Hey there,
it's really ridiculous. I'm either blind or disappointed on the play store and I really hope you can help me out. Until now I was driving with Camera MX that can take videos and pictures and has something called live shot, so I won't miss great moments. Unfortunately, it does not take continuous shots in full quality, instead it records a video and let allow me to select the frames I want to export as images.
This sucks in term of quality. I'm looking for an app that takes real shots. I rather want high quality with lesser shots per seconds, however most apps target for speed and decrease quality. Another big thing is I want to record videos with it, too. And this is the moment were every burst shotter fails.
I'd like to have aperture, ISO value, and exposure time settings for better night photos, too. Half of the apps did not even adjust brightness on my LGG4 (CM13), but none of them fulfilled my expectations.
I really hope anybody can help me out with that. Thank you!
For anybody who came here for the same reason, I found this website: https://softwarerecs.stackexchange....ith-shutter-mode-easy-manual-config-and-video
At the end I decided to go for OpenCamera, because A Better Camera seems not to work on CM.
Related
I was testing out the HDR options for this and they do not seem to do much at all. There is a difference, but it is VERY minor. I took a shot without HDR, one with HDR, and then one using the free HDR app, and the HDR app simply blew the HTC HDR mode completely out of the water...
Has anyone else had any experience with this? Is there something I may be missing?
HDR always seemed like something better left to photo editing software to me (like photoshop). Phone camera filters always seem kind of lackluster, but then again, none of us are taking professional shots with a cell camera I assume
On topic though, I wouldn't doubt it being better. Sense stuff isn't exactly always perfection as far as software quality and HDR was probably just an afterthought tied into the camera so they could tick off a notch somewhere on some sheet for features.
Absolutely the same as my experience. I used HDR Camera from the market before this (free), and I really loved its results. When I installed the 3.0 Sense camera and saw the HDR setting, I was happy until I tried it. My theory is that it is NOT taking multiple pictures, but only doing an image adjustment --->> NOT the same thing. HDR Camera doesn't have the issues that some of you described. You do not have to be rock steady and my phone is plenty fast enough to take the three photos within about a second. The image settings are also adjustable (color, etc.).
On the other hand, the panorama mode in the Sense camera is Awesome!
yareally said:
HDR always seemed like something better left to photo editing software to me (like photoshop). Phone camera filters always seem kind of lackluster, but then again, none of us are taking professional shots with a cell camera I assume
On topic though, I wouldn't doubt it being better. Sense stuff isn't exactly always perfection as far as software quality and HDR was probably just an afterthought tied into the camera so they could tick off a notch somewhere on some sheet for features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Software cannot do what HDR does. HDR takes 2 pictures, adjusting the gain on the sensor between low and high. It combines the best of both images to gain detail in low light areas and avoid over exposure in high light areas. Software will not work after the fact because the extra information gained from low/high gain is not present. Unfortunately the HDR option is poorly implemented by HTC. If you try HDR on the Iphone, you can see a drastic difference.
Actually, I use Pro HDR on my Evo, and it takes fantastic pictures in true HDR. It is a touch slower than a pro camera, but it does actually meter the scene and adjust the camera's aperture accordingly. It then allows for adjustments between the composite image and allows for saving the final as well as the source images, meaning you can do further editing elsewhere. Outside of some cropping, I haven't had problems.
With that said, I would be curious to know what the deal is with Sense. What's interesting is if you put it in HDR mode, it shows the little icon in the top right with multiple images...like whoever designed it at least understood how true HDR *should* operate. Then, if you push and release it instead of the regular shutter button, it beeps and you hear the lens go, and the image focuses itself. So...idk. I don't see a noticeable effect in the regular images at all...
When i switch to video in the camera app the view is zoomed in compared to taking a photo. This is the minimum zoom level in the video mode but would be zoomed in a few times in photo mode.
Anyone else experiencing this and know how to fix it? I've had this issue with all the roms i've tried - ICS & GB.
It's really annoying having to stand far away from the thing I want to record
itsReggie said:
When i switch to video in the camera app the view is zoomed in compared to taking a photo. This is the minimum zoom level in the video mode but would be zoomed in a few times in photo mode.
Anyone else experiencing this and know how to fix it? I've had this issue with all the roms i've tried - ICS & GB.
It's really annoying having to stand far away from the thing I want to record
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah in video mode the image is little bit zoomed ( i would say 2x max) but that will not cause any trouble at all you can still take videos of near objects with ease...
BTW if you want your video quality to be quadrupled try this mod...the video quality is amazing im taking videos of my niece and they are absolutely godly when compared to crappy stock video
try the mod if you have custom rom installed
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1533238
It is very annoying and I find I have to move quite far back to record a video of something right infront of me, unlike just taking a photo.
Yeah i know about that mod and love it, it increased video & photo quality by 1000%
Hi Guys,
I wanted to let you all know that I happened to install Google camera as I was not particularly impressed with the noisy low light photos of the stock camera app.
I was pleasantly surprised to see the results using the google camera after enabling the HDR mode ,the low lights are vastly better than the stock camera in HDR mode, also photos in HDR mode with the google camera are saved much faster than the stock camera in the HDR mode.
Please note that google camera doesn’t show up for me in play store ,so I have side loaded 3.1.025 version .it’s not all rosy though, as the video mode is not working for me and there are occasional FC’s while the pic has been clicked and if you press the home button.
But despite all these, I honestly can’t go back to the stock camera for low light photos,I would suggest you all give it a try and let me know your thoughts.
Cheers.
Attaching some low light picture taken using the google camera.dont have the stock app photos side by side for comparison.sorry.
I have found low light with stock RAW very good as you can control noise levels and lights, even the simple gallery app DNG post treatment make very good results
vegetaleb said:
I have found low light with stock RAW very good as you can control noise levels and lights, even the simple gallery app DNG post treatment make very good results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the Tip mate ,would try it out.I am inclined towards google camera because without any post processing the images have lesser noise compared to the stock camera.I would try to post some better pics,I will admit the ones I have put dont make a strong case for themselves because I was just trying them out
Cheers.
The LG 360 Cam is now available to buy. I got this from Clove Technology at the same time as the VR headset.
I spent a lot of time playing and using this, my detailed review is below. Includes sample media, screen shots and more.
https://gavinsgadgets.com/2016/05/04/lg-g5-friends-lg-360-cam-review/
Any questions, please ask. Also if anyone else has one, then add your views.
gavinfabl said:
The LG 360 Cam is now available to buy. I got this from Clove Technology at the same time as the VR headset.
I spent a lot of time playing and using this, my detailed review is below. Includes sample media, screen shots and more.
Any questions, please ask. Also if anyone else has one, then add your views.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looks really cool man. Will consider to buy one.
How well do you think the 360 cam would work as a dash cam?
Probably overkill
I'm also considering it for a possible dashcam, but what are the practicalities like? Can you just plug it into a USB charger and have it record continuously (1 hr+) to a sd card, or are there some limits?
From memory it's 4gb video size max.
New beta software has arrived play store after some time they take back 5.2.2 to 5.1.1
software says for new features (3d audio for example) need to update firmware but when checks no new firmware found(also check with bridge
). Do u know anything about that?
Old thread, but i dig him out...
Got the camera yesterday for small money. Less money = less risk i thought.
The first impression: Video & photo quality are lower than expected.:crying:
Tried some apps from play store to handle the camera. THan i had made a firmware update because the camera doesn’t support life monitoring with the old firmware. (LGbridge) Now it seems to work alright.
The camera uses BT connection to control the hardware and uses the w-lan to transfer picture data to smartphone.
You can change between full automatic and manual mode. I tried the auto mode at first.
After a few experiences, the results are a little bit disappointing. Under low light, the results are noisy and a little bit unsharp.
The visible quality is lower than expected.:crying: BTW: Between the front and rear pictures, there is a small visible cutting edge.
I hope, this will be fixed in next release!
I think, i will give the project a last chance with daylight now. Thinking about to return the camera to dealer....
more about the camera:
-> http://www.trustedreviews.com/lg-360-cam-review
-> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe6B4sgtLiQ
Edit:
ok, got better results using "daylight" ! Of curse not the same quality as the LG5 camera will do, but acceptable for me.
tried to make some records like GOOGLE does. Driving along the street with G360 on top of the car. That was amazing!
tried to edit 360 video with AndroVid and it worked for me! (cutting and adding sound, no color effects or titles!) Hope i will find more apps to handle my videos.
tried to edit a 360° picture with "snapseed" and "photo editor" and it work!
see my pic in attachment. I have cut me out!
BTW: after uploading my pic, it is only 5% of size as the original one. (4,5MB>245kb)
The quality is very reduced now compared to the original!
There is a new firmware available for 360 cam. Version "L"! Can’t see any differences until now. Was described as a camera optimization only. No new features.
max. record time ~20min / ~2.3Gb. - nothing changed!
no new fw until now.
juli.2017
Just wondering if there's any way I can get an astrophotography time lapse greater than 1 second? I would love to have 60 seconds, but I know it would probably take 4 hours or something.
Just wondering if this is possible or there's any third party apps that might be able to do this (take a longer exposure than the 4 minutes that astrophotography takes)?
I don't think it is possible, the astro time-lapse is made up from the images used to and then stacked for the astro image itself so you would end up with shed loads of images as well.
Have you tried just using the normal time-lapse option in the video settings?
Exactly, take a normal night video and then slow it down with editing software.
schmeggy929 said:
Exactly, take a normal night video and then slow it down with editing software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The dude is talking about astrophotography and long exposure shots for a reason. What will a "night video" do good? And timelapse is not slowing down the video. lmao
That is my mistake, I totally read his post wrong.
Thing is the astro time laps is made up of the individual shots taken when Astrophotography mode is active so those individual image have been taken at f1.85, if you just did a normal time lapse using the main lens the video will still be at f1.85 and with a bit of post processing it should work.
The other way around it is to just take a night mode photo every 30 seconds for 2 hours using a timer and a Bluetooth remote.
MrBelter said:
Thing is the astro time laps is made up of the individual shots taken when Astrophotography mode is active so those individual image have been taken at f1.85, if you just did a normal time lapse using the main lens the video will still be at f1.85 and with a bit of post processing it should work.
The other way around it is to just take a night mode photo every 30 seconds for 2 hours using a timer and a Bluetooth remote.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're talking about Aperture that is FIXED and completely irrelevant in this case. It's not like you have a variable aperture on the lens so you can adjust it.
What matters in his case is the shutter speed and the exposure time.
And no, normal timelapse WON'T work because the shutter speed will be low (fast) and the phone will try to compensate by pushing the ISO high. You'll end up with very dark scenes and TONS of noise.
And what makes Astro mode very important is the FRAME STACKING. Frame stacking reduces the overall noise and increases the "quality" of the image.
Deadmau-five said:
Just wondering if there's any way I can get an astrophotography time lapse greater than 1 second? I would love to have 60 seconds, but I know it would probably take 4 hours or something.
Just wondering if this is possible or there's any third party apps that might be able to do this (take a longer exposure than the 4 minutes that astrophotography takes)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not with stock camera.
You can try MotionCam Pro for that. It has a timelapse option where you can set your exposure time even to 15 seconds.
MotionCam is mainly for RAW video recording, but you can do photos and time-lapses. The output is absolutely GREAT. You're working with a RAW VIDEO basically and the quality is not comparable to ANY other app.
I had one Astro timelapse from it but I can't seem to find it now. It's sh**y weather outside now so can't do even a short one. I could do just a daylight one so you can see what quality I'm talking about here.
Uploaded a screenshot of the viewfinder. As you can see on the SS, you can adjust the ISO and shutter speed (among many other things) and do a timelapse.
This is basically taking RAW shots that you can later post process with various editing software like, Davinci Resolve, Adobe Premiere, Vegas, etc...
What you get is a video quality on the level of a DSLR and BETTER because there is no post-processing involved on the phone, it's basically RAW DNG images taken (sequence) that you can export (render) into a video at your QUALITY choice with YOUR post-processing involved.
Here is one sample I shot at and rendered to 4k60 (no color grading, just stock output).
Keep in mind that this is YOUTUBE, the quality of the original video is FAR better.
JohnTheFarm3r said:
You're talking about Aperture that is FIXED and completely irrelevant in this case. It's not like you have a variable aperture on the lens so you can adjust it.
What matters in his case is the shutter speed and the exposure time.
And no, normal timelapse WON'T work because the shutter speed will be low (fast) and the phone will try to compensate by pushing the ISO high. You'll end up with very dark scenes and TONS of noise.
And what makes Astro mode very important is the FRAME STACKING. Frame stacking reduces the overall noise and increases the "quality" of the image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know the aperture is fixed that's why i said it should work given the astrophotography mode time lapse is made up from the 16 images taken when the mode is active and not once the images have been stacked in to a single image. Given the way you talk you of all people should appreciate just how fast f1.85 is, not a single one of my Canon L lenses is that fast or even comes anywhere close to it.
The OP has nothing to lose by giving it a go before recommending extra software and shooting raw (it is raw BTW if we are getting picky, it isn't an acronym for anything).
MrBelter said:
I know the aperture is fixed that's why i said it should work given the astrophotography mode time lapse is made up from the 16 images taken when the mode is active and not once the images have been stacked in to a single image. Given the way you talk you of all people should appreciate just how fast f1.85 is, not a single one of my Canon L lenses is that fast or even comes anywhere close to it.
The OP has nothing to lose by giving it a go before recommending extra software and shooting raw (it is raw BTW if we are getting picky, it isn't an acronym for anything).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did I say ANYTHING against the fixed aperture of F1.85? I just said that since it's fixed, it's not relevant to the "settings" he uses since he CAN'T change the aperture value anyway.
It's not about "losing" anything, it's about the technical part of understanding that your recommendation won't work because it doesn't use long exposure shutter speeds or frame stacking.
By NOT using frame stacking, the noise will be horrible and there is little much you can do with post-processing without killing completely the "details" on the photo by suppressing both luma and chroma noise.
Another thing is that regular timelapse doesn't push long exposures...It's just not meant to be used for "astro", that's all.
Erm ok fella but how do you think this was all done before Google and its wonderful computational photography came along?
My point about the aperture is it is very fast so it being fixed is not irrelevant at all given it is the only chance of this even working, the OP may have tried it at 0.5x or 5x where the apertures are much slower, the OP has absolutely nothing to lose by giving it a go, it might be crap, you might end up with only the brightest objects in the sky, you might end up with a noisy mush and yet it might be good fun who knows.
Sadly there is always one person that comes along and stomps on the parade because they know best though isn't there?
MrBelter said:
Erm ok fella but how do you think this was all done before Google and its wonderful computational photography came along?
My point about the aperture is it is very fast so it being fixed is not irrelevant at all given it is the only chance of this even working, the OP may have tried it at 0.5x or 5x where the apertures are much slower, the OP has absolutely nothing to lose by giving it a go, it might be crap, you might end up with only the brightest objects in the sky, you might end up with a noisy mush and yet it might be good fun who knows.
Sadly there is always one person that comes along and stomps on the parade because they know best though isn't there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was done in a way that results were not even close to what we have today. Why use "outdated" methods when we have these VERY capable devices?
The app I suggested is great and has exactly what is he looking for.
Your logic of "How did we do this before XY time" is equal to "Let's just ride horses instead of cars because that's how we did it before". lmao