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

Kino: Pro Video Camera

lux.camera

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 376 posts

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#351

Post by sandofsky »

js2 wrote: post #323
infinitedata wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks really promising, hope all goes great! My only concern is reading that you do collect crash reports despite being privacy-focused. How much information is there to identify the picture/video taken or the device/person?

There's two possibilities. 1. They're using the crash reports provided through App Store Connect. These are stack traces with no personally identifying information. You can enable/disable these under Settings > Privacy & Security > Share With App Developers. 2. They're using a third-party crash reporter. Under the covers these are often based on PLCrashReporter or KSCrash. A few such as Firebase (previously Crashlyti…

Yup. We just use Apple’s crash reporting system.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#352

Post by kkukshtel »

I just downloaded this and ran it on my iPhone 15 Pro Max and the video quality is incredible. I had missed that Apple even added LOG support in the past, and the quality of color coming out of this thing is incredible. This is the first time I've seen video (even just a small test) from a phone camera truly look properly "cinematic" without taking footage into Resolve to grade it manually, etc. Bravo.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#353

Post by mrandish »

wraptile wrote: post #233

I wish titles on HN would clarify the platform for limited releases like this. This is iOS exclusive.

Similar apps on Android offering direct RAW format recording include MotionCam Pro and Mcpro24fps. While compatibility depends on the phone, most recent (~ 4 yrs) models from Samsung, Google, Sony and several others are compatible. I think this covers >90% of Android phones.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#354

Post by IshKebab »

kernal wrote: post #338
IshKebab wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never done any iOS dev but I always assumed it was partly because the Android GUI toolkit (views, fragments etc.) is just SO awful that it just isn't feasible to make nice UIs. Certainly in the apps I've made there's absolutely no way I would invest time into animations, custom widgets, etc. Hopefully Flutter will fix that because the difference in usability is night and day. It's just a shame the Dart ecosystem…

Your concept of Android development looks to be stuck in the 4.4 days. Jetpack Compose and its declarative UI is how modern Android apps are developed. https://github.com/android/compose-samples >Hopefully Flutter will fix that because the difference in usability is night and day. It's just a shame the Dart ecosystem is so dead. I don't see how the difference is night and day when they both use declarative UI's. Whet…

> Jetpack Compose and its declarative UI is how modern Android apps are developed.

[citation needed]. I looked into Jetpack Compose a year or two ago and it was way too immature then to use in production. I guess maybe that's improved a bit but we're talking about existing apps here. They don't magically move to Jetpack Compose. Someone has to update them. How much would you bet that MotionCam Pro uses Jetpack Compose?

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#355

Post by tristor »

alexdns wrote: post #266
wilg wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell hath no fury like an Android user spurned.

Globally android has a 70% market share.

Only due to cost, the majority of that share is not devices that are capable of doing what would be required for an app like Kino to work with these features. The share of flagship Android devices worldwide is lower than flagship iOS devices.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#356

Post by dylan604 »

th0ma5 wrote: post #346
dylan604 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's just so far off basis, it's flabbergasting. I've gone into so much detail on what goes on during a color grading session, yet you keep coming back to "but it's all LUTs" in the end. You're totally ignoring all of the work and effort that went into generating those LUTS. You're coming across like you could just download a LUT called TheMatrix.lut and any footage it is applied to will look just like The Mat…

I know it's not just lookup tables. I'm waiting for you to talk about something other than that lol I think the real reason why everyone including all of your cohorts behave like this is because when you press people they realize that they don't have a good way to explain it. It's a very fickle and varied thing per project and if you dig into any one example, it seems really silly and that brings out artists insecuri…

What more could you possibly need me to explain? I've provided much more detail than a lot of the YT tutorials of saying download my LUT. I've described recognizing that as the signal was pushed to the max the color changed from white to magenta and the actual cause coming from a bad sensor in a camera not delivering enough data in the green channel which required using the grading software to isolate and push the green channel harder so that it went back to the desired white. I've briefly talked about the basics of primary and secondary grading. I've talked about using the scopes to see how the adjustments you are making are actually affecting the signal. I have provided much detail on how a grading session is not just applying a LUT. I have never in a serious conversation said that's proprietary knowledge and you're not worthy. I have openly shared. You have not actually asked any direct question other that taking offense and my offense.

I really don't know how you think me and my cohorts are behaving. Is it that we (extrapolated from conversations I've heard) get offended because someone calls themself a colorist because they can apply a LUT? You think this is pompous that we do not agree that the ability to apply a LUT is the same thing as running a full color session? At this point, I'm really not sure what high horse you are on or that you think I am on.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#357

Post by wilg »

drittich wrote: post #299
wilg wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its okay for people not to do twice the work to support a type of phone they don't care about or use. Who is this deceiving? You figured it out, clearly. I think you're more mad than reasonable here.

While your original comment might be taken as funny, this one quickly devolved into a strawman argument ending in a personal attack. Was that your intention?

It's not a strawman but it is an attack on what this person said. I don't think they are being reasonable.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#358

Post by zer0zzz »

kernal wrote: post #345
zer0zzz wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're over 70% marketshare world wide and they produce less than half the revenue. I am not sure how the math breaks down the odds that an individual android user will buy a $20 app, but it doesn't seem great. My point is if the average Android user were even half as likely to buy then the numbers would be about the same plausibly, they wouldn't be half the revenue. I suspect if you're a small shop focused on apps…

Statistics don't tell the complete story. A large portion of that 70% is from developing countries that cannot afford to purchase apps, let alone purchase an iPhone. A fair comparison would be the US, where iOS and Android are fairly even.

Even if that were true, if you had to choose one platform to serve in NA you’re better off selling to iOS users because they make up a majority of North American mobile phone users.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#359

Post by dylan604 »

SamBam wrote: post #304
dylan604 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it sounded like you were suggesting you could make the whole scene darker Did you read over this "Bonus points if your sunglasses are polarized."? I'm not talking about regular polarized lenses in your glasses. I specifically said the world sunglasses multiple times. The entire point of sunglasses is to make the whole scene darker. I really don't know how to describe this any more plainly.

Huh? I'm talking about being able to "dial in the effect." I read that as "dialing in the darkness" (as it relates to motion blur). That's what I'm talking about. Obviously the sunglasses alone make the scene darker. You're the one who brought up dialing it in with polarized lenses.

It sounds like you are not familiar with how a circular polarizer works. By rotating the lens, you are changing the angle that the polarizing filter blocks. At one angle you might block the reflections from windows/water, rotating 90° usually will start to effect the sky so the blue gets deeper. So as you rotate your sunglasses, you see the similar effect.

"I read that as "

that's an issue where you're not familiar with the subject, and have misinterpreted common words used by those more familiar with the subject.

Re: Kino: Pro Video Camera

#360

Post by halostatue »

danielskogly wrote: post #256
sandofsky wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry you ran into that. I distinctly remember testing the 13 mini, due to notch layout issues, so this is unexpected. As soon as the crash reports come in, we’ll dig into that. Unfortunately, while we had a QA person on this, and nearly 100 beta testers, the iPhone camera APIs are a mine field. We’ll get a fix out as soon as we have details.

Same issue on my iPhone 13 mini 17.5.1, tried with Sando. Crashed immediately after beginning filming

I tried with my iPhone 12 mini 17.5.1 BNW. It didn't crash, but it looked like it had and then came back with a weird error (sorry, I didn’t capture it).

My phone is due for an upgrade soon, so it’s not a big deal at the moment.

Post reply on HN