Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

lux.camera

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#11

Post by sandofsky »

Hey everyone. Halide guy here!

This post came out a few weeks ago. To answer your question in advance, your favorite thing from Mark II that’s missing is eventually coming to Mark III.

I’m right now on a short detour updating our video app, Kino. I couldn’t justify touching it until this Mark III preview was out. After that, look for a few more Mark III preview updates before the big launch.

Not going to lie, it’s been an exhausting 12 months, but I’m genuinely excited for what’s ahead.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#12

Post by sandofsky »

Terretta wrote: post #2

Love Halide, and Pro Raw and Nitro, and pay for these even the iPhone's looks grid + RAW meant I didn't really have to. This could bring me back, the B/W with shoe-black blacks is lovely. Hopefully some folks using the preview ask to dial back the grain. In the blog post there's a comparison of grain in the Oculus. The Apple multi-exposure is, as expected, plastic. The first grain example is perfect; then the author…

Grain will definitely be tweaked! It landed late in the release cycle, and I want to give it more love before the final launch.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#13

Post by mirsadm »

lich_king wrote: post #10
mirsadm wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Phone sensors are amazing even without any processing. The difference is not as large as you might think.

As a person who has an expensive phone and a professional camera, let me retort by saying that the difference is larger than you think. On some level, it's basic physics. You get fewer photons, etc. Apple hasn't unlocked the secrets of optics or semiconductor manufacturing that are out of reach for Canon or Nikon. So if they keep making sensors and optics that are many times larger and bulkier than in a phone, there'…

I like to think I have some experience in this area. I have an app on Android that records RAW video (MotionCam Pro). We've compared large expensive cameras to phone sensors many times (you can see it on our YouTube channel if you like).

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#14

Post by astrange »

mirsadm wrote: post #9
lich_king wrote: post #8

I like the weird arms race here: phone manufacturers develop more and more computational photography techniques to convert the output from potato sensors and optics into what looks like a professional photo... and phone-based photographers put more and more effort into undoing a lot of that work to avoid the look they used to covet. Back in my day, that first baby photo would be widely considered the best. I would th…

Not true. Phone sensors are amazing even without any processing. The difference is not as large as you might think.

Really depends on the environment. Low light and nighttime are much worse than you might think, anything else isn't so bad.

(Try taking a photo of the moon with an iPhone. You can't do it, not even with Halide.)

The lenses are also different and direct lighting can cause annoying internal reflections. I don't know this area as well, but lenses are more important than sensors for photos.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#15

Post by astrange »

alsetmusic wrote: post #3

In 2020, when the sky turned orangish-red in California due to massive wildfires, Apple's phones were unable to accurately capture it (I read Android too, but I use iPhones). It was very frustrating. The camera app kept overcorrecting the images. I remember reading that people using Halide's app were able to capture correctly and seeing examples on blogs and such. Thank you Halide for making high-quality software, ev…

All cameras behave this way because of how auto white balance works. Some camera apps are just always in AWB mode.

I asked a phone camera engineer about this once and they told me that shooting through windows also causes issues, but I don't remember why.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#16

Post by jsmith99 »

lich_king wrote: post #8

I like the weird arms race here: phone manufacturers develop more and more computational photography techniques to convert the output from potato sensors and optics into what looks like a professional photo... and phone-based photographers put more and more effort into undoing a lot of that work to avoid the look they used to covet. Back in my day, that first baby photo would be widely considered the best. I would th…

The first baby photo is definitely the best. Artistic lighting setups can work for adult portraits, photographers used to recommend side lighting for male bone structure, but it just looks wrong in these baby photos.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#17

Post by LoganDark »

I feel like instead of saying a photo is "in HDR" (which implies you can view it in HDR), they should be saying the camera can capture HDR. None of the photos in this post are actually HDR for me. (Using Safari on macOS 26.3 with an XDR display)

(Edit: Oops. A few of the photos are HDR. Just, not most of the comparisons, which are where I was looking.)

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#18

Post by closetohome »

I really want to like Halide, and I've had it save a number of photos that the native app couldn't handle. But as a lifelong photographer, technologist, and occasional developer, I still somehow get really lost in the inscrutable icons and self-hiding what-have-you of the UI. I think I want it to be about 50% uglier.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#19

Post by ebbi »

lich_king wrote: post #8

I like the weird arms race here: phone manufacturers develop more and more computational photography techniques to convert the output from potato sensors and optics into what looks like a professional photo... and phone-based photographers put more and more effort into undoing a lot of that work to avoid the look they used to covet. Back in my day, that first baby photo would be widely considered the best. I would th…

It's the convenience, for me anyway - why carry around multiple devices, when one can do the job.

For travel photography, I went from carrying around a Sony full frame, to a Fuji XT3, to hoping by iPhone 19-20 that I can sell all my bodies and lenses and just rely on the iPhone.

The Sony felt like a chore - from carrying around a big camera and lens, through to the editing and photo management. The Fuji was a breath of fresh air - a bit more compact, and the film sims allowed me to cut the editing process out. But there was still lugging around a camera, and then the photo transfer etc.

With mobile phones' improvements in photography, coupled with the endless opportunities for apps, I can't wait to rely on it as my sole camera.

Re: Looks: A Halide Mark III Preview

#20

Post by ricardobeat »

LoganDark wrote: post #17

I feel like instead of saying a photo is "in HDR" (which implies you can view it in HDR), they should be saying the camera can capture HDR. None of the photos in this post are actually HDR for me. (Using Safari on macOS 26.3 with an XDR display) (Edit: Oops. A few of the photos are HDR. Just, not most of the comparisons, which are where I was looking.)

They are in HDR for me - Safari on Macbook Air, 26.2. You must have something misconfigured in your display.
Post reply on HN