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

The limits of "computational photography"

yager.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 223 posts

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#201

Post by buildbot »

astrange wrote: post #191
_aavaa_ wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's true. Capture One introduced HDR merging in one of their recent releases [0]. It does raw in "raw" out. You get a DNG out which is demosaiced. I have not yet looked to see what it's doing under the hood, and how the result compares to EXR. (But in my experience, it seems to struggle with large exposure differences, even when on a tripod). [0]: https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/4410…

I mean, sure, producing another raw is one way to do it, but I wouldn't really call that an image format.

You are all over this thread trying to prove that iPhones somehow have a unique setup in the industry that no other camera can match, and people keep telling you how wrong you are. DNG is 100% and image format, and can be “raw” or completely processed depending on the layers internally. Educate yourself before making such blanket statements.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#203

Post by _aavaa_ »

astrange wrote: post #188
illiac786 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iPhone HDR produces an HDR image file What file format is this? iPhone produces tone mapped HEIC, yes, but that’s not HDR as you pointed out. Or do you mean HDR video ?

No, the HEIC has a proprietary attachment with the HDR data as well. You can see the iPhone display adapting when you view it in Photos.

Do you have any info on how that attachment is stored/accesssed?

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#204

Post by _aavaa_ »

astrange wrote: post #191
_aavaa_ wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's true. Capture One introduced HDR merging in one of their recent releases [0]. It does raw in "raw" out. You get a DNG out which is demosaiced. I have not yet looked to see what it's doing under the hood, and how the result compares to EXR. (But in my experience, it seems to struggle with large exposure differences, even when on a tripod). [0]: https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/4410…

I mean, sure, producing another raw is one way to do it, but I wouldn't really call that an image format.

I have no idea why you wouldn’t call it an imagine format.

But either way that’s changing the goal posts. Here is a consumer software doing what that iPhone does.

If that’s not to your liking, there is other software which produces 32bit float tiff images, those will support an even higher dynamic without the pain of EXR.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#205

Post by Tarrosion »

pkulak wrote: post #182
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #16

I would like to see computational photography applied to raw images from DSLRs and MILCs with APS-C and larger sensors. Perhaps Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fujifilm could have built-in options in their cameras for ‘social media mode’, with a modicum of noise reduction (honestly unnecessary at ISOs lower than about 1600 for modern cameras), but drastically improved HDR and white balance. Many of these cameras are able to…

I've got an Olympus M43 camera, which has an image sensor that's both significantly smaller than full frame, and significantly larger than a phone. I've found that I can do absolutely amazing things to the RAW image later. There are these processes now that will use ML to remove noise, and it blows my mind every time. I can shoot at ISO 6400 now without even thinking about it. I used to cringe when I had to hit 1600.…

I'm also shooting on an Olympus M43, several years old. Any suggestions for software tools you've found helpful?

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#206

Post by illiac786 »

_aavaa_ wrote: post #203
astrange wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the HEIC has a proprietary attachment with the HDR data as well. You can see the iPhone display adapting when you view it in Photos.

Do you have any info on how that attachment is stored/accesssed?

I think I found it:

https://github.com/m13253/heif-hdrgainmap-decode

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#207

Post by pkulak »

Tarrosion wrote: post #205
pkulak wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got an Olympus M43 camera, which has an image sensor that's both significantly smaller than full frame, and significantly larger than a phone. I've found that I can do absolutely amazing things to the RAW image later. There are these processes now that will use ML to remove noise, and it blows my mind every time. I can shoot at ISO 6400 now without even thinking about it. I used to cringe when I had to hit 1600.…

I'm also shooting on an Olympus M43, several years old. Any suggestions for software tools you've found helpful?

Yeah, didn't want to sound like a shill, but Dx0 is so good I run it in a virtual machine on my Linux box. It's "Deep Prime" noise reduction thing is what I was talking about. There are others, even some stand alone, but it's nice having it all in one place, and Deep Prime does seem to be the best.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#209

Post by smusamashah »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #186
smusamashah wrote: post #178

This looks like iPhone postprocessing problem more than anything else. I have used 3 Google pixel phones (up to pixel 4) and none of them does bad post-processing. In fact, it improves the resolution of whatever you are taking picture of https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/10/see-better-and-further-wit... I never saw any of these phones altering the details like in article.

Google Pixel phones still do "deep fusion" processing like an iphone, but instead with Google's secret sauce. The photo your phone is showing you is what machine learning thinks the picture should look like, and not the picture you took.

But unlike examples in the article, whatever magic sauce Google uses, end result does not look different from actual thing.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#210

Post by astrange »

buildbot wrote: post #201
astrange wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, sure, producing another raw is one way to do it, but I wouldn't really call that an image format.

You are all over this thread trying to prove that iPhones somehow have a unique setup in the industry that no other camera can match, and people keep telling you how wrong you are. DNG is 100% and image format, and can be “raw” or completely processed depending on the layers internally. Educate yourself before making such blanket statements.

I know what a DNG is. It's not a final delivery format; it's not compressed and I don't think eg gaming content pipelines are going to accept it for ingest either.

(Also, macOS won't display them in HDR, but will display EXR files in HDR. Some trivia for you.)

Post reply on HN