15 réflexions au sujet de “Alambics de téléphone deviennent tellement mieux, mais qu’en est-il smartphone vid…”

  1. While we are talking about videos: I’m really frustrated at the lack of microphone analysis in many review videos of new phones. A video is not only moving pictures but also sound! I don’t need a perfect video when it sounds like shit.
    I have a phone with a good camera because I don’t want to buy a separate, professional camera with extra microphone attachments. I just want a decent recording device in my pocket all the time, sound included!

  2. Finally something that I can give input on! I work in video, more specifically in broadcast and I always prioritize video performance over photos.

    The main problem with video recording with smartphones is not the resolution or the fps, but rather the bitrate and dynamic range. I much rather have a 1080p30 non laggy movement than a 4k60 laggy almost frame-missing one.

    Unfortunately in terms of video qualitity in the smartphone world the iphone is still king, a little lower we have the galaxy s10 and note 9, but still, those are nowhere near the quality of an older mid range camera like the sony a6000 in terms of video quality.

    Also, I almost always buy xiaomi devices because of their value but they are probably the worst in terms of video quality

  3. Smartphone video is already « so much better » as of iPhone 8, Plus, and X. But only just now did Samsung bother with limitless 4K60 on the S10 series. Google didn’t even so much as *attempt* 4K60 at all with the Pixel 3 and also waved 1080p60 users the middle finger by not letting people use 60 FPS no matter what, because « auto » is basically a Google-knows-best option.

  4. I haven’t had the time or the focus yet to do a full write up on the subject, but a huge part of the problem with the Pixel 3’s video recording capabilities is because [Google is encoding the recorded video](https://i.imgur.com/OwgXFiO.png) with the outdated BT601/PAL standard which has a gamma characteristic that has much less contrast, and it is intended for limited range (35-225) color video lower than 720p. This is the fundamental reason why the Pixel 3’s video looks « washed out. »

    Performing a simple color space assignment to Pixel 3’s video files from bt601->bt709 (the modern/current standard color space, the one everyone else uses) yields back the punchy colors that are most likely intended and that are characteristic of other flagship videos.

    [Here’s a good example](https://i.imgur.com/VAbJiZh.jpg), comparing a Pixel 3 video still, to the iPhone XS still, to a still of the Pixel 3 video assigned to the BT. 709. You can notice that they appear extremely similar, with the only difference being in color temperature — if you adjust the Pixel 3 white balance to be cooler, you can actually make them look almost identical (thanks to /u/altimax98 for video captures).

    [Here are two gifs](https://imgur.com/a/4QjIp6U) that switches back and forth (the second gif came from a random reddit user’s post, forgot who you are, sorry!)

    Of course, the iPhone XS video is still superior because of its Smart HDR video capabilities. Once that sun gets into the frame, it’s game over for every other smartphone. I’m pretty confident that Google is working on their own parallel implementation, however.

  5. I don’t mind companies not talking as much about video recording as still photography, as long as they deliver on the former. While Google may take the crown on photography, video recording (and audio recording even more) is a joke on the Pixel 3. They focus so much on photography yet suck at taking videos.

    Samsung on the other hand offers great photo quality on their flagships (albeit not as good overall as the Pixel 3), and is also on top of their game at video recording.

    Bottom line: They should be great at both, and if they are, I don’t care about what they mention in their PR.

  6. Huaweic kirin 980 is just trash at video recording compared to other flagships and they need to fix it if they want their flagship to stay relevant.

  7. I remember recently I was on this thread years ago about smartphone video cameras and how video was generally always really mediocre quality.

    99.9% of them all said that they literally don’t give a single shit about video, and cared more about the still image quality. It was so monumentally ignorant, like they legitimately believed that it was somehow « physically impossible » to have *BOTH* video and stills good, and one of them *has* to suck.

    It was a couple hundred people too, so it wasn’t just « a friend » that said this shit.

  8. I am just laughing since no one consider the Xperia X1 🙂 just poor advertisement and sale strategy from Sony as always. But they still rock it from the xperia Z time. Nevertheless, it is also the fact that the DXO site advertises some products and their cameras with praising them and most of their scores are wrong 😉

  9. I have been asking this question so much, but haven’t got a reply yet. Gcams are everywhere and they are supposed to be taking good photos? lol, the developers totally forget that the camera sensors can take videos too.. I haven’t seen a gcam port that can take a nonstuttering and decent videos until now.. show me one gcam port which does that and I am willing to permanently shift to the pie version of the roms which are 64 bit on my g5 plus

  10. Well, video is still about huge sensors for the shallow depth of field which just isn’t physically possible with those small sensors.
    I guess it will take years to calculate depth of field effects with at least 24fps like done with stills nowadays

Les commentaires sont fermés.