Develop Bugs

video recording quality

Hey guys, the camera seems pretty good on this phone when I'm taking pictures, however when I am taking videos it almost seems kind of grainy even though its suppose to be 1080p. Anyone else have the similar or different experiences? Please share!

Grain doesn't have much to do with resolution. What affects grain directly is light. Low light will give you more grain. Period. This is valid for professional cameras as well.
Shoot a video I good light and the quality is excellent.

Don't use 1080p it's crap and makes videos look awful. They decided to zoom the picture in about 40-60% and not allow you to zoom out. As a result everything looks grainy and out of focus.
Set ur camera to 720p look at how much you can see, how clear the image is how sharp the colors are etc and then switch to 1080p and you will find all the sudden you zoomed way in and can't zoom out and the picture quality dropped about 60%.
They claim 1080p support but it's a lie since they zoom in and give you a MUCH lower quality video than 720p does.

How do you switch to 720p mode?
efarley said:
Don't use 1080p it's crap and makes videos look awful. They decided to zoom the picture in about 40-60% and not allow you to zoom out. As a result everything looks grainy and out of focus.
Set ur camera to 720p look at how much you can see, how clear the image is how sharp the colors are etc and then switch to 1080p and you will find all the sudden you zoomed way in and can't zoom out and the picture quality dropped about 60%.
They claim 1080p support but it's a lie since they zoom in and give you a MUCH lower quality video than 720p does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App

efarley said:
Don't use 1080p it's crap and makes videos look awful. They decided to zoom the picture in about 40-60% and not allow you to zoom out. As a result everything looks grainy and out of focus.
Set ur camera to 720p look at how much you can see, how clear the image is how sharp the colors are etc and then switch to 1080p and you will find all the sudden you zoomed way in and can't zoom out and the picture quality dropped about 60%.
They claim 1080p support but it's a lie since they zoom in and give you a MUCH lower quality video than 720p does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure that's just a big nasty bug. The camera sensor and chipset are all very capable of 1080. It seems like the 1080 is zoomed into the amount of area that 720 would take in the middle of a 1080 image...I won't say it's an honest mistake, as it's borderline retarded...but, if it is dumping 1080p worth of data it can certainly do 1080p video...that's only 2mp and the tough part is writing that to storage without it getting skippy...and clearly that can be done.
Though I am assuming it is writing a 1080p file...has anyone checked?

daneurysm said:
I'm pretty sure that's just a big nasty bug. The camera sensor and chipset are all very capable of 1080. It seems like the 1080 is zoomed into the amount of area that 720 would take in the middle of a 1080 image...I won't say it's an honest mistake, as it's borderline retarded...but, if it is dumping 1080p worth of data it can certainly do 1080p video...that's only 2mp and the tough part is writing that to storage without it getting skippy...and clearly that can be done.
Though I am assuming it is writing a 1080p file...has anyone checked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GoPro HD also does this. Few of my friend's digital point and shoots did this as well. So, it's a sensor issue, not a software one.
I posted this before:
1080p:
http://youtu.be/c4AtsXjyKhY?hd=1
720p:
http://youtu.be/buHigxvlnfo?hd=1
Pardon my breathing, sinuses FTL
I really wish there was a way an external microphone could be used while recording video.

My problem is with the recorded audio. Has anyone found an app that let's you control audio gain. Serious clipping for live music records.

Its the quality (bitrate) in which the audio is recorded. At stock, its set at 64kbps and a sample rate of 44kHZ which is pretty subpar.
There's a hacked camera apk that lets you record audio at 194kbps with sample rate of 48kHz and also raises the video bitrate by a tad as well.
A tremendous difference in quality.

The graininess is caused by poor lighting. I went to sea world with my girl this week and all the outside video's came out amazing. But, inside shots with low light all came out very grainy. I can't blame the sensor too much because like someone mention before the same happens on high end camera's. But, also remember professional shots are taking with very high end lighting equipment.

Zexell said:
Its the quality (bitrate) in which the audio is recorded. At stock, its set at 64kbps and a sample rate of 44kHZ which is pretty subpar.
There's a hacked camera apk that lets you record audio at 194kbps with sample rate of 48kHz and also raises the video bitrate by a tad as well.
A tremendous difference in quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't seem to find anything like what you're referring to anywhere in the market or our app section. Got a link or a file name? Thanks.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1104051
and if u search our ET4G forum, you'll see a thread about it.
MUST BE ROOTED.

How exactly does "Auto HDR" work?

I never use HDR when taking pics on my GS4, because frankly, it doesn't need it. But I saw a couple of pictures taken with the G3 in HDR that looked AMAZING. It makes me think I'll be using HDR quite a bit. My question is, how exactly does the phone know when to use HDR and when not to? Is it somewhat intelligent about when using it would make the picture better?

Listening in.

Slash8915 said:
I never use HDR when taking pics on my GS4, because frankly, it doesn't need it. But I saw a couple of pictures taken with the G3 in HDR that looked AMAZING. It makes me think I'll be using HDR quite a bit. My question is, how exactly does the phone know when to use HDR and when not to? Is it somewhat intelligent about when using it would make the picture better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dondavis007 said:
Listening in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HDR is used to brighten the dark surrounds of where the lens is pointing towards a bright area.
Without HDR if you took a shot of say looking out of a window the light meter inside the camera exposes the shot for what you see outside the window but unlike our eyes which manage to 'balance the lighting' of everything else inside (surrounding walls) this non HDR shot would make these walls black.
Now take the same shot with HDR and although the exposure is still focused on what you see outside everything else inside the building has it's light lifted, so giving you an effect similar to what your eyes actually see.
The better the camera and I do mean dedicated DSLR type the better the HDR effect.
So, how does it do it......
Well, unknown to you when you take that HDR shot out of the window the sensor immediately notices the lighting is extremely bright in certain areas of the shot. So, instead of exposing the shot to either inside which would result in what is seen out of the window being washed out is extreme brightness or exposing the shot to what is seen outside which results in everything inside being extremely dark, what the sensor now does is say "Hey, let me lift the dark areas and lower the bright areas and give you are more balanced shot"!
It does this by taking two very quick successive shots, one bright areas and one dark areas and then quickly combines the two together.
All you get to see is the final shot.
Some camera apps such as Camera 360 offer a dedicated HDR section where you can control more of the shot.
There is even dedicated standalone apps which concentrate on nothing but HDR.

Camera Tips for Indoor

Hey guys,
I am having trouble taking good pictures with indoor lighting. The first problem is that the viewfinder (or the image on the screen) is not very smooth. It's jittery and lags and its super annoying. How can I improve the speed of the viewfinder so I can frame shots better?
I also hear that the LG has fantastic low light capability. However, with indoor lighting (fluorescent bulbs) I find the images have a lot of noise and the details appear very muddy and very oil painting-ish.
I don't have any problems during sunlight but indoors, the G4's camera is a mess. It's slow, jiterry and all round annoying to use. Any help would be appreciated!

mufaa said:
Hey guys,
I am having trouble taking good pictures with indoor lighting. The first problem is that the viewfinder (or the image on the screen) is not very smooth. It's jittery and lags and its super annoying. How can I improve the speed of the viewfinder so I can frame shots better?
I also hear that the LG has fantastic low light capability. However, with indoor lighting (fluorescent bulbs) I find the images have a lot of noise and the details appear very muddy and very oil painting-ish.
I don't have any problems during sunlight but indoors, the G4's camera is a mess. It's slow, jiterry and all round annoying to use. Any help would be appreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't tried it on my G4. But on other digital cameras, I have seen the displayed preview screen image get jerky in low-light when aiming the camera around.
My theory is that, to make the image bright enough, the camera needs to take a longer preview exposure. Capturing the image for the preview screen works the same way as taking an actual picture, of course. In bright light, maybe the sensor takes a 1/500 second exposure to generate the preview. But in low light, maybe it needs a 1/5 second exposure to make the preview image bright enough to be useful on the sccreen. So now it can only take a max of 5 preview images per second, and the screen will look jerky.
The muddy details, and looking like an oil painting, are at least in part due to the image sensor's ISO value being turned way up, due to the low-light conditions. Some of it may be due to the JPG compression settings, and perhaps noise-reduction. Pictures taken with the flash should help with this, as you're providing more light, and therefore the camera can use a lower ISO value, for better image quality.
You could try taking the same picture in Auto, then in Manual mode. Turn the ISO value down in Manual mode (to maybe 200, 400, something like that), and slow the shutter speed as needed for a proper exposure. In the Gallery, you can check the Details for the picture taken in Auto, to check the ISO value that the camera used. Use a lower ISO value for the Manual mode picture, and see if the results look better. Doing this with the flash turned off should help make the difference more apparent.
You can also capture JPG + RAW in Manual mode. The RAW files do not exhibit JPG compression, or other processing, they are straight from the image sensor. So you may get less muddiness and oil-painting effect.

..

mufaa, can you post any example indoor pics you've taken? That might help provide some context for what you're seeing.

What are your requirements for the picture?
Do you have a moving subject that demands a fast shutter, or can you afford to use a slower shutter speed?

RedOCtobyr said:
mufaa, can you post any example indoor pics you've taken? That might help provide some context for what you're seeing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, here's one for starters. This is the only non-personal image I can share at the moment (I am at work!) but if it's not enough I will snap one tonight and post it for you.
http://i.imgur.com/5mpaT2h.jpg
Zoom into the picture and you will find details buried in blurry oil painting like smudges. This happens in bright pictures as well. Is this how the sensor on the camera is?
KingFatty said:
What are your requirements for the picture?
Do you have a moving subject that demands a fast shutter, or can you afford to use a slower shutter speed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I usually shoot with subjects (my family, nephew, etc.) and I need the viewfinder to be fast. Because the viewfinder is so slow, subjects come out blurry even with the slighest movement. I also have to have a super steady hand.
This wasn't the case with the iPhone 6 i had. I just turned on the camera and snapped away.
phineous said:
Reboot or try force stop on the camera app. I've had mine get like this occasionally but force closing the app or rebooting fixed it when I opened it again.
If that doesn't do it, you could have a bad camera. There were some people complaining about camera problems in early June.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh boy. I will try that. I have rebooted my device multiple times and the result has been the same though.

..

somebodyyy doesn't know how to use manual mode for iso

iiEatTurdz said:
somebodyyy doesn't know how to use manual mode for iso
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any tips?
phineous said:
Maybe try clearing the cache and data on the camera app. Also, check that the laser window next to the camera lens is clean and unobstructed. Most of my pictures, even in lower light are very sharp when zoomed in.
Gotta be a bad camera or focusing laser.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you share some low light/indoor pictures of yours, and what settings you used to take those pics with?

That sample pic does not appear to have the EXIF data where we could check the ISO and shutter speed etc. that you used, can you check on your camera or source image what the settings were?

..

mufaa said:
I usually shoot with subjects (my family, nephew, etc.) and I need the viewfinder to be fast. Because the viewfinder is so slow, subjects come out blurry even with the slighest movement. I also have to have a super steady hand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The sample picture looks fairly normal to me. That is, it looks like ones I've taken on my G4. I believe the effect you're seeing is partially noise-reduction done by the camera processing, but I'm not 100% sure. A high ISO value will also contribute.
Now I'm wondering if maybe I misinterpreted what you meant in your original post. When you say the viewfinder is slow, do you mean just the jerky image if you move the camera around? Or that the pictures themselves come out blurry?
With only so much light available, the camera typically needs to use a longer exposure to get a bright-enough picture. A steady hand helps, as does OIS, Optical Image Stabilization. But neither of those can help if your *subject* is moving, of course.
You have 2 choices to make a moving subject sharper in low-light:
- Add more light. Use the flash if you aren't already, assuming the subject is within reach of the flash (probably around 10 feet, max). This will change the look of the picture, making it look more "harsh", but the added light should improve the image quality. With more light, the camera can use a quicker shutter speed.
- Raise the sensor's sensitivity, by using a higher ISO value. Effectively turning up the amplification, and allowing a quicker shutter speed. But as most of us have experienced, when you turn up a weak/noisy signal (car radio, etc), you observe more of the low-level background. Static, hiss, and so on. In a picture, this shows up as "noise" in the details of the image, and will typically result in pictures with more of the oil-painting look.
The lens on the G4 is f1.8, and should let in more light than the iPhone 6, at f2.2. It's certainly possible the iPhone does better noise reduction, or things along those lines. I'm not saying the G4's camera is perfect. But it shouldn't be woefully worse in low-light, anyways.
To get a comparison of how ISO affects things, try taking the same, stationary-subject picture, at maybe ISO 200, ISO 800, and ISO 2000. Then zoom in and look at the details of each picture. BTW, every camera will exhibit this behavior.

mufaa said:
Any tips?
Can you share some low light/indoor pictures of yours, and what settings you used to take those pics with?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it has nothing to do with the cache and stuff lol they sound stupid. just play with the settings. i typically use my outdoor iso from 100-500 depending on what kind of lighting or colors are present. for indoors i set it 500+. just don't go within the thousands if there's no vivid colors or bright lights. try like 500-800 for the iso and 1-1/8 for the shutter.

RedOCtobyr said:
The sample picture looks fairly normal to me. That is, it looks like ones I've taken on my G4. I believe the effect you're seeing is partially noise-reduction done by the camera processing, but I'm not 100% sure. A high ISO value will also contribute.
Now I'm wondering if maybe I misinterpreted what you meant in your original post. When you say the viewfinder is slow, do you mean just the jerky image if you move the camera around? Or that the pictures themselves come out blurry?
With only so much light available, the camera typically needs to use a longer exposure to get a bright-enough picture. A steady hand helps, as does OIS, Optical Image Stabilization. But neither of those can help if your *subject* is moving, of course.
You have 2 choices to make a moving subject sharper in low-light:
- Add more light. Use the flash if you aren't already, assuming the subject is within reach of the flash (probably around 10 feet, max). This will change the look of the picture, making it look more "harsh", but the added light should improve the image quality. With more light, the camera can use a quicker shutter speed.
- Raise the sensor's sensitivity, by using a higher ISO value. Effectively turning up the amplification, and allowing a quicker shutter speed. But as most of us have experienced, when you turn up a weak/noisy signal (car radio, etc), you observe more of the low-level background. Static, hiss, and so on. In a picture, this shows up as "noise" in the details of the image, and will typically result in pictures with more of the oil-painting look.
The lens on the G4 is f1.8, and should let in more light than the iPhone 6, at f2.2. It's certainly possible the iPhone does better noise reduction, or things along those lines. I'm not saying the G4's camera is perfect. But it shouldn't be woefully worse in low-light, anyways.
To get a comparison of how ISO affects things, try taking the same, stationary-subject picture, at maybe ISO 200, ISO 800, and ISO 2000. Then zoom in and look at the details of each picture. BTW, every camera will exhibit this behavior.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"do you mean just the jerky image if you move the camera around? "
Yup. I hate the jerkiness but I guess there's no way to work around that other than decreasing shutter speed and increasing ISO which results in super grainy pics.
I will try the flash light and see if its any better. Usually, I dislike using flash in normally lit indoor places. It doesn't feel natural.
iiEatTurdz said:
it has nothing to do with the cache and stuff lol they sound stupid. just play with the settings. i typically use my outdoor iso from 100-500 depending on what kind of lighting or colors are present. for indoors i set it 500+. just don't go within the thousands if there's no vivid colors or bright lights. try like 500-800 for the iso and 1-1/8 for the shutter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, it has nothing to do with the cache. I will try those settings. Thanks!

..

Just run into this older post.
My two cents: to avoid high iso muddiness in indoor lower light portraits, you should turn on the flash (or better, use an external led panel to create off camera light)
Indeed flash photos are unappealing, but you can improve them with Snapseed's selective editing, by lowering exposure and warming temperature on your subject faces.
You could also selectively increase exposure on one side to create a less flat picture.

mufaa said:
Hey guys,
I am having trouble taking good pictures with indoor lighting. The first problem is that the viewfinder (or the image on the screen) is not very smooth. It's jittery and lags and its super annoying. How can I improve the speed of the viewfinder so I can frame shots better?
I also hear that the LG has fantastic low light capability. However, with indoor lighting (fluorescent bulbs) I find the images have a lot of noise and the details appear very muddy and very oil painting-ish.
I don't have any problems during sunlight but indoors, the G4's camera is a mess. It's slow, jiterry and all round annoying to use. Any help would be appreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am a photographer and am trying to change over to the new mobile camera trend that started years ago but I do know that with LG, since my friend has one, doesn't have a good sense of lighting, period. I am not trying to put down your device, I do not think you need a new one. A good artist can make art from anything and everything to their best of the ability with what they have. I think you should start trying to do things like opening blinds to a window, putting white sheets of paper around or maybe some gray or black sheets of paper to balance your lighting. Is it at all possible for you to share a visual load of what you're doing with the community? I think it would be valuable to have multiple sets of eyes and have many different minds working with you to solve your problem.

Nexus 5X poor video stabilization. Something we have to live with? Can it be fixed?

Hello,
Im looking to upgrade my Nexus 5 and ive been going through lots and lots of reviews, videos, pictures of many of the new phones out right now. Z5, S6, Nexus 5X.
I really like the Nexus 5X despite some of it shortcomings but one thing i REALLY have a hard time accepting is how shaky the picture is when recording video compared to iphone 6s, Sony Z5 and others.
Here is a video showing it against the Moto X pure:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_zth08zFLw
The Nexus 5x i horrible Is that something we will just have to accept because it lacks OIS or is it possible to fix software wise in a camera update or using a 3rd party camera app. I must say that in its current form its unusable.
Regards
Jacob

indeed it is shaky...
haven't tried it but this one has video stabilization - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.sourceforge.opencamera

Maybe someone with a nexus 5x could try opencamera to record a video and post the result?

Yeah I was hoping 1080p would at least get decent software stability. It has enough pixels for it. ?
Sent from my Sprint Galaxy S5.

Does anyone know? Anyone tried opencamera?

Just my $.02. It was my understanding from the Launch event that it doesn't have image stabilization. Something about how it didn't need it with the upgraded light gathering capability of the camera.

The Moto X pure doesn't have OIS either, it's done in software

I'll just splurge for a gimbal. LOL
Sent from my Sprint Galaxy S5.

gomylle said:
Does anyone know? Anyone tried opencamera?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just tried it and it seems decent. Good thing is that OpenCamera properly implements the sensor orientation detection, so the preview and resulting files are correct. It has experimental support for Camera 2 API, which needs to be enabled in order to expose the EIS setting.
At high resolution (4k), there's significant lag that's recorded in the videos with the EIS enabled. Google did say the 808 couldn't handle it; maybe they weren't just blowing smoke?
At 1080p, it seems to help reduce the shakiness by a fair amount; it's no OIS replacement for sure, but I'd say better than not having anything.

Funny how google said larger pixels negated the need for OIS. Did anyone really believe them? Did HTC not try the super mega sized pixels before?

Evo_Shift said:
Funny how google said larger pixels negated the need for OIS. Did anyone really believe them? Did HTC not try the super mega sized pixels before?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From pics I saw it does fine without OIS. But videos would have benefited. And yes they coined it as "ultra-pixels".
Sent from my Sprint Galaxy S5.

Look at this. Amazing:
http://www.frequency.com/video/nexus-5x-stabilized-4k-footage-using/244831773?cid=5-9852

Hi
Evo_Shift said:
Funny how google said larger pixels negated the need for OIS. Did anyone really believe them? Did HTC not try the super mega sized pixels before?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OIS is only really of benefit for photos at shutter speeds less than 1/60th second, unless you have a zoom lens, where it is helpful at higher shutter speeds, as the more you are zoomed, the more amplified any body shake is. For smartphones with their wide angle view, camera shake is not too much of a problem for most typical situations, and any daytime scene OIS is completely pointless as the shutter speed is plenty high enough to freeze out any camera shake. The larger pixels help as the ISO can be higher without too much noise meaning a faster shutter speed can be used.
For video the situation is different as images are taken over time, so it's the movement in camera position between each picture that needs to smoothed, although the fashion these days on most documentaries and TV shows is to deliberately shake the camera around until it's a nauseating mess with whip zooms into the mix Still it's a good indicator I find for knowing the program is trash and not worth watching :victory:
OIS in smart phones helps a little with video, but the tiny lens optics and limited movement means they don't do nearly as well as a dedicated camcorder with OIS, which gives some amazing results. The link to the stablised 5X video is using a $300 device, so if anyone is that serious about their smart phone video, then for that money we might as well take a much bigger step in image quality and convenience and features and get a dedicated camcorder.
The elephant in the room with the Nexus 6P is EIS, this is the poor mans image stabilizer, yes it does help stabilize the video to a certain degree, but to do this it has to crop the image. It appears to be doing this the cheap way in software (hence needing the powerful chip), taking a 1080P video, then zooming into so it can have a window of view to pan around in, this means the resulting video has less resolution, see the clips here https://youtu.be/HV4rcFuUlUc?t=246 and compare the detail between the two, there is a drop in resolution on the 6P. Better EIS systems capture a larger image at the sensor, then would track and pan a 1920x1080 window across it so no resolution drop, but that requires more low level work with the camera hardware and dedicated chips to do a good job.
Record a 1080P video with the 5X, upload to YouTube and get it to apply stabilization and it will do the same thing, may even turn out better than the 6P EIS as it doesn't need to be done in real time so a bit more care can be taken.
Will the 6P stabilize 4K video? I somehow doubt it has the power to do that, so for 4K it's an even playing field between the two.
Regards
Phil

PhilipL said:
Hi
Record a 1080P video with the 5X, upload to YouTube and get it to apply stabilization and it will do the same thing, may even turn out better than the 6P EIS as it doesn't need to be done in real time so a bit more care can be taken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, aren't those phones using the much higher resolution of the sensor (at least about 4k) to stabilize the video by changing the captured frame on the sensor corresponding to the phones movement? At least i thought that's the reasoning why this works only up to 1080p (which would be preserved, in that case).

I think this could be quite useful for the next Nexus http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/09/imint-wants-to-bring-real-time-video-stabilization-to-android/

General Initial Video results - Needs tweaking

Note this isn't a bash the pixel 6 or google post. It's just my initial impressions with only a couple of shortish video samples.
I took the P6P out yesterday and put it in a mount next to a GP9. I went out to the trail and recorded sections of footage with runs and walk sections.
It was full sun for the most part, no clouds to speak of, at 1:00 p.m. (ish).
The results were... lets say interesting. I can't share the footage unfortunately, it was BF and gorgeous weather here so no one was working or in school and there were families all over the place and I don't post videos with minors in them. I'll have to go back out on Monday during the day when there won't be any one around.
Pixel 6 Pro settings - 4k/30 Active mode stabilization, exposure and color set to auto adjust (defaults)
GoPro 9 - 4k/30, flat color profile, white balance 5000, ISO 100/1600, Sharpness Low, Shutter speed Auto, bitrate High (100mbps), EV -0.5, Hypersmooth Boost+Horizon Lock.
Both were left to record out to HEVC format.
The GP9 settings are my default trail running settings. For me 1gb of space was used on the P6P in roughly 7:30 so to make for easy comparisons I checked the same 7.5 minutes storage burn rate on the GP9.
7.5 minutes of 4k30 on the P6P consumed 1.07gb of space.
7.5 minutes of 4K30 on the GP9 consumed 5.50gb of space.
That puts the P6P with an effective about 20mbps bitrate, at least for this one sample.
Pulling the footage into DaVinci the Pixel footage and putting them side by side, initial impressions -
P6P was obviously sharper since the AI is doing that on the fly. I'd like to see an option to turn this off as I prefer to handle it myself in post but I find it acceptable. Adding 0.44 sharpness in DaVinci to the GP9 brought the two by eye pretty close.
The color space between the two was visibly reasonably close to each other which I liked. In at least this footage there's room to color grade the P6P footage, it's not blown out or over saturated like I get with the GP's native color profile. I could probably use the same grading on both footages with only minor tweaks to merge them somewhat transparently in the same comp.
I noticed a bit of exposure and color wobble at times on the P6P footage. I think auto exposure and color needs to be turned off on the P6P if you're at all going to do any color grading or post work on the footage.
The lens flares on the P6P were noticeably worse than the GP9.
A major complaint I have right now is the P6P footage seems like it would just randomly pick something to focus on and shift the video off to the side. There are a couple of spots it was like I had the two devices on different mounts and was pointing the P6P off to the side of the trail. It was bad enough at first I thought, "did the phone mount loosen up on me and I didn't notice it?" But then it would correct itself and 'aim forward' again.
There were also what I can only assume are frame drops or weird focus choices as there are a few places that look like jump cuts were done on the P6P footage or the AI jumped around the sensor to focus on something else.
There's also signs of the jello'ing in the P6P from time to time.
Overall, without updates/tweaks or opening up some values for user control, I don't think the P6P is going to become my primary recording device on ultra runs unfortunately. Which is a shame as that's why I bought the 512.
For less motion heavy recording like walking/running on technical trail this may not be an issue.
I'll have to see if there are alternate camera apps or putting the P6P on a gimbal and turning stabilization on the phone off. If DJI would ever get the OM5 working 100% with newer androids (P4 is the last official supported Pixel) then that might make for a solid combination. Or wait for updates.
And there's also the incredibly annoying issue of "No you can't turn off the screen while recording because perverts." problem with mobile devices which also adds to the power burn problem. There needs to be some quick way to drop the screen brightness down to 0 while recording IMO.
Other points, 4K/30 video burns through the power as well, more than I like. I started around 68%, finished with 34% but to be fair while I only recorded about 12-15 minutes total footage, I took a crap ton of pictures out on the trails so I don't have a solid idea yet of exactly how bad the burn is going to be. Nor what the impact of setting the display to it's lowest possible brightness will do to help with that.
Also to be fair my Garmin live track was running for the entire 3 hours of the run and there was crappy cell service in that area. But that's the normal for what I wanted to use it for.
Once I have footage I'm okay with posting publicly I'll throw up a side by side view in case someone finds it interesting or helpful.

I don't usually take video, but on a couple of occasions I tried to, it was unusable. Granted, I tried to zoom in at 4x on both tries, and the results were so pixelated and overprocessed, that the footage was unwatchable on anything larger than a phone.

Thats because Google stupidly don't use the 4x telephoto on video. It's a crop.
MacGuy2006 said:
I don't usually take video, but on a couple of occasions I tried to, it was unusable. Granted, I tried to zoom in at 4x on both tries, and the results were so pixelated and overprocessed, that the footage was unwatchable on anything larger than a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

MacGuy2006 said:
I don't usually take video, but on a couple of occasions I tried to, it was unusable. Granted, I tried to zoom in at 4x on both tries, and the results were so pixelated and overprocessed, that the footage was unwatchable on anything larger than a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
86rickard said:
Thats because Google stupidly don't use the 4x telephoto on video. It's a crop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's where your wrong
It uses the telephoto but only if your using 4K30fps
@Ultimoose the P6P uses 43mbs for 4k30 and 62/63mbs for 4K60
Already tested it before and checked mediainfo for bitrates

Quick question from a noobie: why not using 4k/60fps but only 4k/30fps?

I think comparing GoPro 9 video results to a smartphone video results is setting the P6P up for failure.
The GoProv9 (I have the Hero * Black) is solely built to be an active sport recoding device, nothing else.
The P6P is a smartphone that offers the ability to capture video, which I'm pretty sure wasn't designed around mountain biking, trail running, or active outdoor sporting.
Even if the comparison was sitting at a table filled with friends using these two devices; one is specifically designed to capture video, and one has a video capturing feature.

Az Biker said:
I think comparing GoPro 9 video results to a smartphone video results is setting the P6P up for failure.
The GoProv9 (I have the Hero * Black) is solely built to be an active sport recoding device, nothing else.
The P6P is a smartphone that offers the ability to capture video, which I'm pretty sure wasn't designed around mountain biking, trail running, or active outdoor sporting.
Even if the comparison was sitting at a table filled with friends using these two devices; one is specifically designed to capture video, and one has a video capturing feature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just tried shooting a horse show on video. Experimenting with different settings. Didn't turn out that great. Lol. I told girlfriend I need pro equipment

Utini said:
Quick question from a noobie: why not using 4k/60fps but only 4k/30fps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the 4X telephoto zoom works only with 4K30 but it works very wel
though honestly could be a software limitation
Some nice zoom today in the cold (looks better in 4k once processing finishes)

Golf c said:
I just tried shooting a horse show on video. Experimenting with different settings. Didn't turn out that great. Lol. I told girlfriend I need pro equipment
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm a pretty aggressive mountain biker and the GoPro hero 8 black is amazing at video stabilization.
Biggest issue with the GoPro imho is the inaccurate depth perception. Not sure if you meant video horse shows while on a horse or on a static mount.

Az Biker said:
I'm a pretty aggressive mountain biker and the GoPro hero 8 black is amazing at video stabilization.
Biggest issue with the GoPro imho is the inaccurate depth perception. Not sure if you meant video horse shows while on a horse or on a static mount.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was sitting in chair watching. No mount. Auto focus and the horse's motion were glitchy. Still learning those video settings. I had people's heads in front of me and horses in background. The focus on people's heads were perfect. Lol. Maybe turn off auto focus and do manual?

Golf c said:
I was sitting in chair watching. No mount. Auto focus and the horse's motion were glitchy. Still learning those video settings. I had people's heads in front of me and horses in background. The focus on people's heads were perfect. Lol. Maybe turn off auto focus and do manual?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if you look in bottom right corner and select the hand there are 4 different stabilisation options
(some affect resolution)

Izy said:
if you look in bottom right corner and select the hand there are 4 different stabilisation options
(some affect resolution)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried them all. Experimenting. I shot a bunch of stuff. Have to go through it and see what is what.

Found the issue with only seeing 20mbps bit rate. With Active mode stabilization you lose the ability to shoot in 4k/30, it drops to 1080P/30 (technically 28.7 and 28.6 in two different clips so it's not quite the normal). This is a personally painful limitation for me.
So if you want active motion video you either settle for 1080P, less stabilization or use a gimbal as of right now. Except DJI doesn't fully support the P6P / Android 12. Just mostly works.
Side note, the DJI Fly app doesn't work at all on the P6 (or android 12 to be fair). DJI's current official recommendation is to find a phone that their app works on.
The joys of early adopter.

Utini said:
Quick question from a noobie: why not using 4k/60fps but only 4k/30fps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the recording device. On a GoPro 4k/60 and 4k/30 both use 100mbps (with high bitrate selected) to record the video/audio. In order to fit 60 frames per second into the same storage space as 30frames per second the GP uses higher compression which results in lower amount of data per frame. i.e. 4k/60 is lower visual quality than 4k/30. And 4k/24 would be slightly higher quality than 4k/30 but the Pixel doesn't record in 24.
I only use 4k/60 for clips I specifically intend to slow down in post personally.

I captured some more footage and rendering it out now. I'm going to have to say the Pixel 6 suffers in comparison at 1080/30 with Active stabilization. To anything that records video in some respects, not just against a GoPro.
For example: There are frequent freezes where the Pixel's video records the same frame over several frames, I've counted as high as 10 frames of a static image being recorded. This results in what looks like a jump cut transition when it catches back up. This happened several times in the first few minutes of the recording and the outside temp was around 45F which should rule out an overheating issue. Notably the phone recorded the entire 32 ish minute run without shutting down.
The focal point (not focus) drifts pretty badly as well at times. There are spots where it literally looks like the pixel is aimed off the side of the trail while the GP is aimed straight forward with both on the same mount. The camera appears to be shifting which portion of the sensor it's recording from not in a good way. I'm familiar with active stabilization artifacting from this kind of movement, I've owned or own every GP except the 1 so I've seen how EIS has grown and matured over time but the P6's drift and yo yo'ing is not pretty at times.
The jello effect is also noticeable as is the exposure shift although not OMG this sucks kind of way, it's more a ugh, that's ugly kind of way.
The above may be issues with the Active mode stabilization. I wasn't expecting it to be this janky or I'd of recorded other segments with EIS set to 'light' and 'cinematic'. The 'locked' mode which I assume means no stabilization would only be of any use mounted to a stationary tripod or possibly a gimbal.
Once the render finishes, uploads and the full resolution is available I'll post a link. It'll be a few hours at best as YT takes forever to provide the 4k format for me.

Side note, the Active stabilization when it's working seems solid, I'll need to see the rendered side by side but in my editor it's making a solid showing going up against the GP9's Linear+HL+Boost combo.

Nice...very curious to see your results. And thanks for explaining all this!