especially with flash 10.2... it works quite smoothly.
5. It looks amazing, but slightly unstable as far as playback, it works for about 10 seconds then starts lagging.
6. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26057377/MOV015.mp4
Copy and paste from the "dark side"....since i heard alot people saying te o3d got more depth...
ian928 said:
The same 3d content viewed on both phones is going to have the exact same depth and or popout. All the screen is doing on either phone is showing two pictures, one to each eye. The same 3d source is showing the same two pictures on either phone so the 3d effect has to be the same on both.
I think you may be thinking of the camera and not the screen. The evo's cameras are farther apart and would likely make the point where objects appear to pop off the screen farther away on pics taken with the evo. However, if you view pics taken with the optimus on the evo it will have the same depth as when viewed on the optimus.
And to answer your question, you can only adjust the 3d effect in games not in any pictures or video. The games use computer generated images so the effect can be adjusted. In order to adjust the effect in pics and video you would have to photoshop the images seen by each eye which is not something the phone can do on the fly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? Or are you a fanboy of htc?
Because on youtube and on some topics here, people do say the optiumus 3d has more depth with the 3d effect.
Basicly you just said that the 3ds, evo3d and o3d all have desame depths, pop out effects...?
Maybe you can explain a bit more why people are saying the o3d has a better effect?
So if you watch a 3d movie, both the o3d, 3vo and 3ds will have desame effect, depths, pop outs ect?
You made me all confused
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've downloaded quite a few photos taken on the HTC Evo 3D to my O3D and to view on my 3DTV, the 3D is just not as good, the depth in the photos is not as good either.
Download TwinPic, go to the public gallery and download some, they just aren't as good at all!
mmace said:
I've downloaded quite a few photos taken on the HTC Evo 3D to my O3D and to view on my 3DTV, the 3D is just not as good, the depth in the photos is not as good either.
Download TwinPic, go to the public gallery and download some, they just aren't as good at all!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are referring to the differences in the cameras, not the screens. Optimus photos viewed on the evo will have the same depth as when they are viewed on the optimus. All these phones are doing is showing two 2d pictures on the same screen at the same time while blocking the opposite eye from seeing the other pic. The same 3d source will have the same 3d effect on both phones. The same source has the same two pics when viewed on either screen and therefore cannot have a different 3d effect.
Now if we are talking about different sources then of course the 3d effect can be different.
Oh then what does "3D Depth" stands for when viewing 3D photos on O3D ?
exceleth said:
Oh then what does "3D Depth" stands for when viewing 3D photos on O3D ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly, you can change the depth on photos, videos and games by adjusting the parallax focus point. the same depth is not always present just because it's 2x 2D photos.
I guess on any subject, O3D is way better than Evo 3D. Every benchmark result confirm this. We can Even say O3D is the best phone out there in the market yet.
Plenty of reviews out there say the same thing the 3D effect looks better on the O3D than it does on the Evo 3D, when playing the same source or things taken on the phones.
exceleth said:
I guess on any subject, O3D is way better than Evo 3D. Every benchmark result confirm this. We can Even say O3D is the best phone out there in the market yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're goin offtopic.
@jabbypants yes but maybe they all say this based on the camera's.
Go watch desame movie on youtube on both devices...
Someone still hasnt confirmed my first post or said it is not correct...
borgqueenx said:
You're goin offtopic.
@jabbypants yes but maybe they all say this based on the camera's.
Go watch desame movie on youtube on both devices...
Someone still hasnt confirmed my first post or said it is not correct...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1st, "the same"
2nd, HTC Evo 3D only out in the US at the moment, LG Optimus 3D not out in the US at the moment, very highly unlikely that one person has both phones for comparison
mmace said:
1st, "the same"
2nd, HTC Evo 3D only out in the US at the moment, LG Optimus 3D not out in the US at the moment, very highly unlikely that one person has both phones for comparison
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is one tech site in the US (PhoneDog) that has both, they choose the Evo because of higher resolution on the screen and a few other things but they admitted that when it comes to 3D effect the LG stands supreme, the Evo isn't nearly as good, not for the effect or for the eyes.
A bit off-topic but IMHO they miss a few things in that "dog fight" because they don't talk about what is "under the hood" of the LG O3D, as stated above it's hardware is probably the most powerful out there.
ian928 said:
You are referring to the differences in the cameras, not the screens. Optimus photos viewed on the evo will have the same depth as when they are viewed on the optimus. All these phones are doing is showing two 2d pictures on the same screen at the same time while blocking the opposite eye from seeing the other pic. The same 3d source will have the same 3d effect on both phones. The same source has the same two pics when viewed on either screen and therefore cannot have a different 3d effect.
Now if we are talking about different sources then of course the 3d effect can be different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only true if one assumes that both handsets are using a parallax barrier of the same quality which works equally effective. This doesn't seem to be the case. (3d images on the O3D are supposed to be more crisp and the viewing angle is supposed to be wider as well)
SinSilla said:
Only true if one assumes that both handsets are using a parallax barrier of the same quality which works equally effective. This doesn't seem to be the case. (3d images on the O3D are supposed to be more crisp and the viewing angle is supposed to be wider as well)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks this explains it to me. I hope our "media markt" or phone shops get the evo3d soon so we can see them together.
Which makes sense because as the pixels get smaller, the viewing angle gets smaller, its generally harder to make a parallax barrier work as well. Its one reason I am hoping for a 3DS XL as if I am right it would have better viewing angles.
Its tricky business as conversely the more pixels you have the better the effect should be, purely because you have more information to trick your eyes with, but that is 3D in general not factoring in the parallax barrier.
This is all very curious, as I had read the EVO had better quality cameras than the O3D so theoretically should be taking better 3D photos. So it may just be a software issue that the EVO is not setting the image overlap as good as the O3D does, so the situation could change with a quick firmware update.
Still I would like to think the O3D is better as, after all, I bought it rather than waiting for the EVO. I really fancied the higher resolution screen but the priority was on the 3D which it seemed LG were more keen on exploiting whereas the EVO it almost seemed like an after thought - with no mention if it does YouTube 3D or not.
I not seen one video on the Evo that looks good really, they all seem to suffer from HTC's usual crap camera quality and no 1080p recording in 2D that's poor.
Jabbypants said:
I not seen one video on the Evo that looks good really, they all seem to suffer from HTC's usual crap camera quality and no 1080p recording in 2D that's poor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that opinion is useless to me...the quality of the evo3d camera is better then the optimus camera. reviewers almost all agree about this.
BUT...the 3d effect of the camera's is better on the optimus3d. some think this is a software issue, but i dont know...
3d quality optimus 3d
i played a week ago on Optimus 3d and i am impressed about 3d quality
the "pre installed movies" are unbelievable as i compaire with what i have seen on an expensive 3D TV. i think i choose optimus 3d but i have the ability to try
my devices 2 weeks. in August my wife and i may choose a new phone
also in august is on the 6th the launch day of Evo 3d, so i order a optimus 3d and an Evo 3d.
Than i can compair both the devices 2 weeks and return one of the two devices.
I LET YOU KNOW WICH IS THE BEST IN MY OPINION!!!
but i followed for 4 months the both the devices on internet and here on XDA and dont missed a review of both devices on youtube.
My opinion for now: HTC is crap because this device have a lot of troubles, design not the most elegant as it have 2 big buttons for the camera and a big hole in it for mini USB.... i think it is a not finished yet device, look at that cheap lookin carousel (its on iPhone Cydia for 0.99$) and the cover bends when you open it te replace memory and that sort of stuff.
But i have paciense because we have almost full root on it... it hink that if some dev,s fix a lot of troubles i buy this one and a red
Body glove cover(then the over sized buttons looks smaller and gives Evo 3d a more expensive look)
Optimus have a sleek elegant design overall 3d Quality looks fine.. the next update can convert 2d games to 3d games as now it can convert 2d images to 3d images.(i like it)
borgqueenx said:
that opinion is useless to me...the quality of the evo3d camera is better then the optimus camera. reviewers almost all agree about this.
BUT...the 3d effect of the camera's is better on the optimus3d. some think this is a software issue, but i dont know...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmmm, I've viewed a LOT of photos taken by the Evo 3D and I don't agree, the quality is not as good, and in a lot of cases the right camera is out of focus, not good!
Jabbypants said:
I not seen one video on the Evo that looks good really, they all seem to suffer from HTC's usual crap camera quality and no 1080p recording in 2D that's poor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't know that as GSM Arena says it does 1080p at 24fps, like the O3D until they bumped it up to 30fps with the retail firmware.
Alex Atkin UK said:
I didn't know that as GSM Arena says it does 1080p at 24fps, like the O3D until they bumped it up to 30fps with the retail firmware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Noticed that myself.
Also the Evo 3D can only take 3D pictures at the resolution of 2mp while the LG I believe is 3 or 3.5 can't recall.
The HTC EVO 3D has no feature to protect 3D technology from offsets.
The LG Optimus 3D has Real Time Misalignment Correction to protect 3D technology from dropping/ heating/ humidity which can result in offset throughout the device’s lifetime
mmace said:
hmmm, I've viewed a LOT of photos taken by the Evo 3D and I don't agree, the quality is not as good, and in a lot of cases the right camera is out of focus, not good!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cannot agree more on this. HTC's weakest part is their camera for sure. The EVO 3D 5mp cameras share the same fate as other HTC phone with 5mp camera. Under explosure and poor optics for the camera seems to be haunting EVO 3D. Also under bright light, it has issue with flares as well. This is also common with other 5mp camera from HTC.
Althought can't really say LG O3D's 5mp camrea is the best, but at least it is way better than HTC's one. It does not come with problem like under explosure. weird halos etc.. Also note that O3D takes 3mp 3D photos vs EVO3D 2mp
It is also quite normal for LG to have better 3D viewing quality than HTC. LG already had this tech fro their other appliances. It's more comfortable to view O3D's 3D. Probably the design in the parallax display is the key point here.
Hello everyone
This you must consider just some help and ideas based on my experience with 3D devices - not that I have such a great experience. I own a 3D camera, the FujiFilm RealPix 3D W1 and this phone.
You are free - and I hope that will do it, to contribute with your own ideas and photos.
First thing first... As in normal photography, not take shots against light sources, as sun and other powerfull light sources. Against the sun, lasers you could end with your camera ruined because of the too much light on the sensor - consider that it gets focused, like a magnifying glass...
Also in 3D avoid taking photos with flash. The flash is not powerfull enough and do not distribute even light for all two camera, so in some way you'll get the left photo slightly brighter than the right photo and when is all put together you might get a ghost effect.
Do not shoot on object perpendicular on the cameras because when is viewed in 3D you'll get a very annoying and disturbing effect that you'll hit your eyes and brain like a cannonball ' remember that °it is all in your head° - the 3D effect I mean.
Also do not shoot object that do "split" in half the 3D image - gives the same annoying effect.
The distance from the subject is recommanded between 2 and 5 meters. Below 2 meters you'll get your cannonball, above 5 meters the 3D effect is lost.
Also is recommanded to take photos of subjects with different depths, like flowers, because you'll get a very obvious and good 3D effect. Do not shoot a subject that fills up all the photo with one color, like a table painted in yellow.
Pay attention at parallax - a wrong adjustment and you'll get ghost pictures. If you're forced to take a photo of different subjets, on different depths in same photo, hitting the right parallax is a little harder than usual. I choose the center of the photo, in which all subjets are clear, that I crop the photo, leaving the ghost effect (which in this case is on the margins) out.
3D mostly means contours and coloured subjects, so you have to seek always some contrast between different subjects in same photos.
These are the main things I can think of right now.
Hope that you'll find them helpful. Please let me know what you think.
LE: talking to TylDurden (you'll find his query later this thread - please feel free to help if you can) I reminded of some tips that first time I forgot to mention. here they are
NEW TIP (which I forgot about it) - When you're gonna shoot in 3D mode just don't make a full press of the onscreen button, press it just a little shorter in time in order to get the real preview of the photo. In this preview you'll see how the final photo will be. And if you get some ghost image just adjust the parallax and try to get all the objects or most of them without ghost trails or sides.
Another TIP - set your screen brightness at maximum level because if you have it reduces you might not notice ghost effects
Another TIP - the focus area works better if is set on center not on border - don't ask why but I do see a difference.
And most important TIP - try, try, try. Remember every settings used to take the photos and compare same photos of the same object but with different settings and see which ones are working for you.
Thanks
Thanks for the tips, are very helpful.
Thanks for the tips.
I have learned that to get something to jump from the phone towards the viewer, you must keep an entire object within the picture.
Take ie. a picture of a face/head, it can be on 1m, just keep the entire head inside the frame. Don't come too close, it'll cause the headaches/canonball effect BigBadSheep already talked about, but 2m is way too much. 0.8m or 0.5m can work a lot! As long as you keep the object within the frame.
I stumbled upon this when my son kept his icecream close to the camera with his hand. When we watched the photo the icecream was really jumping out of it.
I have tested this a lot, by moving the object very close to the camera or partly out of the frame. Just play with it to find the best result.
3D pictures with water are very cool as well!
I have made many 3D pictures with people jumping into the water. Especially if you dare to keep the camera quite close to the action, it gives awesome effects!
Timing is very difficult with the O3D b/c there's about 1sec between pressing the button and the picture actually being taken.
I started to press the button 1sec before the expected water bomb, that works quite good! I now have about 30 very very cool pictures of my kids smashing into the water!
I'm more and more leaning towards favouring 3D pictures above 3D movies.
Shooting 3D movies is very hard and the image is shaking very easily which becomes too tiresome to watch. Filming in 3D is very difficult. Making pictures is cool though!
And if you watch them on a good passive(!) 3D TV it's even better!
(please all: never buy an active 3D TV, I have an active 3D TV myself and I use it less and less. the effect is so bad during daylight and the on/off button is very tedious, especially the switching all the time if you're moving through pictures etc. passive 3D tvs work perfect during daylight, never the strobing effect. cheap glasses. no batteries needed for glasses.
My father/sister has a passive TV and I really regret having an active TV. Surely, the 3D is good and all, but compared to the passive (LG/Philips) TV of my father/sister, passive is just the way to go.
Don't believe those who claim that active gives a full HD while passive doesn't. It's bollocks. At first b/c the strobing effect is far worse then even the supposed half Full HD effect could be. Secondly b/c both active and passive offer a half Full HD effect. Active just closes your left and right eyes half of the time while passive hids half the image from your left and right eye)
Rho'd Berth said:
Don't believe those who claim that active gives a full HD while passive doesn't. It's bollocks. At first b/c the strobing effect is far worse then even the supposed half Full HD effect could be. Secondly b/c both active and passive offer a half Full HD effect. Active just closes your left and right eyes half of the time while passive hids half the image from your left and right eye)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but that is incorrect. I have an active shutter tv and no strobing problems at all.
As for passive and active being half quality you seem to misunderstand how they work because only passive 3D is half resolution.
Passive tv puts both images on tv together and the glasses block out half the image from each eye so right eye and left eye see half the picture.
Active tv doesn't cover each eye up as you say but instead sends the whole picture for each view to each eye very quickly rather than just hide half of it as passive does.
They don't just feed half of what's on screen to each eye but instead show the full hd image to each so you get full quality not half. It is also what causes the strobing that some people experience.
This halving of resolution on passive 3D is why some sets now go higher than 1080p so that when displayed passively the video is same resolution as an active set although most sets still don't do this.
http://hometheater.about.com/od/tel...ve-Polarized-Vs-Active-Shutter-3d-Glasses.htm
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
As an owner of a 3D active
mistermentality said:
Sorry but that is incorrect. I have an active shutter tv and no strobing problems at all.
As for passive and active being half quality you seem to misunderstand how they work because only passive 3D is half resolution.
Passive tv puts both images on tv together and the glasses block out half the image from each eye so right eye and left eye see half the picture.
Active tv doesn't cover each eye up as you say but instead sends the whole picture for each view to each eye very quickly rather than just hide half of it as passive does.
They don't just feed half of what's on screen to each eye but instead show the full hd image to each so you get full quality not half. It is also what causes the strobing that some people experience.
This halving of resolution on passive 3D is why some sets now go higher than 1080p so that when displayed passively the video is same resolution as an active set although most sets still don't do this.
http://hometheater.about.com/od/tel...ve-Polarized-Vs-Active-Shutter-3d-Glasses.htm
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must say that still the active is the way to be, even if now there are some TV with passive 3D that makes a good picture. I own the LG 50PX950N TV set, the first with THX certified 3D. Always the LG. But, as it happens always, LG pulled out from the hat the 3D passive which is advertised as better as the active ones, from here seeing the in all company, on all branches, is the philosophy: you bought it? Thanks alot sucker! because they made these passive one 7 months after the shouted out: you've made the greatest 3D active TV ever!
But still , as stated, I think that active is still the way.
And, in another news, I would like to write about how to connect the phone to the TV in such manner that you get 3D directly out of the box. I had some time to figure this out.
First you need the HDMI 1.4 cable. Then, from the HDMI settings you must force it on 1080p (50Hz or 60 HZ - I think it makes no difference, seeing that now all TVs can make both frequencies). Leaving in automatic mode it just takes the native resolution of the screen, which is 480x800 and in this mode you wont't get the 3D effect, nor the HD videos played.
Next, about the 3D pictures, will be a tutorial on how to make them "universal", meaning being able to display them on every display, with red-cyan 3 mode.
BigBadSheep said:
Hello everyone
This you must consider just some help and ideas based on my experience with 3D devices - not that I have such a great experience. I own a 3D camera, the FujiFilm RealPix 3D W1 and this phone.
You are free - and I hope that will do it, to contribute with your own ideas and photos.
First thing first... As in normal photography, not take shots against light sources, as sun and other powerfull light sources. Against the sun, lasers you could end with your camera ruined because of the too much light on the sensor - consider that it gets focused, like a magnifying glass...
Also in 3D avoid taking photos with flash. The flash is not powerfull enough and do not distribute even light for all two camera, so in some way you'll get the left photo slightly brighter than the right photo and when is all put together you might get a ghost effect.
Do not shoot on object perpendicular on the cameras because when is viewed in 3D you'll get a very annoying and disturbing effect that you'll hit your eyes and brain like a cannonball ' remember that °it is all in your head° - the 3D effect I mean.
Also do not shoot object that do "split" in half the 3D image - gives the same annoying effect.
The distance from the subject is recommanded between 2 and 5 meters. Below 2 meters you'll get your cannonball, above 5 meters the 3D effect is lost.
Also is recommanded to take photos of subjects with different depths, like flowers, because you'll get a very obvious and good 3D effect. Do not shoot a subject that fills up all the photo with one color, like a table painted in yellow.
Pay attention at parallax - a wrong adjustment and you'll get ghost pictures. If you're forced to take a photo of different subjets, on different depths in same photo, hitting the right parallax is a little harder than usual. I choose the center of the photo, in which all subjets are clear, that I crop the photo, leaving the ghost effect (which in this case is on the margins) out.
3D mostly means contours and coloured subjects, so you have to seek always some contrast between different subjects in same photos.
These are the main things I can think of right now.
Hope that you'll find them helpful. Please let me know what you think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also use to have the fuji 3D w1 by the way update the firmware it will improve too much, I sell it and got they W3 and it's waaaayyy better. Thanks for the tips man.
Sent from my LG-P920 using xda premium
mistermentality said:
Sorry but that is incorrect. I have an active shutter tv and no strobing problems at all.
As for passive and active being half quality you seem to misunderstand how they work because only passive 3D is half resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, both eyes receive half the Full HD resolution, together that's Full HD.
Passive tv puts both images on tv together and the glasses block out half the image from each eye so right eye and left eye see half the picture.
Active tv doesn't cover each eye up as you say but instead sends the whole picture for each view to each eye very quickly rather than just hide half of it as passive does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Active shutter is closing one eye after another eye. All the time only 1 of your eyes can see the screen. The other one is closed / blackened.
The TV is showing first the left eye frame and then the right eye frame. While the left eye frame is showed, the right eye is blackened, and the other way around.
They don't just feed half of what's on screen to each eye but instead show the full hd image to each so you get full quality not half. It is also what causes the strobing that some people experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I said, they feed the full image to each eye half of the time.
I have an active shutter tv and no strobing problems at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Watch a 3D movie in full day light and you will have strobing problems, unless your glasses cover your eyes entirely.
When ie. your left eye is blackened by the glasses, then there's still light coming in from the sides of your glasses. It's not so much the TV that's strobing but the light from other sources.
It's a fact that watching active 3D during daylight just plainly sucks.
Did you ever watch passive 3D TV? Did you ever compare? Or are you just defending your own TV, like most people do.
Like I said, I have an active 3D TV myself, a very good rated Samsung. Compared to even the cheap Philips passive 3D TV of my father my TV sucks in 3D. Not during the night if we're wathcing a good movie. Then it's ok. But the entire viewing experience is more then just the dark evening in the winter. IT's also the turning on of the glasses, the replacing the batteries, the fact that the glasses are that expensive. The fact that my Laptop 3D shutter glasses are damaged and also cost $100. The fact that the glasses are heavy, etc.
We've watching vacation pictures on a passive TV with 8 people among with 4 kids. No need to turn on the glasses for the kids and some adults. Imagine doing the same on active TV..... and then I'm not even taking the extra $600 for glasses in account.
Rho'd Berth said:
Watch a 3D movie in full day light and you will have strobing problems, unless your glasses cover your eyes entirely.
When ie. your left eye is blackened by the glasses, then there's still light coming in from the sides of your glasses. It's not so much the TV that's strobing but the light from other sources.
It's a fact that watching active 3D during daylight just plainly sucks.
Did you ever watch passive 3D TV? Did you ever compare? Or are you just defending your own TV, like most people do.
Like I said, I have an active 3D TV myself, a very good rated Samsung. Compared to even the cheap Philips passive 3D TV of my father my TV sucks in 3D. Not during the night if we're wathcing a good movie. Then it's ok. But the entire viewing experience is more then just the dark evening in the winter. IT's also the turning on of the glasses, the replacing the batteries, the fact that the glasses are that expensive. The fact that my Laptop 3D shutter glasses are damaged and also cost $100. The fact that the glasses are heavy, etc.
We've watching vacation pictures on a passive TV with 8 people among with 4 kids. No need to turn on the glasses for the kids and some adults. Imagine doing the same on active TV..... and then I'm not even taking the extra $600 for glasses in account.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to agree with everything of the above. I also have an active 3D Samsung TV and especially during the daylight there are problems. Not to mention the extremely expensive 3D glasses.
Last weekend a friend of mine who just purchased a passive 3D LG TV (with 8 FREE glasses included) had a BBQ party of 6 people. I took some 3D videos with my O3D and played them on his TV. All 6 people at the same time could enjoy my 3D videos on his TV under broad daylight. With my TV this could be impossible.
Rho'd Berth said:
No, both eyes receive half the Full HD resolution, together that's Full HD.
Active shutter is closing one eye after another eye. All the time only 1 of your eyes can see the screen. The other one is closed / blackened.
The TV is showing first the left eye frame and then the right eye frame. While the left eye frame is showed, the right eye is blackened, and the other way around.
That's what I said, they feed the full image to each eye half of the time.
Watch a 3D movie in full day light and you will have strobing problems, unless your glasses cover your eyes entirely.
When ie. your left eye is blackened by the glasses, then there's still light coming in from the sides of your glasses. It's not so much the TV that's strobing but the light from other sources.
It's a fact that watching active 3D during daylight just plainly sucks.
Did you ever watch passive 3D TV? Did you ever compare? Or are you just defending your own TV, like most people do.
Like I said, I have an active 3D TV myself, a very good rated Samsung. Compared to even the cheap Philips passive 3D TV of my father my TV sucks in 3D. Not during the night if we're wathcing a good movie. Then it's ok. But the entire viewing experience is more then just the dark evening in the winter. IT's also the turning on of the glasses, the replacing the batteries, the fact that the glasses are that expensive. The fact that my Laptop 3D shutter glasses are damaged and also cost $100. The fact that the glasses are heavy, etc.
We've watching vacation pictures on a passive TV with 8 people among with 4 kids. No need to turn on the glasses for the kids and some adults. Imagine doing the same on active TV..... and then I'm not even taking the extra $600 for glasses in account.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you just pointed out the active glasses send the full image to each eye alternating between left and right but both eyes do still see full hd in both eyes because the two images are at full resolution.
They do not half the resolution at all, and if you have an active tv you can see that yourself because you will see both images at the same time but full res. Now do that on a passive set and you'll notice the difference.
As for expensive glasses, you can buy them for under fifteen pound in uk and rechargeables are only twenty something pound and neither are heavy, I watched the olympics for three hours no problem at all last night.
I do need to explain regarding strobing, I was referring to the 3D image not strobing.
You are right that light sources will flicker, but I don't watch much 3D tv during the day so for me it isn't an issue as I prefer watching films with the lights off but yes you are right on that.
This review of both at http://m.cnet.com/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/57437344?ds=1 does a good job of explaining what I mean even though the author prefers passive they do admit active has higher resolution.
In a few years I will probably get a passive set as by then 4K passive sets will be higher res than current active ones but for now I prefer a higher resolution image but each format has benefits.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
Dave,
So you admit that there is strobing of light (not the TV) that is annoying. You're just saying that it doesn't matter b/c you don't watch TV during daylight anyway. So let's keep it honest: there is a problem, and you can't watch 3D movies during the summer and much of the spring.
They do not half the resolution at all, and if you have an active tv you can see that yourself because you will see both images at the same time but full res. Now do that on a passive set and you'll notice the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And again you claim that you see Full HD to both eyes at the same time.
No, that's not true, all the time 1 of your eyes is covered. Never do you see a Full HD image to both your eyes at the same time.
I'm not saying that passive is better a picturing a Full HD image, it's just using a different technique.
Passive 3D: Both your eyes get half a Full HD image all the time
Active 3D: Both your eyes get a Full HD image half the time
In my opinion the quality is very very good on both active and passive 3D.
The reason I favour passive is b/c of the:
- strobing during daylight
- annoying expensive glasses
And so far everybody who has experienced both Passive and Active 3D TV agrees with me.
Only people who read up the theory and never saw a passive 3D TV disagree.
Robert
mistermentality said:
As you just pointed out the active glasses send the full image to each eye alternating between left and right but both eyes do still see full hd in both eyes because the two images are at full resolution.
They do not half the resolution at all, and if you have an active tv you can see that yourself because you will see both images at the same time but full res. Now do that on a passive set and you'll notice the difference.
As for expensive glasses, you can buy them for under fifteen pound in uk and rechargeables are only twenty something pound and neither are heavy, I watched the olympics for three hours no problem at all last night.
I do need to explain regarding strobing, I was referring to the 3D image not strobing.
You are right that light sources will flicker, but I don't watch much 3D tv during the day so for me it isn't an issue as I prefer watching films with the lights off but yes you are right on that.
This review of both at http://m.cnet.com/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/57437344?ds=1 does a good job of explaining what I mean even though the author prefers passive they do admit active has higher resolution.
In a few years I will probably get a passive set as by then 4K passive sets will be higher res than current active ones but for now I prefer a higher resolution image but each format has benefits.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No matter which one of the 3D types is better the full HD resolution shouldn't be the main factor for choosing your 3D TV, at least for the majority of the people. That's because the average human eye could fully spot the 1080p only when it's very close to the TV.
For example, with an 40-inch TV, you need to sit closer than 5 feet (1.5 meters) for the full HD resolution to become apparent. How many people watch TV that close?
Check the chart here:
http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/
I have 42" lg tv and i can definitely see the difference between 720p and 1080p from 2,5m or so. Clearly see it for example in ps3 xmb is in 1080p vs xbox dash which is always in 720p just upscaled. Or when playing sacred 2(one of the few games that run in full hd) in xbox try to set 1080p play and then set 720p and it will look like **** compared to 1080p. So full hd matters. Not to mention difference in movies.
Sent from my LG-P920 using xda app-developers app
xtrustkillx said:
I have 42" lg tv and i can definitely see the difference between 720p and 1080p from 2,5m or so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not surprising considering your TV size and the your viewing distance. If you look at the chart, for 42" TV the 2.5m you're sitting it's actually the upper limit for distinguishing between 720p and 1080p (the actual range is 1.6-2.5m for a 42" TV). But if you sit 3-4m away, you can't distinguish between 720p and 1080p.
And that's for a normal 2D picture which uses as a source sharp graphics and fonts of PS3 games. If you watch instead 3D video the differences between 1080p and 720p are even less apparent considering the slightly darker image and the glasses.
Rho'd Berth said:
Dave,
So you admit that there is strobing of light (not the TV) that is annoying. You're just saying that it doesn't matter b/c you don't watch TV during daylight anyway. So let's keep it honest: there is a problem, and you can't watch 3D movies during the summer and much of the spring.
And again you claim that you see Full HD to both eyes at the same time.
No, that's not true, all the time 1 of your eyes is covered. Never do you see a Full HD image to both your eyes at the same time.
I'm not saying that passive is better a picturing a Full HD image, it's just using a different technique.
Passive 3D: Both your eyes get half a Full HD image all the time
Active 3D: Both your eyes get a Full HD image half the time
In my opinion the quality is very very good on both active and passive 3D.
The reason I favour passive is b/c of the:
- strobing during daylight
- annoying expensive glasses
And so far everybody who has experienced both Passive and Active 3D TV agrees with me.
Only people who read up the theory and never saw a passive 3D TV disagree.
Robert
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive posted two links which explain clearly that active gives full hd to each eye and passive does not.
I could post a hundred but you will still insist I'm mistaken or lying.
If you can't see that a full hd image to each eye (your eye combines both hd images to make one 3D image so it is a full hd 3D image) is better than half hd I then nothing I say and no links I post will convince you and this thread will just become a kind of back and forth argument that goes nowhere so I will agree to disagree.
And yes passive is better except for resolution, as I explained when you said strobing I was referring to what a lot of people do when saying that which is that the tv image strobes and disagreeing about that.
So yes passive is good but it is still correct that for resolution per eye active remains better for now. That doesn't make active better in general of course but in that specific area it does.
And of course people will still argue that I'm incorrect or have never seen passive 3D etc so I'm going to agree that we can disagree.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added at 10:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 AM ----------
botson71 said:
No matter which one of the 3D types is better the full HD resolution shouldn't be the main factor for choosing your 3D TV, at least for the majority of the people. That's because the average human eye could fully spot the 1080p only when it's very close to the TV.
For example, with an 40-inch TV, you need to sit closer than 5 feet (1.5 meters) for the full HD resolution to become apparent. How many people watch TV that close?
Check the chart here:
http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I chose active for the higher picture resolution primarily as I watch most of my films in the dark so any flickering of daylight isn't a problem for me. And because I like the tv of course.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2
Thanks for the 3D Photo tips. I don't do a whole lot of 3D Photography since I suck at it, maybe these tips will change that and I'll get back into it.
Also just to chime in on the whole Active vs Passive debate I have a 23" LG Passive set and even a passive set with glasses I have a hell of a time finding the sweet spot. I thought a set with glasses wouldn't have that problem like our phones do. Obviously our phones have a parralax barrier and that's why you have to find the sweet spot but with my LG set and Passive glasses I still have to nail a vertical sweet spot. I can't be too high or too low. This also effects how close I can sit to the set. If I sit too far away than I will get ghosting on either the top or the bottom of the screen. I can shift myself higher or lower and make one of them go away but the only way to fix them both is to simply move myself closer to the screen. My friend has an Active set and we never have any of these issues with his set. It's in his basement and is pitch black in broad daylight so he's never had to worry about bright daylight. The cheap glasses of the Passive set are nice but the sweet spot is such a hassle.
Maybe someone can point out what I'm doing wrong and I can have a much better 3D experience with my Passive set.
Well...glad to be helpful
TylDurden said:
Thanks for the 3D Photo tips. I don't do a whole lot of 3D Photography since I suck at it, maybe these tips will change that and I'll get back into it.
Also just to chime in on the whole Active vs Passive debate I have a 23" LG Passive set and even a passive set with glasses I have a hell of a time finding the sweet spot. I thought a set with glasses wouldn't have that problem like our phones do. Obviously our phones have a parralax barrier and that's why you have to find the sweet spot but with my LG set and Passive glasses I still have to nail a vertical sweet spot. I can't be too high or too low. This also effects how close I can sit to the set. If I sit too far away than I will get ghosting on either the top or the bottom of the screen. I can shift myself higher or lower and make one of them go away but the only way to fix them both is to simply move myself closer to the screen. My friend has an Active set and we never have any of these issues with his set. It's in his basement and is pitch black in broad daylight so he's never had to worry about bright daylight. The cheap glasses of the Passive set are nice but the sweet spot is such a hassle.
Maybe someone can point out what I'm doing wrong and I can have a much better 3D experience with my Passive set.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But again I'll be talking from personal experience. Before I buy my TV set - a 50 inches LG PX950N, I was searching on all forums for every kind of info. And at that moment I've reached the conclusion, and is also recommended, that in order to enjoy a real 3D effect your TV set has to be 40 inches or bigger, especially for passive, which at that moment - I'm talking March 2012, wasn't so much accepted. And because my living room isn't big enough I went for a 50 inches Plasma TV set for three reasons - 3D effect (with all those criterias to obey to - size and active) but also that the TV must give full satisfaction in 2D mode HiDef and SD. And the third one as I had this offer - TV set and 3D camera (and here's another story to tell) I bought all just for 1000 euros (plus 40 euros for SD HC card for the 3D camera). Overall a good affair.
Now what can I tell in your case: maybe isn't you that don't get the perfect photo maybe it's just the size of your 3D TV set. And surely it's the passive mode which still is not a real option.
NEW TIP (which I forgot about it) - When you're gonna shoot in 3D mode just don't make a full press of the onscreen button, press it just a little shorter in time in order to get the real preview of the photo. In this preview you'll see how the final photo will be. And if you get some ghost image just adjust the parallax and try to get all the objects or most of them without ghost trails or sides.
Another TIP - set your screen brightness at maximum level because if you have it reduces you might not notice ghost effects
Another TIP - the focus area works better if is set on center not on border - don't ask why but I do see a difference.
And most important TIP - try, try, try. Remember every settings used to take the photos and compare same photos of the same object but with different settings and see which ones are working for you.
Thanks guys for reading and replying to my posts.
You are right
botson71 said:
No matter which one of the 3D types is better the full HD resolution shouldn't be the main factor for choosing your 3D TV, at least for the majority of the people. That's because the average human eye could fully spot the 1080p only when it's very close to the TV.
For example, with an 40-inch TV, you need to sit closer than 5 feet (1.5 meters) for the full HD resolution to become apparent. How many people watch TV that close?
Check the chart here:
http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But just to make fun out of it - the human brain, let me say that I can spot the 1080p from very far away, and I'm talking something like 5 meters - my living room is long 6,7 m and 4 m wide, and when I'm eating between me and TV (50 inches plasma TV set) is this distance. And I notice better 3D effect than my wife. But my wife is seeing more colors - mixtures, shades and variations than I do. So go figure how we're set in my house.
Great thread. Worth a bump for those like me who are new here.
Sent from my LG-SU870 using xda app-developers app
Hi Folks,
I visited the fair today with my boy which arrives in the city once a year.
My boy was on the rides and I tried getting a few photos of him with my 20mp Sony Xperia Z3....
By the time the photo was taken, my boy had already gone by....
The camera is soooooooooo disappointing, but has so much potential to be good.
Has anybody discovered a decent camera app yet, that has no shutter lag and one that makes full use of the camera?
If I don't find something by November, I'm going for the Nexus 6 :silly:
@rseHoyle said:
Hi Folks,
I visited the fair today with my boy which arrives in the city once a year.
My boy was on the rides and I tried getting a few photos of him with my 20mp Sony Xperia Z3....
By the time the photo was taken, my boy had already gone by....
The camera is soooooooooo disappointing, but has so much potential to be good.
Has anybody discovered a decent camera app yet, that has no shutter lag and one that makes full use of the camera?
If I don't find something by November, I'm going for the Nexus 6 :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haven't tried a different app yet, but I may have something else for you. It's the autofocus that delays the photo.
1. Use the camera button
-push it down slightly, it should focus
-once it has found the focus, just keep holding it slightly
push the button completely if you want to take the photo, it should be without a delay now.
You can also use a different type of autofocus... Have to try the different modes for myself.
Also use manual mode, depending on the light conditions and the movement, you want a high shutter speed and if needed a higher iso, which gives you a sharper image while moving.
Damn, someone should write a guide for the camera
Thanks for this info. I'll give it a go
I'm not sure the camera is quick enough to capture moving stuff. I have tried a lot of modes and can't seem to sort it.
With an awful flash too, in sub par lighting, like parties, this is a recipe for absolute disaster. Can't believe Sony didn't sort out the camera flash.
Jonathan-H said:
I'm not sure the camera is quick enough to capture moving stuff. I have tried a lot of modes and can't seem to sort it.
With an awful flash too, in sub par lighting, like parties, this is a recipe for absolute disaster. Can't believe Sony didn't sort out the camera flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sony has the ability to film and during film to make pictures. I do that for fast moving pictures, like filming friends that pass by during marathon's. You can then decide to keep the film and the pictures. If you only want pictures, delete the film afterwards. This way you can start filming in advance and you are sure you are not too late and you have the risk your camera is not ready yet.
Jonathan-H said:
I'm not sure the camera is quick enough to capture moving stuff. I have tried a lot of modes and can't seem to sort it.
With an awful flash too, in sub par lighting, like parties, this is a recipe for absolute disaster. Can't believe Sony didn't sort out the camera flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't tried it yet, but have you tried the Timeshift burst? I think this is what we should use when trying to capture moving objects.
Yep, that is even better than my idea!
As a general rule, I only use auto on any camera when there is no more than one thing away from perfect conditions:
If it's motion but in great lighting, auto is ok.
If it's dark but the subject is still, auto is ok.
If it's a bit dark AND there is motion, you are gonna need to set up some manual settings or a mode like burst to get a good result. That said, as above, focussing first is essential for moving objects. Find something that is at the same distance as the subject you want, half hold the button to get the focus point, then hold it until the subject comes into frame, then depress fully. This, combined with burst, is the best way for fast movement.
Ok, I was at a scary halloween function last night, and by the time I took photos of scary subjects, they'd gone...
There's no excuse for this camera, it's a mess...
I have a Fuji XT1 camera and I know how photography works, apparently the Xperia Z3 has 20 mega pixels - Maybe it does, but only if you want a grainy shot....It's shocking!
KurtHoyle said:
Ok, I was at a scary halloween function last night, and by the time I took photos of scary subjects, they'd gone...
There's no excuse for this camera, it's a mess...
I have a Fuji XT1 camera and I know how photography works, apparently the Xperia Z3 has 20 mega pixels - Maybe it does, but only if you want a grainy shot....It's shocking!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you say you understand photography when all you point to is the megapixel count? There is so much more to a good photo than resolution.
The reason I point to the 20 mega pixel is because the photos taken with this camera should be of a good enough standard to print out at a size of 18" x 12" however, the photos look grainy on screen so I'd hate to see how crap they look any bigger.
The camera is shocking, the 4k videos are too so please dont try to defend it. Its very poor!
A Better Camera is a good alternative.