- avon b7
- Last Active
tmay said:avon b7 said:kevin kee said:"Light trails on iPhone are still possible though, notes Mann, as the device is able to detect when it is placed on a tripod versus handheld and adjusts so that light trails are still captured."
I suppose it's the gyroscope and motion sensor to detect whether the phone is on tripod or on hand?
And yes, I agree, that fisherman pic is just beyond any phone camera capability until 11 Pro.
Any competitor night mode would just make it like a photo of "bright day" instead of capturing the night mood.
The photo looks great btw.
This is what the author said regarding Night Mode:
"Many of us iPhone photographers have watched as other phones like the Pixel and the Huawei P30 have passed us in low light. It feels so good to see the iPhone 11 Pro has caught up in low light performance.""One thing I love about Apple's approach to Night mode is the strategic balance of solving a technical problem while also caring deeply about artistic expression," Mann writes. "When you look at the image above, it's clear their team didn't take the let's-make-night-look-like-day approach, as some of their competitors have. Instead, it feels more like an embrace of what it actually is (night) while asking, How do we capture the feel of this scene in a beautiful way?"
At the beginning (more than a year ago) you had a night mode and activated it as a specific mode. That was then and it still exists. The difference is that since that beginning, things have changed an a lot.
Now you don't have to activate a specific mode unless you really want to.
The camera will work its magic using its AI chops (NPU etc) to deliver a great overall photo. It is not simply turning night into day just for the sake of it. In fact Night Mode can also be used to take incredible daytime shots.
Yesterday I posted a link in another thread to some comparisons between the Huawei P30 Pro and the iPhone 11 Pro.
As the author of the linked article made clear, Apple has caught up somewhat but those other phones still produce great photos (as shown in the comparison) and the Mate 30 Pro just got released which looks like it is going to take things up yet another notch (pending reviews of course).
Something similar happens with the dedicated Portrait Mode. It's still there but other modes will get you better results if you want to take certain situations into account. Aperture Mode for example. You, the user, can opt for full auto or full pro mode with no extra apps needed.
bobroo said:A guy would like to think that Corning would have been selling Gorilla Glass at a profit over the past 10 years. Enough profit to fund research and development.
Why would Corning need Apple's money? Seems like irresponsible management to me. Seems like the fruit company bought Gorilla Glass in the past and at their suggestion for something different, has to pay some more.
I don't understand.
corrections said:avon b7 said:tenthousandthings said:gregjaehn3 said:This may be thr most hypocritical article I've ever read. On 8/28 the same author posted this about night sight on Android phones:
What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around 6 seconds
14 days ago that was posted to discount the value of the night sight feature. Now in this article he praises the new iPhone for taking a night sight photo in around 5 seconds.
So when Apple introduces this capability, it uses an image of a person. iPhone does it better. This is pretty much exactly the point of DED's prediction article from August 28 -- the iPhone 11 will advance Apple's lead in mobile imaging. True to form, Apple now does night mode better than the competition.
You have highlighted a good example and you are rehashing what was said in that article but what was claimed wasn't presented correctly. In fact the claims you are making (that came from that article) are incorrect as a result.
Please read the comments on that piece where I specifically quoted the article he linked to.
There is no twisting, and repeatedly implying that I'm lying to confuse people is just reprehensible. You should apologize and stop doing this. It's really ugly.
I stated that Dark Mode was overblown as a feature because 1) it requires special conditions and holding the camera still for several seconds (~6 sec, I linked to an Android blog as the source of that comment) 2) it's not a feature people use frequently, because in low lighting it often makes more sense to use a flash than hold the camera still 3) it's clearly not a feature that singularly sold Pixel cameras- despite massive MASSIVE hype, Pixel sales were an inconsequential rounding error, and sales decreased this year from a super low starting point. Google wasn't building up a base over time based on all this camera hype, despite lying to investors in its conference call that Pixel just needed a year to two to gain traction.
On iPhone 11, while I haven't really tested it in detail, the feature looks like its doing less overprocessing. Pixel renders its effects, like single lens Portrait, using ML algos that often result in fake-looking shots. That's not my original, exclusive opinion. Again it's what android fan bloggers write.
You can lie up and down that I'm twisting facts but there's nothing to twist. Here I only stated that Apple erased what had been an exclusive feature on Pixel and Honor phones, and that's absolutely correct. And it appears Apple's version of this is better, which is to be expected because Apple has better ISP silicon, more and better lenses, and wasn't rushing out a feature to have some exclusive to use against a competitor with an all-around better photography experience, which includes video.
You also misrepresented tenthousandthings' comments, which were accurate. Stop being like this and just admit you are wrong and making false accusations.
First off, some perspective. I mostly don't even read your articles. You lost credibility in my book too long ago and they are also too lengthy for my limited time. When I do read one I am often astounded by the skewed, twisted or just plain wrong information contained in them. Occasionally I will pick out a couple of examples and take issue with them the vast majority I just let go. Sometimes I comment on the comments.
When people start calling you a bitter fanboy and attacking you, you rarely see me jumping in. I understand an editorial gives writers a lot of slack and I honour that right to a personal opinion. Fair game, fair play and all that.
However, that said, you twist things to deliberately fit your own narrative. Yes, so much criticism of people's narratives and calling them 'pundits' when you yourself are a pundit (like all of us if you want to use that word) but you very much have a narrative.
The other day I simply pointed out via copy/paste what you had done. Your words against the words of the author you were referencing (and completely misrepresenting).
I largely left it for the reader to form their own opinion. Quite fair IMO.
No one accused you of lying.
For clarity here is what I put in that thread:
This is from this article:
"What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around six seconds, and then often ultimately results in a fake-looking picture anyway, as noted by Joshua Swingle, writing up a comparison of the Huawei P30 Pro and iPhone XS Max for Phone Arena."
And this is from the linked article:"The iPhone XS Max suddenly struggles to produce consistently good photos and the P30 Pro excels by combining four pixels into one, therefore producing a higher-quality 10-megapixel photo. It’s worth pointing out that the shots produced by Huawei’s phone can sometimes appear artificial but it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do.
If the Huawei P30 Pro’s standard night shots aren’t good enough, there’s also a dedicated Night Mode. This drastically increases the amount of light captured and can ultimately produce some incredible pictures that blow the iPhone out of the water. The only downside to this feature is that you need to hold the phone steady for around six seconds."
See the difference?
Ok. So let's look at where you twisted things to fit your own narrative which is sitting in the title of that article (and I let pass). Here it is:
Editorial: 'iPhone 11' design will advance Apple's mobile imaging lead
'Apple's mobile imaging lead'?
What lead? Optical zoom? No. Camera sensor and size? No. AI camera tech. No. Low light. No. Motion blur reduction? No. Noise reduction? No. Overall imaging versatility? No.
If Huawei and more recently Google and Samsung have stood out for anything it is the imaging advances and Apple hasn't made the same strides but suddenly you paint a picture of Apple already having a lead and not only that but extending it on a phone that hadn't even been released.
Did you ever admit that competitors were leading Apple in many areas regarding imaging?
So, onto what you said in the piece:
"What's often left out is the fact that the processing needed to deliver these low light images requires that users hold their phone still for around six seconds"
False. It only requires you to hold the
camera still to capture the scene if you choose to enter Night Mode. Why? Because it is a long exposure mode that can be done handheld. This was literally impossible on an iPhone without a tripod. Huawei Night Mode uses the NPU based AIIS to all but eliminate handheld camera shake.
What seems to have gone completely over your head is that low light photography on phones like the P30 Pro is now so good that you don't have to enter Night Mode in the first place! That means that to get the shot, you are NOT required to hold the phone still for up to six seconds to capture the scene. For that to occur you would have chosen to enter Night Mode. Believe me, users without good low light capable cameras spend more than six seconds repeatedly trying to get a decent photo! But the actual seconds involved are totally irrelevant when the choices are getting the shot or not getting the shot. You should be able to grasp that. In that context the whole time situation is moot. And Night Mode can also be used to great effect in daylight!
To make this crystal clear to you:
"The beauty of P30 Pro is that everything happens in auto-mode. Users don’t need to switch to a dedicated mode (they rarely do). Also, P30 Pro can capture better photos than the Pixel 3’s night sight in a much shorter time (sub-second vs. 4-6 seconds), making it that much more natural as a point and shoot."
"then often ultimately results in a fake-looking picture anyway"
Really? 'Often'? 'fake-looking'? 'Anyway'?
No. He said 'sometimes' (not often), artificial (not fake) and 'anyway' doesn't even have a place here because he said (and very, very clearly):
"sometimes appear artificial but it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do."
So let's try to fit 'anyway' in there somehow, just for the heck of it.
"sometimes appear artificial but anyway it’s still better than what Apple’s device can do."
Yes, sometimes the results can look artificial, just like heaps of HDR photos can look artificial! But the reality is that this is personal preference and many actually prefer it that way. Like the Instagram crowd!
You deliberately twisted what was being said through omission and substitution. On top of being factually incorrect with the low light processing claims. You could have avoided that error by dedicating a little more effort to understand what you were trying to leave in poor light.
You are free to read my - very limited - criticism as unfair. That's your (and everybody else's call) but there is nothing reprehensible there.
If I post response to one of your articles (I often don't) it is to correct points and inject some balance into the discussion. In the past you have claimed you don't write to be balanced but accurate. Lately you haven't even been accurate but I let those pass as oversights (you got the iPhone 11 pricing wrong, you claimed Dark Mode instead of Night Mode here, errors in titles etc) unless there is something incorrect that isn't a
I think you have been overstretched with all the news lately.
StrangeDays said:thrang said:Phil and Craig occasionally interject a little more unique personality into their delivery, and with some unscripted asides - but mostly, its sounds very repetitive.
I used to be in community theater and know how bad nerves are, so my hat's off to them.
You missed the point. The same criticisms are aimed at professional speakers too (politicians for example when in presentation mode).
Rehearsal isn't the problem. The script, structure and delivery are the problem.
thrang said:The problem is the script writing is becoming clichéd, and often relies on similar voicing and phrasing for various speakers. If I hear one more person say "We're sure you'll love it as much as we do," or "We can't wait to get it in your hands..." I may throw my crappy Apple Remote into my screen.Phil and Craig occasionally interject a little more unique personality into their delivery, and with some unscripted asides - but mostly, its sounds very repetitive.This does a disservice to the the products and services being introduced.So Apple needs to change up the copy writers, or enforce a mandate of varied voices, vocabulary, and styles, and cut way back on repetitive/clichéd phrasesThey also often talk exhaustively about a feature, and then show you a commercial, which can be a bit anti-climactic. Perhaps show the commercial first to delight, and then present it in greater detail. (Slofies for example)More "real people" stories where appropriate would be great, as those are often very powerful.
Sometimes it reminds me of Wayne's World when the show gets taken over and then goes 'corporate'.
It's not only Apple, but the 'problem' is there and you described it very well.