XP4N: I made a (photography) thing!

Krupa

I tried the neon one last night. It was already foggy, I might post both for comparison’s sake…

richardyot

@Krupa said:
I tried the neon one last night. It was already foggy, I might post both for comparison’s sake…

Is that low light at the top and neon below? They both look great! 👍

Krupa

@richardyot said:

@Krupa said:
I tried the neon one last night. It was already foggy, I might post both for comparison’s sake…

Is that low light at the top and neon below? They both look great! 👍

Cheers, it’s actually neon at the top and the unprocessed version below… I don’t get out much after dark tbh, though maybei should think about it as someone up the valley posted some amazing fog pictures on Facebook from the park in the next town earlier!

skiphunt

.

Krupa

wim

@richardyot - It's more likely that it's an internet issue between your location and the server than a server issue itself. Internet packet routing sometimes gets temporarily disrupted or screwed up and sends packets bouncing all over the world to get to a particular destination. Routing to other sites can be fine but disrupted for whatever reason to a certain locale or provider. Generally these things tend to resolve over time.

That's just an assumption, but one based on many years of IT experience.

wim

As for the more fundamental issue of the bandwidth this thread needs, I can't speak for our host, but if it were my site I don't think I'd invest time in customizations to make this particular non-music related thread work better for people having issues with it. If it were a photography forum, or if it brought in ad revenue to offset costs, or if it was an e-commerce site, or if I wasn't many months behind schedule with the next release of my flagship app, it might be different.

Please don't take that as me saying that discussing the problem is a waste of time. I'm just the kind of person that can't stop themselves from adding context and that continually thinks it's their job to help set expectations.

skiphunt

.

wim

@skiphunt said:
I agree... nothing radical should be done to accommodate the sluggish performance of this thread... since it only very loosely has anything at all to do with the general focus of the site... but I think dropping that max file cap down to at least 1MB would go a long way IMO.

I think that would likely have negative effects on other more directly music related things though.
Anyway, it's not something I have the ability to change. That'd be a @Michael thing.

Michael

In theory I have a script that I’ve written which automatically downsizes particularly large images anyway, on the server at periodic intervals. I could potentially tweak the thresholds on whether any image is downsized or not.

skiphunt

.

wim

@skiphunt said:
Ultimately, I guess it doesn't matter. I'm just passing on that... although I'm a fan of Bram's camera app and enjoy checking out the images other users are getting with it... I have also found myself thinking twice before clicking on the thread if i don't feel like getting aggravated by the slow load. But yeah, doesn't really matter much.

I totally get that. And without feedback such as yours, no-one who can do anything about it would be aware of the issue. I'm not tryin' to shut that down by any means.

skiphunt

.

skiphunt

.

wim

Wait. You're supposed to clean something? Is that the bumpy looking bit on the back of the phone? The thumb rest thingy?

Krupa

@skiphunt said:

@Krupa said:

Really fine detail on this one. I wonder what makes the difference in some of the users who get fine/sharp detail, and others who's images look a bit soft? Which iPhone is this one? Seems like those with the iPhone 15/pro tend to get the sharpest detailed images in my informal noting of the sharp images vs not-so-sharp images.

My guess is that people aren't obsessively cleaning their camera phone lenses before taking any images... but, I suppose it could be a difference in iPhone models. My guess is that it's skin oil on the lenses that isn't getting cleaned off every time.

Yeah, it’s a big iPhone 15 pro, best phone camera I’ve been near. I even captured some nebula in Orion’s Belt last night with it😅

lsdphoto

@skiphunt said:

Really fine detail on this one. I wonder what makes the difference in some of the users who get fine/sharp detail, and others who's images look a bit soft?

Perhaps Bram could comment on how the app deals with focus and sharpness generally?

• We do not have control in the app for selecting the focus point, so how does it decide?
• Does the app use the phone's image stabilisation abilities?
• Some of the film types add a deliberate blur?

So basically to understand how it works before we factor in how clean our lenses are, camera shake and image downsizing for this thread?
Lee

Krupa

@lsdphoto said:

@skiphunt said:

Really fine detail on this one. I wonder what makes the difference in some of the users who get fine/sharp detail, and others who's images look a bit soft?

Perhaps Bram could comment on how the app deals with focus and sharpness generally?

• We do not have control in the app for selecting the focus point, so how does it decide?
• Does the app use the phone's image stabilisation abilities?
• Some of the film types add a deliberate blur?

So basically to understand how it works before we factor in how clean our lenses are, camera shake and image downsizing for this thread?
Lee

I’d love an infinity focus setting, one thing I really struggle with on phone cameras is when the autofocus just refuses to accept I want to take the sky or horizon😅

brambos

@lsdphoto said:
Perhaps Bram could comment on how the app deals with focus and sharpness generally?

I'm at the mercy of Apple's camera algorithm. I ask it to take the picture, and whatever logic it uses to focus the shot is applied. I reckon it may even differ per iPhone model.

Indeed, in some film types I do a very subtle (sub 1-pixel) blur. Mostly to get rid of the "digital sharpness" that makes phone images so recognisable. Nothing that would make the image look actually blurry. Just more natural.

skiphunt

.

lsdphoto

@brambos said:

Indeed, in some film types I do a very subtle (sub 1-pixel) blur. Mostly to get rid of the "digital sharpness" that makes phone images so recognisable. Nothing that would make the image look actually blurry. Just more natural.

I usually save the unprocessed version alongside the app-generated one. Comparing them often shows the app-generated version to be much softer than the unprocessed. I assumed this was part of the goal with XP4N but perhaps how 'soft' is an expectation thing. Here's a zoomed-in comparison ('daylight' on left, 'unprocessed' on right):

Another example, this time 'balanced' and 'unprocessed':

Is this about what you would expect? My phone is a 14 Pro.

Lee

sugus

sugus

sugus

sugus

sugus

Can we talk to each other? It is important

Krupa

Lols like an interesting and eclectic day there @sugus! I particularly love the colour on the last one..

sugus

@Krupa said:
Lols like an interesting and eclectic day there @sugus! I particularly love the colour on the last one..

The LAST one is B&W .....

sugus

sugus