Stock camera better than FCamera? - Page 2 - maemo.org

jaimex2 | # 11 | 2010-11-14, 00:33 | Report

Originally Posted by windows7 View Post

IMO, i think there is an issue caused by the metallic frame around the camera.... i remember last year some guy here reported that he got better results when removing the back cover, he also tried painted the metallic frame but did not made a difference... the other thing is in my old n95, i got better quality pictures then i do with the n900 and camera is exactly the same... could the outside frame around the camera be causing the poor quality pictures?

Not quite, the blue edge of the camera's slide-able cover would cause the flash to reflect blue light back into the lense and give photos a blue blur.

The solution was to use a black permanent marker on the blue strip facing the lens to get rid of the reflection. Works a treat.

The chrome frame doesn't seem to make to bad of a difference, try taking a photo with the front cover off. It's really flash photography that suffers.

Back to the discussion, how do we get the best photo results using all thats available to the n900?

Last edited by jaimex2; 2010-11-14 at 00:37.

The Following User Says Thank You to jaimex2 For This Useful Post:
BLC

jd4200 | # 12 | 2010-11-14, 00:48 | Report

Originally Posted by ossipena View Post

you are climbing into a tree with your butt first. (and you don't really understand raws that well).

you seem to know your stuff, on a lot of topic, way more than me anyway, but if you wasn't so rude and overpowering in your posts i'm sure more people would be willing to learn from you.

sorry for the offtopic.

anyway, thanks for your post, i learnt a bit more about RAW.

Last edited by jd4200; 2010-11-14 at 00:51.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jd4200 For This Useful Post:
Estel, handaxe

Bingley Joe | # 13 | 2010-11-14, 07:01 | Report

Originally Posted by ossipena View Post

errrrr.... raw file is raw file. it is all you can get. it has everything the sensor has outputted when read.

So you are stating unequivocally that the sensor/imaging system in the N900 is incapable of producing greater than 8 bits per channel of precision?

I'm not being argumentative -- I understand what a RAW file is. I simply don't know anything about the absolute capabilities of the N900's camera hardware, and what the FCam developers have chosen to focus on..

These are DNGs we're dealing with, so I'm wondering if they might be linear DNGs - ie: partially processed - rather than pure RAW data encapsulated in the DNG wrapper. Linear DNG might explain why they're only 8 bits per channel. It would also make a certain amount of sense from a usability standpoint as Nokia hasn't released an N900 RAW profile that I'm aware of.

So... 'yes' errrrr 'no': Are you 100% certain that 8 bits per channel is the absolute limit of what the hardware is capable of?

The Following User Says Thank You to Bingley Joe For This Useful Post:
Estel

ossipena | # 14 | 2010-11-14, 07:21 | Report

Originally Posted by Bingley Joe View Post

So you are stating unequivocally that the sensor/imaging system in the N900 is incapable of producing greater than 8 bits per channel of precision?

I'm not being argumentative -- I understand what a RAW file is. I simply don't know anything about the absolute capabilities of the N900's camera hardware, and what the FCam developers have chosen to focus on..

These are DNGs we're dealing with, so I'm wondering if they might be linear DNGs - ie: partially processed - rather than pure RAW data encapsulated in the DNG wrapper. Linear DNG might explain why they're only 8 bits per channel. It would also make a certain amount of sense from a usability standpoint as Nokia hasn't released an N900 RAW profile that I'm aware of.

So... 'yes' errrrr 'no': Are you 100% certain that 8 bits per channel is the absolute limit of what the hardware is capable of?

Sorry, I didn't remember right. The actual output is 10bit per pixel so the raw isn't actual raw file. those 2 bits probably give you zero headroom still.
http://retiisi.dyndns.org/~sakke/foo...APL_090511.doc

any dslr sensor is frigging huge compared to the n900's one which is pretty much in the middle of yellow and purple rectangles (1/2.5"). yes smaller sensors have better specs but if you need about 50 of them in order to get same area than fx camera has, well you probably get the point,

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ossipena For This Useful Post:
Estel, HellFlyer, jrinconr, nicolai

Bingley Joe | # 15 | 2010-11-14, 15:28 | Report

Originally Posted by ossipena View Post

Sorry, I didn't remember right. The actual output is 10bit per pixel so the raw isn't actual raw file. those 2 bits probably give you zero headroom still.

Thanks, ossipena -- that's good to know. I agree that the extra 2 bits probably aren't terribly useful, but I'd still prefer to have them than not.. I mean, I'd need them if I ever find myself trying to photograph someone getting a shave and a hair cut!

ETalvala | # 16 | 2010-11-14, 21:26 | Report

FCamera DNGs contain 10 bits per pixel, which is the full bit depth of the sensor.

We've done some investigating on where the blue/yellow color issues are coming from, but don't yet have a solution, unfortunately.

-Eddy, one of the FCam devs

The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to ETalvala For This Useful Post:
Bingley Joe, don_falcone, Estel, fw190, ivyking, mikecomputing, ossipena, stlpaul, The Winter, TomJ

Zoin | # 17 | 2010-11-15, 08:52 | Report

ETalvala, great to know you are working on this issue! Hope you will come to the solution soon 'cause no matter how hard I tried - still no good with correcting this issue in photoshop. I also noticed that when you are aiming a frame with standard camera app the picture also have this blueish vignetting. But when you press the "shoot" button and after the phrase "processing image" the photo displayed on screen have no such an issue - so it's all a matter of post-processing i believe.

ossipena | # 18 | 2010-11-15, 09:31 | Report

Originally Posted by Zoin View Post

so it's all a matter of post-processing i believe.

define post processing?

I'd say it is a matter of image processing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
the raw file has only individual values of those squares. image processing is the thing that converts the data into viewable format and I understand word post processing as modifying already created viewable file.

The Following User Says Thank You to ossipena For This Useful Post:
don_falcone

geohsia | # 19 | 2011-12-24, 15:59 | Report

Originally Posted by ETalvala View Post

FCamera DNGs contain 10 bits per pixel, which is the full bit depth of the sensor.

We've done some investigating on where the blue/yellow color issues are coming from, but don't yet have a solution, unfortunately.

-Eddy, one of the FCam devs

From the research I've seen there is something about the oblique angle of light against the sensor that causes the color cast in the RAW files.

I've used a program called CornerFix to address the issue:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/cornerfix/

Please see the attached two photos. For best results slideshow the 4 files where you can switch quickly between the two pairs of photos. When you see one pair back and forth in a slideshow you'll see the off-color vignetting much more clearly.

Attached Images

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to geohsia For This Useful Post:
Estel, handaxe, ivgalvez, Sourav.dubey

plaka666 | # 20 | 2012-01-04, 08:44 | Report

Originally Posted by geohsia View Post

From the research I've seen there is something about the oblique angle of light against the sensor that causes the color cast in the RAW files
I've used a program called CornerFix to address the issue:.

You just made my day - I've been looking for something like this for the past month. Do you have a profile you're using? If so, can you share it? I will try to make one this week or next.

Last edited by plaka666; 2012-01-04 at 08:45. Reason: text fix, wtf is up with quoted html code being parsed to text?

The Following User Says Thank You to plaka666 For This Useful Post:
imo