Hands on: Apple's iPhone XS and XS Max are gorgeous, and a boon for photographers

145679

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 187
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,900member
    Soli said:
    gatorguy said:
    k2kw said:
    spheric said:
    Oh, come on, kids. 

    Is it at all possible to discuss the relative merits of devices without some idiot immediately going off the rails about how somebody did it first? 

    Yeah, Apple defined the modern smartphone. 

    You wanna Cher it and turn back time, or live with a world where other companies make great phones too, for whatever reason and with whatever moral baggage? 

    You don’t want to buy a Samsung because they’re immoral swine? Cool. Neither do I. 

    Now shut the fuck up about it while the adults are talking about image quality and lens focal length, or whatever the hell else is THE ACTUAL TOPIC. 

    Jesus Christ. 

    Every. Single. Fucking. Thread. 

    Evidently its a Samsung Screen and Camera Sensor.   The Google people are saying the Pixel 2 still has a better camera, but I remember some of the pictures DED posted from the Pixel2 and don't have an interest in it.
    You wouldn't expect DED to post good pictures would you? I always read his editorials, they're entertaining and always have some really creative wordplay,  but he has no intention of being unbiased. That's his shtick
    He certainly has a preference for Apple, but I've never seen him go out of his way to make Apple look good when they're worse and other look bad when they're better. I've read countless articles from him where he mercilessly pans Apple for their decisions and praises others for doing it better or right.
    Mercilessly pans Apple? For what? I think I might remember one article quite some time back where he had some niggling issue with them but I've not ever read a DED article where he clearly and loudly took Apple to task on some Apple device, software, or feature choice.  No matter I suppose, we all have somewhat selective memories and perhaps he did "mercilessly" complain....  once. 
    ;)
    avon b7muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 162 of 187
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,181member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    I queued in line for 3 hours last Friday for the first time.  Purchased the XS.  It's a super fast phone and while I thought I'd hate FaceID, I actually like that - very seamless experience that just works.  Only a couple of times have I had to adjust myself to align with the phone.

    The camera however is another thing which makes me sad as I waited past the X for a better camera...  It's kind of a real mix.  For a regular shot you can get some great photos.  But low light performance is not great and I went to a beautiful park this weekend expecting great shots, but found the colors were very washed when taking some beautiful landscape pictures full of many plants.  (I got lots of good photos too and portrait is really neat, but landscapes of plants in sunlight just failed)  I also think that 12 MP is just too few these days... there's loss of detail when zooming in on a nice landscape photo.

    Maybe I'm just too used to a DSLR, or even my old 950xl and expected too much, but this Apple's premium device - I was stepping up from an SE and my phone does not have a camera that is $1000 more than that.  (The SE is surprisingly good when light is available.)

    Still, I get to enjoy the large vibrant screen and the fact that everything else just flies on the phone.  But I'm really hoping that the camera quality on the XS will improve over time given the focus on algorithmic photography.

    What modes did you shoot the landscapes in?

    I would think that Smart HDR is what you want to use.

    Here's a link to Austin Mann's review of the XS; he's a travel photographer

    http://austinmann.com/projects/iphone-xs-camera-review-zanzibar
    I was in regular Photo.  There is no SmartHDR option in the photo app that I can find, but it is enabled in the Settings/Camera.

    "How do I use it?

    It’s simple. Just make sure HDR is enabled in the on-screen menu, choose your subject, and take a picture. Your iPhone does the heavy lifting.

    Announcing the feature, Apple VP marketing, Phil Schiller said: “Increasingly, what makes incredible photos possible aren’t just the sensor and the lens but the chip and the software that runs on it.”

    I picked that out of a link to applemust.com


    I hope that helps.

    Not really, there is no HDR option on my XS.  On my SE the camera app has an HDR icon at the top.  On the XS you just have Flash, Live, Timer and Color.

    As I said, I have Smart HDR on in the settings but there is no other sign of it.  I guess it is supposed to be automatic or something.
    Schiller clearly mentioned it during the presentation. Perhaps, as you say, that it's SmartHDR so that you don't have to fiddle with controls before taking a photo and then do everything you want in post in a more casual fashion. Schiller goes into a fair amount of detail about how many different photos and types of photos are taken for each single photograph (from the user's standpoint).

    edit: At around 01h:09:35s Schiller goes into what makes SmartHDR work:





    Just before that he talks about some of the new things with the ISP and A12 Bionic that they haven't done before, like the number of operations per photo and the pairing of the ISP and Neural Engine which I have to assume also play a role in how SmartHDR works:




    edited September 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 163 of 187
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,900member
    tmay said:

    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a computational bokeh effect if it's going to blur the primary object you're trying to photograph?

    Here's an example I just took* since I don't think you're understanding the difference between bokeh...

    In this first photograph Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    Funny thing; I was asking myself that. Being able to add a focus point doesn't really solve any problems, at least that I can see.

    Good point,
    It looks as tho Apple's "bokeh effect" also introduces some softness in the subject as well, softening the overall image and not just the background. Look at the hair detail and eyes in the two images. 
  • Reply 164 of 187
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,181member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:

    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a computational bokeh effect if it's going to blur the primary object you're trying to photograph?

    Here's an example I just took* since I don't think you're understanding the difference between bokeh...

    In this first photograph Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    Funny thing; I was asking myself that. Being able to add a focus point doesn't really solve any problems, at least that I can see.

    Good point,
    It looks as tho Apple's "bokeh effect" also introduces some softness in the subject as well, softening the overall image and not just the background. Look at the hair detail and eyes in the two images. 
    It does soften parts of the foreground figure. A little on the face and considerably more on her arm and shirt, but it does not make her too blurry to make our when they un-bokeh the background. That Huawei video shows a very slight un-blurring of the background while the coffee cup becomes something you'd only see if you were swimming with your eyes open in an over-chlorinated pool for 2 hours.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 165 of 187
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,181member
    gatorguy said:
    Soli said:
    gatorguy said:
    k2kw said:
    spheric said:
    Oh, come on, kids. 

    Is it at all possible to discuss the relative merits of devices without some idiot immediately going off the rails about how somebody did it first? 

    Yeah, Apple defined the modern smartphone. 

    You wanna Cher it and turn back time, or live with a world where other companies make great phones too, for whatever reason and with whatever moral baggage? 

    You don’t want to buy a Samsung because they’re immoral swine? Cool. Neither do I. 

    Now shut the fuck up about it while the adults are talking about image quality and lens focal length, or whatever the hell else is THE ACTUAL TOPIC. 

    Jesus Christ. 

    Every. Single. Fucking. Thread. 

    Evidently its a Samsung Screen and Camera Sensor.   The Google people are saying the Pixel 2 still has a better camera, but I remember some of the pictures DED posted from the Pixel2 and don't have an interest in it.
    You wouldn't expect DED to post good pictures would you? I always read his editorials, they're entertaining and always have some really creative wordplay,  but he has no intention of being unbiased. That's his shtick
    He certainly has a preference for Apple, but I've never seen him go out of his way to make Apple look good when they're worse and other look bad when they're better. I've read countless articles from him where he mercilessly pans Apple for their decisions and praises others for doing it better or right.
    Mercilessly pans Apple? For what? I think I might remember one article quite some time back where he had some niggling issue with them but I've not ever read a DED article where he clearly and loudly took Apple to task on some Apple device, software, or feature choice.  No matter I suppose, we all have somewhat selective memories and perhaps he did "mercilessly" complain....  once. 
    ;)
    He did recently go after Apple for their stupid naming convention where they pair Roman numerals with letters and expect you to switch between them with ease, but that's very mild compared to the logistical complaints he's had with Apple over the years. When others pop up I'll try to remember to post them.
    I honestly believe most people in the real world spent the last year pronouncing the X in “iPhone X” as ex, not ten. With these XS and XR names, that’s only going to get more pronounced. I really find it hard not to say ex-arr and ex-ess. A Roman numeral is hard enough. But to put two alphabetic characters next to each other and expect people to treat one as a Roman numeral and the other as a letter is too much. They look like ex-arr and ex-ess so people are naturally going to see them and say them as ex-arr and ex-ess.

    Think about this. If the naming system is “X_”, where the leading X represents 10 and the underscore is a letter of the alphabet, we could have an “iPhone XX”, which Apple would have you believe should be pronounced ten-ex. Madness. Apple wouldn’t do this, of course, but it shows how illogical this X-as-ten naming scheme is.
    edited September 2018 sphericwatto_cobra
  • Reply 166 of 187
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,833member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:

    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a computational bokeh effect if it's going to blur the primary object you're trying to photograph?

    Here's an example I just took* since I don't think you're understanding the difference between bokeh...

    In this first photograph Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    Funny thing; I was asking myself that. Being able to add a focus point doesn't really solve any problems, at least that I can see.

    Good point,
    It looks as tho Apple's "bokeh effect" also introduces some softness in the subject as well, softening the overall image and not just the background. Look at the hair detail and eyes in the two images. 
    Nilay of The Verge describes Portrait Mode as hit or miss, and I've seen comments from Austin Mann and others to that effect, so softness doesn't sound awful at this point compared to that. I would prefer to see more detail in the hair of the subjects arm, they look mottled, and I can't tell on the eye, my age being responsible for that, but Apple has a ways to go until it can even match a kit lens on a dslr.

    For Portrait IQ, the new X models get better, but not equal in IQ to the Pixel 2, and I expect the Pixel 3 to gain on that, assuming an imager upgrade. I have tentatively planned to purchase a new iPhone a year from now, hoping for a triple lens, accompanied by a time of fight sensor, and possibly even Pencil support. Another 12 months to fiddle with image effects.

    Link to TheVerge;

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/18/17871816/apple-iphone-xs-max-review-camera-processor-battery-price

    edited September 2018
  • Reply 167 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    hentaiboy said:
    melgross said:

    Bokeh is a totally unnatural effect. Lens bokeh is no more natural, or “right” than computational bokeh.
    You make a valid point and IMHO the whole bokeh thing is overblown nowadays, as is HDR.

    But as photographer, you’ll agree that some bokeh is more PLEASING than others and I just don’t find computational bokeh pleasing. 
    Some bokeh is more pleasing, to be sure. Right now, lenses have been producing bokeh since they were first made hundreds of years ago. More recently, for several decades, attempts have been made to improve bokeh, to a greater, or lesser, degree of success.

    since computational photography is just three years, or so, old, and bokeh is just now being addressed, I think it’s too early to make a fair comparison as to what will look better after it’s been addressed a few more years. As to what’s more pleasing, some people, who are not photographers, think that computational bokeh looks better, because it doesn’t have those “big round dots” in the background, which some people think of as distracting. Particularly in photography, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 168 of 187
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,060member
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a computational bokeh effect if it's going to blur the primary object you're trying to photograph?

    Here's an example I just took* since I don't think you're understanding the difference between bokeh...

    In this first photograph Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    You have lost yourself again!

    Read the article. What you are pointing out has absolutely no reference in this article. Not in the images or the description. This is what that article says:

    Camera time

    The first thing we did, after booting up the new phone, was jump straight into the camera. We've been dying to check out the new controllable aperture feature exclusive to these new phones.




    We noticed that XS Max was quicker than our iPhone X in activating the Portrait Mode blur effect as we aimed at our subject.




    Our photo loaded, and a moment later an adjustable row of f-stops appeared below the image. As we increased or decreased the aperture, the level of blur in the background would increase and decrease. It looks pretty slick. There is going to still be a difference in the look of the blur on an iPhone versus a DSLR, but being able to adjust it was pretty amazing to see."

    Can you see anything there that speaks about what you just posted - and in the context of what you said? Is what you just highlighted anywhere in the article?

    NO!

    My question was related to the article, not what Schiller said. You know that because I said - right here in this thread - that I didn't see the presentation.

    So, what is here - in the article?

    Aperture feature. Changing depth of field.

    What is in my question and link?

    Aperture mode. Changing depth of field.

    That is how I read it anyway.

    Maybe you are starting to understand now?

    I mentioned my 'surprise'. Why do you think that was?

    Well, did you check the date of the video I linked to? Early 2017. Do you know when the P9 was released? April 2016.

    No NPU. No Bionic.

    So, when I read this piece, I say to myself, what's new in that - the feature? Hadn't all dual lens iPhones had that feature from the start?

    I just took for granted they had.

    So, what did I do? I asked a question!

    Brilliant eh?

    Now let me ask you a question.

    Do you agree that it was possible to simply give an answer and clear things up in ONE post?

    Easy, right?





    edited September 2018 spheric
  • Reply 169 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    AppleZulu said:
    nunzy said:
    Apple now has the best cameras ever made. Professional photographers will not need anything else.

    I defy anybody to see any differences unless the photo is blow up to billboard size.
    No, not the case at all. Sure, amateurs may not need anything else, but the iPhone camera does not substitute for a ‘real’ camera. 

    The iPhone has only two lenses, each with a fixed aperture and focal length. The portrait mode feature that blurs the background to create what they like to call “bokeh,” is entirely simulated. It is essentially an automated photoshop feature. Although it is generally nicely done, you don’t have to enlarge the picture in many cases to see where the simulated effect hasn’t quite found the edges of the subject to separate it from the background that’s blurred after the fact. I can see the difference on my phone’s screen. No billboard needed. 

    The actual bokeh effect is achieved with ‘real’ cameras where you (or the onboard computer) control focus, aperture, and shutter speed according to the laws of physics and record the result on the camera’s sensor (or film, if you’re really old-school). The iPhone’s fixed focal length, fixed aperture lenses simply can’t do that. It is physically impossible. Actually that’s not entirely true. They could be set up to do that, but then they couldn’t not do that, to go for the double negative. It’s the fixed aspect of the lenses that make that the case.  

    Mind you, the iPhone’s cameras are better than most consumer grade amateur gear that’s been out there, but they’re no match for a good Nikon, Olympus, Canon, etc. camera with interchangeable lenses. And they’re certainly no Hasselblad. 
    Like a few other guys here, you don’t seem to understand that bokeh, no matter where it comes from, is artificial. It’s an artifact of a device made by people, which makes the effect unnatural and artificial.

    we, that is, people, can’t see bokeh, because our eyes and brains don’t work that way. I already gave an explanation of this. Therefor, bokeh is a fake representation of what we get in a photo. Because of that, whether out of focus images come from a lens, or a computer, doesn’t matter. What matters is whether the person with the image likes it.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 170 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member

    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nunzy said:
    Apple now has the best cameras ever made. Professional photographers will not need anything else.

    I defy anybody to see any differences unless the photo is blow up to billboard size.
    ...the iPhone camera does not substitute for a ‘real’ camera. 
    The iPhone not being as good as other cameras does not make it imaginary or fake.
    That’s why I put the word real in quotes, sparky. Didn’t want to get into an argument over the semantics of the word professional or DSLR or mirrorless DSLR or whatever. But then you had to go for the semantic argument over the word real. Congratulations!
    Again, the question revolves around the concept of “real”. Is an artifact of a device designed and made by people any more real than another artifact made by a device designed, and made by people, particularly when those artifacts resemble nothing that we see with our eyes? I suspect not.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 171 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member

    tmay said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nunzy said:
    Apple now has the best cameras ever made. Professional photographers will not need anything else.

    I defy anybody to see any differences unless the photo is blow up to billboard size.
    No, not the case at all. Sure, amateurs may not need anything else, but the iPhone camera does not substitute for a ‘real’ camera. 

    The iPhone has only two lenses, each with a fixed aperture and focal length. The portrait mode feature that blurs the background to create what they like to call “bokeh,” is entirely simulated. It is essentially an automated photoshop feature. Although it is generally nicely done, you don’t have to enlarge the picture in many cases to see where the simulated effect hasn’t quite found the edges of the subject to separate it from the background that’s blurred after the fact. I can see the difference on my phone’s screen. No billboard needed. 

    The actual bokeh effect is achieved with ‘real’ cameras where you (or the onboard computer) control focus, aperture, and shutter speed according to the laws of physics and record the result on the camera’s sensor (or film, if you’re really old-school). The iPhone’s fixed focal length, fixed aperture lenses simply can’t do that. It is physically impossible. Actually that’s not entirely true. They could be set up to do that, but then they couldn’t not do that, to go for the double negative. It’s the fixed aspect of the lenses that make that the case.  

    Mind you, the iPhone’s cameras are better than most consumer grade amateur gear that’s been out there, but they’re no match for a good Nikon, Olympus, Canon, etc. camera with interchangeable lenses. And they’re certainly no Hasselblad. 
    "In photography, bokeh (/ˈboʊkeɪ/ BOH-kay) (Japanese: [boke]) is the aesthetic quality of the blur produced in the out-of-focus parts of an image produced by a lens. Bokeh has been defined as "the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light".


    Seems to me that as aesthetic quality is both subjective and perceptual, albeit as you state based on complex parameters of the lens and aperture, using ML/AI to synthesize bokeh in a smartphone, is an effort worth making. Evolved imager/aperture/lens stacks for smartphones will surely be developed, and this can only improve that perceived bokeh.

    Personally, I wouldn't mind having a recent full frame mirrorless with ML/AI bokeh effect so that even kit lenses could provide reasonable bokeh, without the high cost of f/0.95 lenses with  9 curved aperture blades.

    I LOVE curved aperture blades! So sexy.
  • Reply 172 of 187
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,779member
    Bokeh is not “artificial”. 

    It is a natural result of wide apertures having narrow focal depth-of-field. 

    The smaller the aperture, the deeper the in-focus range, and the less blurry the background. 

    Bokeh is as natural as focus or motion blur or lens flare. It can be minimised or provoked within what circumstances allow through photographic skill, but it is a natural physical phenomenon. 

    What these phones do is to FAKE the effect to be more in tune with what we feel to be natural, and to allow us to shift the viewers’ attention more towards the subject of the photo. 
    gatorguy
  • Reply 173 of 187
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,181member
    avon b7 said:
    You have lost yourself again!

    Read the article. What you are pointing out has absolutely no reference in this article. Not in the images or the description. This is what that article says:
    You specifically asked, "So, when I read this piece, I say to myself, what's new in that?" So, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you're just slow and not trolling, I made it as clear as I possibly could to show you exactly WHAT THE FUCK IS NEW IN THAT!

    You claimed that Apple wasn't first and when pointed out that these are very different effects you're still claiming that these two effects are the exact same thing and that Apple isn't doing a single thing different from Huawei's attempt to dupe you into thinking that making the foreground and background both blurry are just as good Apple's solution… which the article covers.

    edited September 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 174 of 187
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,779member
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a  Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    […]
    Can you see anything there that speaks about what you just posted - and in the context of what you said? Is what you just highlighted anywhere in the article?

    NO!

    My question was related to the article, not what Schiller said. You know that because I said - right here in this thread - that I didn't see the presentation.

    So, what is here - in the article?

    Aperture feature. Changing depth of field.

    What is in my question and link?

    Aperture mode. Changing depth of field.

    That is how I read it anyway.

    Maybe you are starting to understand now?

    I mentioned my 'surprise'. Why do you think that was?

    Well, did you check the date of the video I linked to? Early 2017. Do you know when the P9 was released? April 2016.

    No NPU. No Bionic.

    So, when I read this piece, I say to myself, what's new in that - the feature? Hadn't all dual lens iPhones had that feature from the start?

    I just took for granted they had.

    So, what did I do? I asked a question!

    Brilliant eh?

    Now let me ask you a question.

    Do you agree that it was possible to simply give an answer and clear things up in ONE post?

    Easy, right?

    Okay, so it turns out that apps have existed to exploit the depth of field of dual-camera iPhones for some time, such as Focos:
    https://itunes.apple.com/de/app/focos/id1274938524?mt=8

    What’s new here isn’t so much that the Xs can do this, it’s that Apple is embracing it and adding the effect to the viewfinder IN REAL TIME in a coming update. That’s where they’re going with this, and why they’re only adding it to the default camera on the Xs at this point. 
    edited September 2018 gatorguytmay
  • Reply 175 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    A very good article about the Xs max cameras and how the system works.

    https://medium.com/s/story/inside-apples-iphone-xs-camera-technology-50d47ba7be8f
    Solibestkeptsecretwatto_cobra
  • Reply 176 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    Soli said:
    gatorguy said:
    k2kw said:
    spheric said:
    Oh, come on, kids. 

    Is it at all possible to discuss the relative merits of devices without some idiot immediately going off the rails about how somebody did it first? 

    Yeah, Apple defined the modern smartphone. 

    You wanna Cher it and turn back time, or live with a world where other companies make great phones too, for whatever reason and with whatever moral baggage? 

    You don’t want to buy a Samsung because they’re immoral swine? Cool. Neither do I. 

    Now shut the fuck up about it while the adults are talking about image quality and lens focal length, or whatever the hell else is THE ACTUAL TOPIC. 

    Jesus Christ. 

    Every. Single. Fucking. Thread. 

    Evidently its a Samsung Screen and Camera Sensor.   The Google people are saying the Pixel 2 still has a better camera, but I remember some of the pictures DED posted from the Pixel2 and don't have an interest in it.
    You wouldn't expect DED to post good pictures would you? I always read his editorials, they're entertaining and always have some really creative wordplay,  but he has no intention of being unbiased. That's his shtick
    He certainly has a preference for Apple, but I've never seen him go out of his way to make Apple look good when they're worse and other look bad when they're better. I've read countless articles from him where he mercilessly pans Apple for their decisions and praises others for doing it better or right.
    Gotta disagree here. He’s a fanboy for sure. His biases are well known, and on display at all times. If you don’t see that in his. Articles, then you’re either not paying attention, or just happen to ageee.
    edited September 2018 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 177 of 187
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,181member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    gatorguy said:
    k2kw said:
    spheric said:
    Oh, come on, kids. 

    Is it at all possible to discuss the relative merits of devices without some idiot immediately going off the rails about how somebody did it first? 

    Yeah, Apple defined the modern smartphone. 

    You wanna Cher it and turn back time, or live with a world where other companies make great phones too, for whatever reason and with whatever moral baggage? 

    You don’t want to buy a Samsung because they’re immoral swine? Cool. Neither do I. 

    Now shut the fuck up about it while the adults are talking about image quality and lens focal length, or whatever the hell else is THE ACTUAL TOPIC. 

    Jesus Christ. 

    Every. Single. Fucking. Thread. 

    Evidently its a Samsung Screen and Camera Sensor.   The Google people are saying the Pixel 2 still has a better camera, but I remember some of the pictures DED posted from the Pixel2 and don't have an interest in it.
    You wouldn't expect DED to post good pictures would you? I always read his editorials, they're entertaining and always have some really creative wordplay,  but he has no intention of being unbiased. That's his shtick
    He certainly has a preference for Apple, but I've never seen him go out of his way to make Apple look good when they're worse and other look bad when they're better. I've read countless articles from him where he mercilessly pans Apple for their decisions and praises others for doing it better or right.
    Gotta disagree here. He’s a fanboy for sure. His biases are well known, and on display at all times. If you don’t see that in his. Articles, then you’re either not paying attention, or just happen to ageee.
    I already gave you one recent example of where he thinks Apple is making a mistake with the names. As I said, it's mild, but it's certainly not Gruber being "fanboy" that agrees with every move Apple makes. I'm not going to look back on all his reviews to find others, but he will periodically point out stuff about Apple that "we" typically also disagree with. And it's not just reviews. I think he's more likely to disagree with how Apple handles their privacy when it comes to things the consumer should now, as well as some lawsuits where Apple seems to be using their might to take unfair advantage of others. Again, I'll point them out the next they occur.

    PS: Do you consider yourself a "fanboy"? I certainly don't. I tend to prefer Apple's products because they suit my needs the best, but if someone comes out with a better option (like Amazon with the Echo) I'll go with their offerings, and I have a long lists of things I wish Apple would make, but I'm also not against Apple nor do I expect that another smartphone company will win me over anytime soon… I'm just constantly open to the idea at all times. I'm mostly an Apple home and I'm fine if someone calls me a 'fanboy" because of it, but does that also mean a "fanboy" can't ever be critical of a company?
    edited September 2018
  • Reply 178 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:

    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    Is there a difference between the camera mode you are describing and what Huawei phones have done for years?

    The reason I ask is that when they announced the feature I automatically assumed it would be different but what you describe is practically identical to how Huawei phones have operated since the P9. I thought it was already possible on Apple's dual lens phones.

    [video]

    Or is not so much what it does as how it does it?
    It looks like it's doing the same type of adjustments, but I'm not sure why you mention it. For starters, when has Apple been first to anything, and yet new release you have to claim that some other company—which now seems to be Huawei, a company that makes Samsung look honest—did something first.

    Is Apple's algorithm really as bad as Huawei's? First of all, here's a screenshot of the video you posted where the presenter is showing how you can blur the foreground to make the background come into view yet he background is still blurry as fuck. It seems like it's better for adjusting bokeh, but that's not what the video is doing as noted by the coffee cup getting blurry.

    Finally, what's YOUR point? Why do you keep mentioning other, shittier products in conversations about Apple that were never asked. You're the THIRD reply in this thread! Is your goal to just jack the thread with your nonsense?

    [image]
    My point was in that third post. Asked, explained, asked again, explained again, and again, and again.

    Why don't YOU get it?

    You know, if I explain it again, you still won't get it. Of that I'm sure.
    Let me ask you a question: What's the point of a computational bokeh effect if it's going to blur the primary object you're trying to photograph?

    Here's an example I just took* since I don't think you're understanding the difference between bokeh...

    In this first photograph Schiller shows the original photo with their bokeh effect in play"


    In this second photograph Schiller shows how they've adjust the bokeh effect so that the background stands out more WITHOUT altering the primary subject in the foreground:

    So, why in the world would someone want for the object they took a photo of to become blurry like the background of the photo? These don't have the physical components to mimic Lytro! Bottom line: Huawei ain't got nothing but their typical snake oil to sell.


    * I took screenshots from the September event. I was being cheeky with my word usage.
    Funny thing; I was asking myself that. Being able to add a focus point doesn't really solve any problems, at least that I can see.

    Good point,
    It looks as tho Apple's "bokeh effect" also introduces some softness in the subject as well, softening the overall image and not just the background. Look at the hair detail and eyes in the two images. 
    Tough to tell exactly with those images, but the eyes look fine. The hair is supposed to be out of focus if it’s set to the equivelant of f1.4. The focus depth using a full frame with a 50 f1.4 gives about 1/2” focus at that distance. So, about right.
    edited September 2018
  • Reply 179 of 187
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,789member
    spheric said:
    Bokeh is not “artificial”. 

    It is a natural result of wide apertures having narrow focal depth-of-field. 

    The smaller the aperture, the deeper the in-focus range, and the less blurry the background. 

    Bokeh is as natural as focus or motion blur or lens flare. It can be minimised or provoked within what circumstances allow through photographic skill, but it is a natural physical phenomenon. 

    What these phones do is to FAKE the effect to be more in tune with what we feel to be natural, and to allow us to shift the viewers’ attention more towards the subject of the photo. 
    No, bokeh is artificial. It’s a result of an artifact of an artificial device designed, and made by people. Motion blur and lens flare are both artificial. Anything that comes from a device we make is artificial, and fake. The point is that we don’t see that way, and so anything that we make that provides an image with those artifacts is, by definition, artificial.

    it doesn’t matter whether effect is from a lens or computer, it’s artificial. The important question is whether it’s pleasing. And there, different people have different opinions. None of those opinions are either right or wrong. It’s art, after all, whether it looks good, or bad.
  • Reply 180 of 187
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,060member
    Soli said:
    avon b7 said:
    You have lost yourself again!

    Read the article. What you are pointing out has absolutely no reference in this article. Not in the images or the description. This is what that article says:
    You specifically asked, "So, when I read this piece, I say to myself, what's new in that?" So, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you're just slow and not trolling, I made it as clear as I possibly could to show you exactly WHAT THE FUCK IS NEW IN THAT!

    You claimed that Apple wasn't first and when pointed out that these are very different effects you're still claiming that these two effects are the exact same thing and that Apple isn't doing a single thing different from Huawei's attempt to dupe you into thinking that making the foreground and background both blurry are just as good Apple's solution… which the article covers.

    I claimed?

    What are you talking about? What you said wasn't in the article.

    I read an article, had a doubt and asked a question? I even explained why I asked the question!

    Is that too difficult to get into your head?

    I wasn't claiming Huawei had anything 'first'. Jesus, I thought all iPhones had the feature!

    That's why I asked the question. And now, I'm slow. How ironic!

    You are comparing the results of a three day old phone to the result of a phone released in April 2016! I'd say you weren't exactly very quick on the uptake!


    edited September 2018 spheric
Sign In or Register to comment.