I was applying my tempered glass screen protector and after everything was done, I did a thorough check to realize that my laser sensor has hairline scratches. Will it affect the focus or performance? It's my first LG phone..
Thank you in advance!
My laser appears to have a few tiny scratches as well.
Highly doubt it will hurt anything. My g3 laser was scratched up and it seemed fine.
I was thinking of polishing the plastic and applying a film protector to get it protected. Any idea if a film would affect the focus? Thank you for the reply.
Sent from my LG-H815 using XDA Free mobile app
Anyone got preventive measures to prevent laser focus plastic cover from getting scratches further? Mine is quite scratched up and I'm pretty annoyed by it. I believe it won't affect the focusing speed but it's a flagship phone from LG and yet such thing happens..
Sent from my LG-H815 using XDA Free mobile app
The laser cover is soft, cheap plastic. Nothing you can do about it. No, it won't affect the focusing unless you put a giant gash in it that will deflect the beam. Same thing was happening on the G3. Just be careful about it.
---------- Post added at 14:02 ---------- Previous post was at 14:02 ----------
brysonwong said:
Anyone got preventive measures to prevent laser focus plastic cover from getting scratches further? Mine is quite scratched up and I'm pretty annoyed by it. I believe it won't affect the focusing speed but it's a flagship phone from LG and yet such thing happens..
Sent from my LG-H815 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Polish it with ABS polishing compound, then put a drop of optical hard lacuqer on it. More trouble than it's worth, IMHO.
Although LG brands it as "laser" it's nothing more than a ray of infrared shot and measured after it bounces off obstacles. So unless the emitter/receptor is REALLY weak, there will be likely no effect on the focus.
Double that with the fact that the camera uses both the "laser" and phase detection to focus, if the "laser" fails to provide focus information the phase detection will do (slower).
Think of it that way: Do you care that much about the scratches on your TV's remote infrared emitter?
Don't worry, your "laser" is fine
AnteusFogg said:
Although LG brands it as "laser" it's nothing more than a ray of infrared shot and measured after it bounces off obstacles. So unless the emitter/receptor is REALLY weak, there will be likely no effect on the focus.
Double that with the fact that the camera uses both the "laser" and phase detection to focus, if the "laser" fails to provide focus information the phase detection will do (slower).
Think of it that way: Do you care that much about the scratches on your TV's remote infrared emitter?
Don't worry, your "laser" is fine
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you really know what a laser actually is.
The whole point of the laser-assisted autofocus is to project a tightly focused, coherent beam of light shining in a single direction so that it reflects off the photo subject and nothing else. A non-laser IR diode projects light in a "cone" in all directions, which is useless for focusing the camera. It is a laser by all means, otherwise it would not work at all.
Scratching the cover might diffuse the beam slightly but only a major gash will actually impair it to the point of uselessness (since it will scatter the light in many directions).
Here's a more thorough explanation: http://www.androidauthority.com/lg-g3-laser-auto-focus-386896/
siraltus said:
I don't think you really know what a laser actually is.
The whole point of the laser-assisted autofocus is to project a tightly focused, coherent beam of light shining in a single direction so that it reflects off the photo subject and nothing else. A non-laser IR diode projects light in a "cone" in all directions, which is useless for focusing the camera. It is a laser by all means, otherwise it would not work at all.
Scratching the cover might diffuse the beam slightly but only a major gash will actually impair it to the point of uselessness (since it will scatter the light in many directions).
Here's a more thorough explanation: http://www.androidauthority.com/lg-g3-laser-auto-focus-386896/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know very well what a laser is, thank you very much
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8062/a-closer-look-at-the-g3s-ir-laser-auto-focus-system
A "perfect" laser would be actually counter-productive, for unless you have a sort of "crosshair" on your viewfinder to mark the focusing point, you may very well have your phone focus on the tree behind your beautiful significant other, just because your subject is not in the laser's line of sight.
It is actually necessary for this concept to work that the beam is conic. Here, see this image from LG's own keynote: http://androidspin.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LG-G3-Laser-Autofocus.png
If it was a super-focus laser, would they represent it as a conic, albeit very narrow, beam?
They don't need a "perfect" laser emitter to work out their concept. Granted, they need a narrow beam to avoid interference and allow an accurate measure of the scene being captured but a perfect laser beam (perfectly coherent, single direction light) would just do more harm than good. This is not used for sniper rifle or whatever, it's used for focusing on a scene.
Scratches will maybe deviate a portion of the beam a little but the majority of it, unless the window is completely buffed, will still serve its purpose. I'm strongly guessing that the way it works is: Send a burst, receive reflectionS (plural because there will be more than one) and apply some algorithm that'll define the most appropriate distance to focus on, based on the collection of durations from the receiver.
So I have a question on this topic. Since its supposed to be infrared, on a remote, you cant see anything being emitted unless you look at the emitters through a camera or something. When I have my camera on my G4 on, I can see a tiny red red light shining. Can anyone else actually see the red light being emitted? Just making sure mine's not defective.
rustypie said:
So I have a question on this topic. Since its supposed to be infrared, on a remote, you cant see anything being emitted unless you look at the emitters through a camera or something. When I have my camera on my G4 on, I can see a tiny red red light shining. Can anyone else actually see the red light being emitted? Just making sure mine's not defective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see it too. Very much like you can see the IR emitter of your TV remote, except it's more focused here so even more noticable. Your device's fine
More on why we can "see" infrared in certain conditions even though it's out of the visible spectrum: http://phys.org/news/2014-12-human-eye-invisible-infrared.html
You'll notice that the "laser" is pulsing rapidly, which is the required condition to trick the eye into "seeing" the beam.
Related
There have been numerous discussions on XDA and elsewhere about issues with Xperia cameras, specifically what looks like flecks of dust on the images.
It was my theory that such dust would have to be directly on the CCD in order for it to appear as sharply defined as it is.
To test this theory I removed my camera and using an exacto knife and a steady hand, opened the camera to expose the CCD directly. Then using a cotton swab and some alcohol, wiped the surface of the CCD itself.
After reassembly the dust specs were still evident in the same locations.
It is my opinion based on this that it is not worth the effort to do what I did. You will be better off replacing the camera entirely. Or letting the phone slip from your hand while you are mixing a load of cement.
Possibilities:
- the flecks are under some protective surface on the CCD
- the CCD was manufactured with the flecks already there
- pixels in the makeup of the CCD have gone dead
- etc etc
I thought it a good idea to post this so someone else would benefit and not waste time with a futile effort.
Don
I think its software related. If you go to video, point at something white so that you can see the black dots, then wobble the phone a little. You will see them jumping around on the screen as the camera tries to focus. I'm not sure what it is, but its definitely not dust.
Sent from my C6503 using Tapatalk
Your images taken through camera will contain noise during bad lighting conditions.The images taken with my phone on bright sunlight are good and do not have any noise.Sony should take care of this atleast in upcoming models
Hello guys! Currently using the LG G3 for a couple of months now. I just found that the focus of this phone is completely garbage when it comes to close up and macro shots. I already tried searching google and android forums including XDA (maybe I'm bad at searches, I don't know LOL). I'm not sure if mine is a dud but whenever I bring an object near point blank range, it seems to have difficulty focusing on it. I tried comparing it with a Note 3 and iPhone 5S by bringing a lightning cable tip and USB cable tip near the camera.. Both focused on the objects except the G3. It seems to be fixed on the background objects, I even tried on a white canvas and close up focus still does not work! I even tried wiping the laser beside the camera, cleaning it with a microfiber cloth. Still doesn't focus at very near objects.
Help? Please? Will appreciate the replies! I hope I'm just missing a feature or just maybe forgot to turn something off. I really don't want to switch phones because so far this is the best. This is a deal breaker for me though if this doesn't work out well.
EDIT: problem is still there. i thought turning over the phone and making the laser autofocus stay at the bottom would help solve my problem with this phone. still nothing. i tried putting a pencil close to the lens like "in your face" close, and it really can't focus on it! Note 3 and iPhone 5S was able to focus on it but not the LG G3..
Probably the laser angle can't change, so if it's super-close to the camera lens the laser doesn't actually hit the object, thus it never focuses.
TheStickMan said:
Probably the laser angle can't change, so if it's super-close to the camera lens the laser doesn't actually hit the object, thus it never focuses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suspect the same thing. If that is the case, then I'm quite disappointed with LG for this. Everything is spot on about this smartphone except this tiny (but irritating) issue. I'm already considering selling it just because of this. I take pictures of objects, most of the time super close, so people can see the smaller details. Using other camera apps didn't help. Really a hardware stretch I guess.
How close are you taking these pics? I've taken pics of my food and it focused okay. Of course if impromptu macro shooting is something you do often... this'll be a deal breaker for you.
TheStickMan said:
How close are you taking these pics? I've taken pics of my food and it focused okay. Of course if impromptu macro shooting is something you do often... this'll be a deal breaker for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sometimes I take photos of small gadgets' details like the voltage of the charger, tip of the usb port etc. to show a few people like what comes with the package and stuff. Still undecided though, I'm about to trade to an M8 but i told the guy to hold on. Have to read more about this.
I've noticed 2 things that are a little bothersome, seeking opinions.
1)When you take a macro, there is a sever aberration on the edges, beyond just bokeh. It almost looks like a motion blur. Is this a manufacturer blemish? Or are others noticing this too?
2)Would scratches on the laser cover screw with the ability to focus? I'd think that the lasers might skew and get confused....
Thanks!
I have taken shots with the laser completely covered up and uncovered. There appeared to be no noticeable difference with the images. Wouldn't it New funny if there "laser focus" was just a gimmick, no actual functionality.
dontbeweakvato said:
I have taken shots with the laser completely covered up and uncovered. There appeared to be no noticeable difference with the images. Wouldn't it New funny if there "laser focus" was just a gimmick, no actual functionality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think that hasn't popped into my mind
dontbeweakvato said:
I have taken shots with the laser completely covered up and uncovered. There appeared to be no noticeable difference with the images. Wouldn't it New funny if there "laser focus" was just a gimmick, no actual functionality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tried to take a close up shot with laser focus covered with my finger. Couldnt focus on the object. Uncover it and voila it focuses in to time
I have guessed (!) that the laser simply provides illumination for dark scenes, so the camera can see better, letting it autofocus more accurately.
Many conventional digital cameras have autofocus illumination functions, just a source that helps light up the middle of the scene before shooting, so the AF can work properly.
My assumption is that this is basically what the laser is doing. I don't claim to understand why it would have to be a laser vs some other light source. Perhaps because a laser can light up something further away, vs a broader light beam of the same power. Or maybe because a laser can make a small dot (unlike a broader beam), which the autofocus system can assume should be crisp, and can adjust the focus so that the laser's dot looks sharp.
But I don't think it's something like a laser rangefinder. I think it just kind of flicks around and "paints" the scene with light, so the image sensor can see better.
Try the focus tests in dim/dark lighting. I'm guessing the camera will have a harder time focusing if you cover the laser when trying to focus in a dark environment.
Again, this is speculation, I haven't tried to test the focus with and without the laser. But if it's basically acting like an AF-illuminator, then I wouldn't call it a useless gimmick. Instead, it's something that should be most-helpful in poorly-lit areas. And not needed if you're outside in bright lighting.
dontbeweakvato said:
I have taken shots with the laser completely covered up and uncovered. There appeared to be no noticeable difference with the images. Wouldn't it New funny if there "laser focus" was just a gimmick, no actual functionality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does have functionality but imagine you are trying to take a photo through a window of something outside. The laser would bounce off the glass and not be very useful.
in this case the G4 will fall back on contrast detection which is the std auto focus method. so covering up the laser means it uses contrast detection. might not be as quick though.
---------- Post added at 04:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:15 AM ----------
drtchocky said:
1)When you take a macro, there is a sever aberration on the edges, beyond just bokeh. It almost looks like a motion blur. Is this a manufacturer blemish? Or are others noticing this too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i notice the first 10% and last ten % are softer than the centre. is this what you mean ? maybe post an image.
2)Would scratches on the laser cover screw with the ability to focus? I'd think that the lasers might skew and get confused....!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no, i doubt it would affect functionality.
Now for something colossally boring A picture of the laser's output.
This is a 15 second exposure using another camera, at ISO 800, f2.0, with the G4's camera running, and its laser aimed at a white sheet of paper maybe 10" away. An exposure like this captures a lot of light, and you can still barely see anything from the laser.
I can only assume that the output from the laser is simply very, very dim. I can see a red flicker when looking at the laser's window. But I don't see anything with it aimed at paper.
If the camera is reading something about the laser light not using the lens & image sensor (eg-, somehow using it as a range finder), that's impressive. If the image sensor can actually detect something useful from the laser by itself, that's maybe more impressive. That would mean the sensor is very, very sensitive. Or that maybe the laser light is largely outside our visible spectrum, but within a wavelength that the G4's image sensor sees (that is, the light is actually brighter than it looks to the eye).
I then tried focusing the G4 on things in the room in very, very dim lighting. It's dark out, the TV was on, and that's it. The camera claimed it was focused (green square, beep), but it wasn't. I even tried covering the lens & window with my finger (pitch black "scene"), and it claimed it focused.
I then aimed it at my laptop on the floor, which had one visible LED. With the flash off (no AF-assist light), I'd tap on the LED on the screen, to focus there. I tried it with the laser exposed, and the laser window covered. It kept claiming it focused, but it wasn't. The LED appeared as a big fuzzy blob. When I'd enable the flash, it would turn that on to help focusing, and would actually focus properly.
But in my very-limited test, in a dark room, with the flash disabled, I didn't observe a focusing improvement from having the laser in-use.
Hello,
Today when taking photos I've noticed that light sources like lightbulbs and chandeliers appear twice in photo. It's hard to describe, but attached photos should clarify what I'm talking about.
I've checked on other phone, Honor 8X and it's same.
And here's my question to you: do you observe the same behaviour, or my device is flawed?
Shogun91 said:
Hello,
Today when taking photos I've noticed that light sources like lightbulbs and chandeliers appear twice in photo. It's hard to describe, but attached photos should clarify what I'm talking about.
I've checked on other phone, Honor 8X and it's same.
And here's my question to you: do you observe the same behaviour, or my device is flawed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's odd....I have to see if my phone does the same.
Are you on Auto mode?
SantinoInc said:
That's odd....I have to see if my phone does the same.
Are you on Auto mode?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I'm on Auto. I've gone also through pro mode settings, but none of them seem to reduce it.
Shogun91 said:
Yes, I'm on Auto. I've gone also through pro mode settings, but none of them seem to reduce it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And Honor 8x does the same? Thought that the camera lenses cover has some reflecting residue like oil etc...it is strange.
mzsquared said:
And Honor 8x does the same? Thought that the camera lenses cover has some reflecting residue like oil etc...it is strange.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, Honor does the same. Actually I've just checked LG V30 and Huawei P10 Lite, and it's almost the same.
I'm kinda shocked I haven't noticed it before.
Can you please check on your phones?
I don't know if it's worth using warranty with my Note 10+ if it's the general issue.
I took a direct photo of my desk lamp and there's nothing wrong, I'll try again later tonight using different angles/sources.
I googled it and this problem is widely commented on:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=phone+camera+ghost+reflections+of+light+sources
mzsquared said:
I took a direct photo of my desk lamp and there's nothing wrong, I'll try again later tonight using different angles/sources.
I googled it and this problem is widely commented on:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=phone+camera+ghost+reflections+of+light+sources
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the link. So it seems like this can be considered "normal".
However I'm still curious what will be result of your tests. Please share what was the outcome, whether you were able to reproduce this.
It depends on the angle, sometimes you will see this, some times not, I have seen this in dedicated cameras as well
Thank you for your response.
As I'm testing it more, it seems very hard to take photo without ghost lights when not pointing straight into light source, attached few more sample files.
Maybe I'll get over it, if not I'll give it a go, and use warranty, they'll do something with this or not.
Hello,
That's amazing to see this post today, just the day i noticed exactely the same.
I noticed that when doing a video test, through windows stores (the room was in the dark, light going thru the little holes in the stores). I had exactely the same kind of little lights reproduced in the left quarter of the frame.
I thought it was due to the shape of the lens, some kind of light reflexion on it, but now i am wondering because that is the EXACT same thing as your description.
I would not send to warranty... since i had exactely the same 'problem'. I believe it is due to lens design.
mafy31 said:
Hello,
That's amazing to see this post today, just the day i noticed exactely the same.
I noticed that when doing a video test, through windows stores (the room was in the dark, light going thru the little holes in the stores). I had exactely the same kind of little lights reproduced in the left quarter of the frame.
I thought it was due to the shape of the lens, some kind of light reflexion on it, but now i am wondering because that is the EXACT same thing as your description.
I would not send to warranty... since i had exactely the same 'problem'. I believe it is due to lens design.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe you have the same, but don't know how often you see these lights.
I can understand this can be seen in some conditions, but as I'm testing it more, I almost can't take any photo without it.
I've looked through YouTube reviews with some night shots and can't see it there.
Attaching last two samples, to not spam this thread, as maybe I'm now oversensitive on this
I'll go to the store today, and see what they'll say.
Shogun91 said:
Thank you for the link. So it seems like this can be considered "normal".
However I'm still curious what will be result of your tests. Please share what was the outcome, whether you were able to reproduce this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Went on tonight to my favorite night photography places and the full moon was the perfect source of light to look into the "ghosting" thing. It's really easy to see what's happening with the light when moving the camera around its axis. Note 10 has a rather thick glass covering/protecting the lenses and the light entering the camera is being distorted by the inner and outer surfaces of the glass plate depending on the angle of entry.
I was having really boring Sunday today so I'm glad I found something to do because of that, and I even made a little drawing using the S-Pen(love the s-pen!) to illustrate directional changes of light while entering/exiting a medium of different densities (air/glass)
We know that light will get reflected by a glass at certain degree because of different density between air and glass. Basic physics. Our camera is made of multiple layers of lens with variables angle. So if 99% of light goes through the lens, 1% get reflected. We won't see it for normal light. But if the light source is very bright, even 1% will be visible on photo.
That's my hypothesis.
Happens all the time when facing a lamp light directly, with wide and zoom lens. But seems to be less visible with ultra-wide.
This looks like an internal reflection within the camera it's self.
Internal reflections are common on multi-element lens.
You pay big bucks for coated elements and engineering to suppress this effect in pro lens.
Internal reflections can also happen between the cmos sensor and any of the internal optics.
In the case the cover element is a prime suspect.
Lol, you can thousands for a pro shooting system and you will still find this.
First time with an in screen finger print scanner. It seems the Pixel 6 turns on at maximum brightness (regardless of the screens brightness) a circle under your finger as you unlock. This is very bright in a dark or dim room, causing my finger to glow bright red, sure I can see bone!
As I understand it the finger print scanner is just a capacitive scanner under the screen, so not something that "sees" justifying the bright light, so why is this happening? Is it just something Google thinks looks cool without giving much thought to it, or does it have a purpose?
I'd really like to get it toned down so it's not so jarring in a dark room when using at night, but see no settings to allow this, is there a way to change it?
Struggling to see how this is any better than a rear fingerprint scanner.
It's not capacitive, lel. How would that work? It's hidden under the display.
It's an optical fingerprint scanner. And optics means it requires light to function.
There are three main systems in smartphones: Capacitative, optical and ultrasonic. Google opted for an optical sensor on the Pixel 6 (pro).
Without light, the system can't work. It requires a combination of light and dark.
A capacitative fingerprint scanner uses an array of tiny capacitor circuits to cllect data. How would you exchange/store electrical charge, if a glass panel is between the scanner and your finger? It's just not possible, from a simple physical conditions standpoint.
It's working as intended.
Besides, it's simply NOT better than a rear fingerprint scanner. The old Pixel rear scanner was beatiful and just worked. In a dream world, the Pixel 6 would have faceunlock AND a rear fingerprint scanner, so we can enjoy unlocking with ease at home and use the fingerprint scanner whenever we wear a mask in public.
But, we are not in an optimal world.
Morgrain said:
It's not capacitive, lel. How would that work? It's hidden under the display.
It's an optical fingerprint scanner. And optics mean it requires light.
Without light, the system can't work. It requires a combination of light and dark.
It's working as intended
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many thanks, I did Google it after posting and found it was a CCD device so optical, should have done that first! I thought it just worked the same as the rear ones but just placed under the glass. Everyday is a school day, guess I will just have to use a pincode when its dark.
Must say I find the rear scanners much easier and natural to use, I don't see these personally as any improvement.
PhilipL2021 said:
Many thanks, I did Google it after posting and found it was a CCD device so optical, should have done that first! I thought it just worked the same as the rear ones but just placed under the glass. Everyday is a school day, guess I will just have to use a pincode when its dark.
Must say I find the rear scanners much easier and natural to use, I don't see these personally as any improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome. I agree with you here, I liked the Pixel 2 and 3 scanner at the back, with a case on you just had this "easy" resting and finding place with your finger. It just "moved" naturally into the hole and unlocking was never a problem.
Sadly, Google decided to opt for another solution.
I edited my previous post btw with some more info about scanners, maybe you will find it useful.
I think it's a shame that Google doesn't use the latest technology for its fingerprint sensor. Google developed the Tensor chipset in collaboration with Samsung. Why didn't you just adopt the ultrasound technology for the fingerprint sensor from Samsung? In my opinion, this technology would be a perfect fit for the Pixel 6. Has it probably got too expensive for Google or Samsung doesn't want to share the technology (yet) with others? In any case, it's a shame.
KiLLiNGDAY said:
I think it's a shame that Google doesn't use the latest technology for its fingerprint sensor. Google developed the Tensor chipset in collaboration with Samsung. Why didn't you just adopt the ultrasound technology for the fingerprint sensor from Samsung? In my opinion, this technology would be a perfect fit for the Pixel 6. Has it probably got too expensive for Google or Samsung doesn't want to share the technology (yet) with others? In any case, it's a shame.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe it had something to do with the supply situation, many parts are only hard to come by.
Pixel 7 next year got to have a reason to upgrade. I can see the return of a rear or ultrasonic in display + face unlock as a feature heavily marketed lol
Google is trying to stay up to date with the cool kids. That optical sensor is a gimmick nobody asked for. It's not nearly as fast or precise as the rear one. But hey, at least it's "cool".
PhilipL2021 said:
Struggling to see how this is any better than a rear fingerprint scanner.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe what's supposed to be potentially better about them is that they don't take up as much space in the phone, making more room for other things (like the huge batttery). I could be wrong about that.
KiLLiNGDAY said:
Has it probably got too expensive for Google or Samsung doesn't want to share the technology (yet) with others? In any case, it's a shame.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is my theory that they have an agreement with Samsung to not make their phones "too good" (gimp them), in exchange (and money) Samsung provides them some parts. For that matter, Samsung could've just refused to license certain technology to Google. I'm glad at least the storage is UFS 3.1, from Samsung.
I suspected it was more for looks. Trying to make themselves look more mainstream.