Feedback on camera tuning [not relevant]

answered 2013-12-28 19:48:30 +0200

jsiren
10392 ●35 ●48 ●53

Exposure compensation controls are absolutely necessary. (+/-)

The (still) picture quality seems to have improved somewhat. The noise reduction is much better now.

Also, I don't know if it's the camera or Gallery, but see https://together.jolla.com/question/5035/gallery-landscape-pictures-are-rotated-too-much/

answered 2014-01-08 23:22:57 +0200

bilgy_no1
7008 ●55 ●100 ●104

I noticed in the first few pics I took (before the updates) that there seemed to be no noise reduction at all. That may lead to so people complaining about noisy pictures, but on the upside a lot of detail was retained even in dark situations. I compared it to the HTC One S and difference in detail was quite strong.

I would love for Jolla to include different Noise Reduction settings (e.g. Off, Low, Auto, High), so we at least have some kind of control over what's happening.

I don't think any other manufacturer offers this in smartphones, but it is very common in DSLR/CSC camera's. It may not make much of a difference for the current sensor, but once the feature is developed it can be carried over to the next Jolla which will have this great 1/1.7" sensor (...suggestion no. 2).

answered 2014-01-01 23:12:38 +0200

wstephenson
81 ●2 ●2 ●5

I'd like to have a configurable shutter speed limit and a way to turn off the upper ISO limit. 1/30s is fine for static subjects but for shooting my kids I'd rather have more noise than blurry hands and faces in every shot, without sacrificing natural lighting by using flash. Since aperture is fixed on mobile cameras the balance of ISO/shutter speed is the only control we have, until the camera has exposure compensation.

Oh and when you do add exposure compensation, how about a screen edge slider control for it?

answered 2014-01-27 16:44:42 +0200

netvandal
1051 ●18 ●31 ●29

I think that one of the most straightforward way to improve image quality could be allow manual setting of aperture/exposure and iso, in that way if the software is not mature enough to make a great photo an amateur photographer can shot a good picture anyway, with, I think, a minimal programming work (just the UI).

Allowing to save it in RAW could also be a great idea too, to fix wrong WB.

answered 2013-12-28 19:43:10 +0200

biatch0
71 ●1 ●2 ●4

http://www.biatch0.net/

I haven't received my Jolla yet, so this may not be applicable - Setting max ISO to 640 in an effort to reduce noise is a double edged sword. Will it reduce noise? Yes... but at the cost of the shutter being open longer, and let's face it, most of us are hopped up on coffee most of the time resulting in wobbly hands which is probably a bad combination with lower shutter speeds/lower max ISO. Possibly an ISO expansion option could be added to the camera menus (similar to some cameras which have default ISO up to 3200 but an optional 6400 when ISO expansion is enabled)?

Again, I don't have my Jolla (yet) - just offering my 2 cents.

answered 2014-01-08 15:06:12 +0200

teun
9681 ●64 ●88 ●90

i think lowlight performance is better now. Glad to read that the AWB balance bug in artificial light and flash is on your to do. What i noticed that there is not much quality difference between picture with or without flash

answered 2014-02-16 20:47:54 +0200

StaticNoiseLog
5633 ●58 ●77 ●97

WARNING: This may be very stupid from a technical point of view, but try to see it from a user perspective. Maybe my suggestion can be an inspiration for a novel feature that is actually useful.

On a (D)SLR camera you can adjust the focus manually and "what you see is what you get" in terms of sharpness.

I have been wondering whether it would not be feasible to have a "what you see is what you get" control for brightness in a digital camera. Many users (including me) are not capable of making sound decisions regarding shutter speed or ISO settings. But they can look at the display and think "it should be brighter" or "it should be darker". It would be nice to have a lever to adjust the brightness of the picture in the "viewfinder". And the camera then automatically and intelligently tries to make the picture look as similar as possible to what you had on the viewfinder in terms of brightness. Especially in low-light conditions this might be helpful to achieve the desired result without many attempts.

(If this suggestion is so stupid that it insults your intelligence, please comment so and I will try to delete it).

answered 2014-02-15 23:51:04 +0200

tingo
191 ●1 ●9 ●12

I'm running SailfishOS 1.0.3.8 now, and I still think that pictures are to blurry in low light conditions (whenever the autoflash kicks in). Even setting the flash to always on doesn't help. It's easy to reproduce too; try to take a picture of black text on a white background (a receipt from a shop for example) bot in good light and bad light conditions. Notice the difference?

answered 2014-02-17 22:57:39 +0200

StaticNoiseLog
5633 ●58 ●77 ●97

When I made my first shots with the Jolla I was wondering whether it would be possible to squeeze more quality out of an average sensor with highly advanced software. Today I happened to come across this article, "High-Quality Computational Imaging Through Simple Lenses":

http://www.cs.ubc.ca/labs/imager/tr/2013/SimpleLensImaging/ (watch the video, well worth the time)

(a link in German: http://www.heise.de/foto/meldung/Mit-Software-gegen-Bildfehler-Algorithmus-gleicht-schlechte-Objektive-aus-2093855.html)

Maybe the inventors would even support Jolla to become the first platform using this technology? Or perhaps similar open source work exists, possibly a university research project somewhere.

answered 2014-02-16 21:23:46 +0200

pmelas
2723 ●48 ●64 ●70

updated 2014-02-16 21:25:46 +0200

I took my first few pictures today with the Jolla phone, for some reason I cannot upload them to my PC (Failed to get folder list: -1: Unspecified error).

The camera app does not give me many as many options I want, e.g. manual settings. I can understand there is a lot of processing and dynamic range limitations, but at the moment the light metering does not take into account the centre point of the camera, as a result even a little bit of bright sky at the top of the frame, is enough to under-expose the main focus area of the picture.

I have sample images from the same spot with my N9 and DSLR if requested.