Live data from Hacker News

A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

appleinsider.com

91–100 of 414 posts

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#91
post #32

Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…

I have no objection with what we have today either but it does feel slippery slope-y, especially in the AI era. Before we know it our cameras won’t just be picking the best frame for each person, it’ll be picking the best eye, tweaking their symmetry, making the skin tone as aesthetically pleasing as possible, etc etc etc. It was always this way to an extent but now that we’ve given up the pretence of photos being “r…

Samsung phones (and I guess iphones too) already do this lmao.

https://www.insider.com/samsung-phones-default-beauty-mode-c...

My favorite one is the phones that put a fake picture of a moon in pictures where the moon is detected!

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moo...

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#92

Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…

I think purists are fine with it as long as you can turn it off.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#93

Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…

It's honestly better than this on all fronts, since you can get ProRAW out of recent iPhones even in the default camera app and get RAW without DeepFusion out of different alternative camera apps.

I think I had to spend ~$1k to get my first DSLR with RAW support back in the 2000s. Adjusted for inflation, Halide + a recent iPhone feels like a pretty good deal.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#94

Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…

My issue with this has nothing to do with purism, but with how often the results are just no good, for reasons that have nothing to do with the sensor, but the choices of whatever model they run. Does it take a picture at night? Yes, but it's often unrecognizable compared to what my own sensor, my eyes, sees. It's not a matter of a slightly better reality, but the camera making choices about how light should go that have nothing to do with the composition in front of it.

You might remember an article about how there are many situations where the iphone just takes bad portraits, because its idea of what good lightning is breaks down. 5 year old phones often take pictures I like more than one of the latest phones, and not because the hardware was better, but because the tuning is just bad.

Fun things also happen when you take pictures of things that are not often in the model: Crawlspaces, pipes, or, say, dentistry closeups. I've had results that were downright useless outside of raw mode, because computational photography step really had no idea of what it was doing. It's not that the sensors are limited, but that the things that the iphone does sometimes make the picture far worse than in the past, when it took fewer liberties.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#95

I heard mention on a podcast recently [0] that if you hold down the button in the iPhone camera app it will capture a set of photos and then mark the one that it thinks is the 'best' (based on, for example, the photo where everyone has their eyes open). Not the same as what happened here of course. (I keep forgetting to try this, not least because I always try to get the people out of my photos!) [0] This one, I thin…

Unfortunately they changed the behavior a few major releases ago: now holding the button down switches to video recording. Annoying for me, since I don't do video. If you use the software button you can slide to the left for burst, but afaik there's no way to trigger burst photos from the volume buttons. Maybe the new programmable button on the iPhone 15 series.

https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/take-burst-mode-shots...

"Tip: You can also press and hold the volume up button to take Burst shots. Go to Settings > Camera, then turn on Use Volume Up for Burst."

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#96
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are conflating two different aspects. Live Photo is a feature where it captures a couple of seconds of video before/after the photo is taken. From the article that feature was not enabled. The computational pipeline is where you press the shutter and it blends a few frames together in order to do focus stacking, HDR etc. Based on what I have tried with my iPhone it is doing this in < 100ms which is not enough tim…

maybe? you can also turn your iphone off, but it still broadcast btle and cell signals. who knows what any feature toggle does anymore, let alone on/off. lol do-not-track is tracked.

You can tell because of the type of file that gets saved in your photo library.

Live Photos are clearly marked.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to photograph a toddler without this feature. Good luck. Does the fact that the iPhone allows me to do this pretty reliably without any fuss mean I have more or less control?

Odd. I have hundreds of great shots of my toddlers, none taken with these “features”.

I know you’re pretending to be dense on purpose, but taking a dozen pictures at once and automatically picking the best one can obviously save a lot of shots. Same with combining exposures.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#98

Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…

> Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality. The lens itself introduces flaws/changes as does film and developing. You don't have to be a purist to want the ability to decide what gets captured or to have control over how it looks though. Those kinds of choices are part of what make photo…

But regular people expect it. And then they take a picture of the moon and they are disappointed.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality. The lens itself introduces flaws/changes as does film and developing. You don't have to be a purist to want the ability to decide what gets captured or to have control over how it looks though. Those kinds of choices are part of what make photo…

To play devils advocate here: the best camera is the one you have with you, and computational photography does mean you can just push a button without thinking and get a clear picture that captures a memory. It’s obviously an argument to say that Apple shouldn’t get to choose how your memories are recorded, but I know I’ve captured a lot more moments I would’ve otherwise missed because of just how automatic phone cam…

> computational photography does mean you can just push a button without thinking and get a clear picture that captures a memory.

I'd argue that the women trying to take a photo of herself in her wedding dress did not get a clear picture that captures a memory. She got a very confusing picture that captured something which never happened. There are lots of great automatic camera features which are super helpful, but don't falsify events. If I take a picture of my kid I want my actual child in the photo, not a cobbled together AI generated monstrosity of what apple thinks my kid ought to have looked like in that moment.

Automatic cameras are great. Cameras that outright lie to you are not.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#100
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe? you can also turn your iphone off, but it still broadcast btle and cell signals. who knows what any feature toggle does anymore, let alone on/off. lol do-not-track is tracked.

You can tell because of the type of file that gets saved in your photo library. Live Photos are clearly marked.

why are they not marked as video?
Post reply on HN