DIY trick to improve camera photos...maybe?

[magnus]

OP,
Great Idea and post.

Since you are able to compare them side by side......instead of a hardware filter like you've implemented.....what about a software filter for flash photos from inside ICS?

I actually thought that was the point of the Warmth Filter in the gallery to help you reduce the 'coolness' of flash photos

Does the hardware filter work any better than the software filter?

Thanks

 

[jcardona1]

OP,
Great Idea and post.

Since you are able to compare them side by side......instead of a hardware filter like you've implemented.....what about a software filter for flash photos from inside ICS?

I actually thought that was the point of the Warmth Filter in the gallery to help you reduce the 'coolness' of flash photos

Does the hardware filter work any better than the software filter?

Thanks

Yes, the software filter sort of does the same thing...BUT, every time you edit the picture you are ruining the quality and pixelating the image. Once the picture is taken, the camera applies its settings/edits, and then compresses the image into a jpeg file. This is why professional photographers shoot in 'RAW' format. Think of it like a digital negative. It's unprocessed and contains all the pixel data. Once it's compressed into a jpeg, any edit you make will distort image quality, even though it's not immediately noticeable. That's why it's better to address this on the hardware side, as opposed to software, because we don't have the raw image data, all we have is the compressed jpeg.

This is getting a little technical, but here's an example of raw vs jpeg edits on my DSLR.


This photo is the unedited and compressed jpeg, straight from the camera
View attachment 44531

This is the .RAW file, which I edited, then compressed and saved as a jpeg
View attachment 44532

And to show you what happens when you try to edit a compressed jpeg, here's the original jpeg, with the exact same edits I applied to the RAW file. You can see how bad it distorts the image quality
View attachment 44533


The point of all this, is that unless you have a RAW image, which we don't with cell phones, you should avoid making too many edits to a compressed jpeg where at all possible if you want the best image quality. The best approach is to get the picture looking good straight out of the camera

 

[Briankbl]

Yes, the software filter sort of does the same thing...BUT, every time you edit the picture you are ruining the quality and pixelating the image. Once the picture is taken, the camera applies its settings/edits, and then compresses the image into a jpeg file. This is why professional photographers shoot in 'RAW' format. Think of it like a digital negative. It's unprocessed and contains all the pixel data. Once it's compressed into a jpeg, any edit you make will distort image quality, even though it's not immediately noticeable. That's why it's better to address this on the hardware side, as opposed to software, because we don't have the raw image data, all we have is the compressed jpeg.

This is getting a little technical, but here's an example of raw vs jpeg edits on my DSLR.


This photo is the unedited and compressed jpeg, straight from the camera
View attachment 44531

This is the .RAW file, which I edited, then compressed and saved as a jpeg
View attachment 44532

And to show you what happens when you try to edit a compressed jpeg, here's the original jpeg, with the exact same edits I applied to the RAW file. You can see how bad it distorts the image quality
View attachment 44533


The point of all this, is that unless you have a RAW image, which we don't with cell phones, you should avoid making too many edits to a compressed jpeg where at all possible if you want the best image quality. The best approach is to get the picture looking good straight out of the camera

You are too smart for this forum lol. No offense intended to anyone here haha.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[kimintenn]

Thanks for all the info on the filters! I think I'm going to give them a try too.

 

[GoBears]

I think the light orange looks fantastic. My sister went to school for photography, so hopefully she has some of these gels. Thanks for taking the time to post these. Great experiment and results.

 

[SSHGuru]

I certainly appreciate the effort. However if the phones came with a gel I would be posting what you've posted and showing how people can get better pictures if you take it off. :blink:

 

[jcardona1]

I certainly appreciate the effort. However if the phones came with a gel I would be posting what you've posted and showing how people can get better pictures if you take it off. :blink:

Ha I'm sure we would. But like I said, it all comes down to how you prefer your pics to look. It's no secret that LED flashes are very cool, almost violet. Some phones can match the white balance settings with the flash and the ambient lighting pretty good. The objective is to get the picture to look like it did depending on the lighting you were under. The Nexus simply can't do that very well. If I'm under incandescent lighting (which all households still use), then your lighting is warmer in color, like 3000K. We don't use 5000-6000K lighting in living spaces simply because it will make your home look like an office or a science lab, and it's not 'pleasing'. Every picture I take using flash under incandescent lighting looks very blue, which is not accurate, hence the gel filter.

But I still need to give it a try under different lighting and outdoors, and in total darkness to see how it will work in the long run. But for now, I like it. So much that I taped it to the back of my case

 

[Snow02]

Ha I'm sure we would. But like I said, it all comes down to how you prefer your pics to look. It's no secret that LED flashes are very cool, almost violet. Some phones can match the white balance settings with the flash and the ambient lighting pretty good. The objective is to get the picture to look like it did depending on the lighting you were under. The Nexus simply can't do that very well. If I'm under incandescent lighting (which all households still use), then your lighting is warmer in color, like 3000K. We don't use 5000-6000K lighting in living spaces simply because it will make your home look like an office or a science lab, and it's not 'pleasing'. Every picture I take using flash under incandescent lighting looks very blue, which is not accurate, hence the gel filter.

But I still need to give it a try under different lighting and outdoors, and in total darkness to see how it will work in the long run. But for now, I like it. So much that I taped it to the back of my case

You're right, of course. But to each their own. I'm just glad my flash goes off in prefect sync with the snap every time. That hasn't been the case on past phones.