Develop Bugs

[Q] Is the poor video framerate gonna get corrected in future?

Hi everyone.
HTC Desire is being found in my country better than other android phones, but I have a serious problem with its bad video recording framerate (15). I tried to download a video sample, and it was really bad as I thought (no offense to the fans ).
My phone's video recording ability is important for me, so please don't give answers like: this is a phone, go get a camcorder, ...
Some people say that it will have HD 720P support in future firmware updates, but I wanna know is there a plan to improve the framerate as well?
Thanks.

As the phone records direct to the SD card I would suggest trying a faster class of card and see if that affects things at all.
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

mahi58 said:
Hi everyone.
HTC Desire is being found in my country better than other android phones, but I have a serious problem with its bad video recording framerate (15). I tried to download a video sample, and it was really bad as I thought (no offense to the fans ).
My phone's video recording ability is important for me, so please don't give answers like: this is a phone, go get a camcorder, ...
Some people say that it will have HD 720P support in future firmware updates, but I wanna know is there a plan to improve the framerate as well?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the desire already has 720p recording, but keep in mind its limited by its hardware, 1 ghz isnt alot to encode HD and i know the iphone has better HD recording but i think that has somthing to do with its improved gpu, recording at lower resolution is flawless so why not do that?

Galaxy S and iPhone 4 are the first phones that are likely to have the processing power to record 720p with decent framerates. Desire just isn't as powerful, no matter how it's optimized it won't be perfect, ever.
However, even those two phones (probably) don't benefit much in terms of real video quality by just upping the recorded resolution. Trying to fit even a BAD 720p-capable sensor in a phone form factor isn't going to be a reality for a couple years or so, I'd estimate. Right now you get lots of extra pixels but the picture doesn't actually look any better since the sensor is too small to properly capture such high resolution.
It's something like the "megapixel war" that went on (and continues to some extent) between the major camera vendors. There's not more space to use a better sensor, they just make the sensor try to interpret the light better. Now it's phone vendors claiming they can do 720p when in reality the sensors they're using are probably capable of "real" 480i resolution at best.
But you can see the result... take two shots on the phone of your choice, one at 3mp or so and one at the maximum, then try blowing up the 3mp one to the 10mp one's dimensions and compare them side by side. The resized one looks a bit blurry? Now apply a good professional sharpening filter such as Neat Image. Voila, they're all but identical, just one has lots more garbage data in the form of grain where there was none in real life. The sensor is so tiny there's literally just not enough photons hitting it to do anything but interpolate most of the data, even in daytime outdoors.
I know you said you don't want me to say "just buy a camcorder", but honestly that's the only solution if you want an actual image quality difference. An honest camcorder can give you a million times the feature set and record decent audio too.
Maybe check out the Canon HF100... I think that's what it's called. I have the previous year's model and it's outstanding value. Record true 1080p @ 30fps, and it's so clear you can capture individual frames from it and it looks better than any cameraphone. Takes competent stills too, and I think the most recent model has 20x optical zoom. It's like... 25% larger than an empty toilet paper roll and a little more squarish.

So do you recommend setting to 480?

Thank you guys.
I bought a Google-HTC nexus one today D). I had to buy a used cell phone because of the android phone shortage in my country, and I had to buy it today, so I wasn't able to read any of your posts; but some interesting comments have been posted:
AndroHero
You mean there is a video recording mode for desire, which records in lower resolution, but gives better framerates?
If so, desire would have been a flawless choice for me! Why isn't this mentioned anywhere?
nawoa
Very interesting ideas, thank you.
I have noticed the difference between true 720P videos and the "claimed" ones which are being recorded by cell phones, and, frankly, the difference is obvious.
But still, if you watch the video samples from desire and some competitors (from GSMArena or somewhere), you will confirm that there's a huge difference, which is not being caused by the low resolution, but by the poor framerate in desire.
Desire's video sample is disappointing...
But if it's possible to record in lower resolution and better framerate, then desire would have been a better choice than a second hand nexus one.

Hardware not capable? 1Ghz not fast enough?
Nexus one 720p @27fps!!!
Edit:Video

nawoa said:
Galaxy S and iPhone 4 are the first phones that are likely to have the processing power to record 720p with decent framerates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IPhone uses its GPU, that's why it performs so well. Guess it's a driver issue. If the desire were to utilize the GPU, the results would be far better.

iPhone and Galaxy S share the same CPU/GPU chip, and as you say, yes it probably leverages the GPU to help encode the data more efficiently. Even if not, it's a more efficient chip which doesn't just mean it's smaller and uses less battery, but it's actually more powerful despite running at the same clock speed.
For example, I had an experience when I was upgrading my computer last year, going from a 65nm CPU to a 45nm CPU with identical architecture, cache, etc. Running at the same clock speed I get ~20% or more of a performance boost just due to the better efficiency.
I can't say how well that carries over to this situation since I'm sure there are more improvements in the transition from "snapdragon" to "hummingbird" than just the newer manufacturing process and more powerful GPU, but you can be sure the CPU gains a significant speed advantage from the lower node even before whatever other enhancements have been made.
"Hardware not capable? 1Ghz not fast enough?
Nexus one 720p @27fps!!!"
I'm not even going to look. 27 FPS isn't any kind of standard and if indeed that framerate is being achieved it's because there is extremely good lighting. Please introduce me to the world you live in where everyone and everything is always in ideal studio lighting... Aside from that I know without clicking the link that it will be terrible-looking.
"But if it's possible to record in lower resolution and better framerate, then desire would have been a better choice than a second hand nexus one."
I don't mean to belittle you but doesn't it go without saying that there is a lower-resolution video mode available when 720p is only just being unlocked in the most recent firmware? Whatever the case, N1 and Desire have identical hardware, if anything you might have a screen you like better than if you bought a Desire today.
Anyway, yes in my opinion you'd normally want to record at a lower resolution. I haven't done a thorough quality comparison but I'd guess you're not going to get much benefit from going above 320x240 for video. The truth is harsh, isn't it? Probably no harm in using the highest image size but it's not going to deliver miracles, especially considering the shutter lag and lack of any kind of image stabilization system.
But on the upside, your videos will have a smaller filesize, the framerate will stay consistent (at least if there is adequate lighting), and as I said earlier there is absolutely no real-world quality difference except that you'll get less battery usage and video noise when recording and playing back lower-resolution video.
Keep in mind, I bought a Desire and I love it. I even think the camera and video is fine. Just keep your expectations reasonable and realize that you need an actual camera to take good pictures/video. It's for Youtube, Facebook, and that kind of thing, not wedding photos.
Canon HF100 (IIRC) is a solid prosumer choice, or if you want something more compact but still versatile you might look at the Sony DSC-TX5, which is very durable and even waterproof to boot. It was just replaced with a newer (but not significantly different) version, so you can get it pretty cheap too. It offers quite good still and video quality (REAL 720p) considering it's like 15mm thick and even has some voodoo real 5x optical zoom system despite not having a moving lens on the front.

This thread's piqued my curiosity a bit, I'm going to try to do a semi-scientific study to determine what the best settings are for the camera.
I can't say exactly how you'll have to configure your new N1 since I'm using the Sense camera app, but you can probably still have an improvement by trying to modify settings in a similar way.
This is very preliminary and I don't have daylight to work with, I'll get into it more tomorrow, but so far:
Contrast is best at its default setting, 0. I'd prefer a -0.5 but no such option exists.
Saturation should be reduced to -1, this will help lessen the strength of noise and also gives somewhat more realistic color.
Sharpness should be reduced to -1, this again will help reduce noise and eliminates the majority of the sharpening artifacts. Going down to -2 helps a bit more but the loss of detail probably isn't worth it.
Brightness should be left at 0, it operates in mysterious ways and doesn't seem to be very helpful regardless of how it's set.
The ideal video capture resolution is 640x480. 320x240 doesn't appear to bring a framerate improvement so there's not really much sense unless you're limited by storage. All capture sizes besides 320x240 and 640x480 operate by simply cropping the image and offer no positive effects that I can see. 720p may add a superficial amount of detail but at the cost of an unsteady framerate and much greater encoding/decoding load (1280x720 vs 640x480, or 921,600 pixels per frame vs 307,200).
Similarly, taking widescreen stills simply crops the top and bottom and results in no quality difference to the part of the full frame that's actually recorded. You're probably best off recording in the sensor's native 4:3 aspect ratio and then cropping them to your taste on your home computer.
The ideal video capture codec is MPEG4 - H.264 offers a nice reduction in filesize but uses too low of a bitrate, resulting in worse quality during fast movement. It is also more work to encode and decode, hurting your battery life.
Obviously don't use zoom for any reason since it's just cropping and resizing with speed as the only consideration. You'll get much better results doing the same thing on your home computer.
Due to the low sensor quality, there's not a whole lot of difference between 5 and 3 megapixel shots, but there's no harm in going with 5mp. The biggest difference is the filesize. Taking a picture of the same subject, my 5mp shots ranged from 2.96mb to 2.38mb, while the 3mp ones were 1.22mb to 0.76mb.
I'd like to revise my earlier statement that the processor isn't capable of encoding 720p30 in realtime. It's now my opinion that the problem is just the camera firmware trying to make sense of the idea that you're asking it to pull usable pixel data for a 1280x720 frame, 30 times a second, from such a tiny sensor. To compensate for the lack of light information, it's forced to reduce the framerate or else the image will turn into a mess of noise. It's probably being a bit too conservative, but not by a lot. The fault lies with the sensor, not the CPU... I think.
Finally, *something* I did seemed to significantly reduce the framerate, or rather, the quality of recording high-motion video. This might be something peculiar to the rom I'm running, or it could be completely in my head, but I think I changed something when I was messing with the various settings and it had a noticeable negative effect.
It's late here now so I'll pick up in the morning but my current wild guesses are:
-Capturing full-frame is more difficult than capturing cropped widescreen, or vice-versa?
-Face detection processing adds too much latency to the recording?
-Flicker reduction should be taken off auto for best performance?
-Custom filtering settings (brightness/sharpness, etc) slow recording down?
-How the camera was focused reduced/increased the encoding difficulty?
-Sharpness settings increased/decreased the amount of frame data needing to be encoded?
-...Or I screwed something up in SetCPU? No... I don't... think so... but it's pretty late. Hmm...
I'll pick up tomorrow. Someone's probably already figured out the perfect settings but I'm pro at being redundant.

The 480p is flawless?
Come on ... It is OK-ish, but not flawless. Especially indoor, even with good lighting still mediocre.
Multimedia is one of the weakest in Android, hopefully Gingerbread will correct this.
AndroHero said:
the desire already has 720p recording, but keep in mind its limited by its hardware, 1 ghz isnt alot to encode HD and i know the iphone has better HD recording but i think that has somthing to do with its improved gpu, recording at lower resolution is flawless so why not do that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

You could try switching to 800 ISO in settings camera mode, then switch back to camcorder mode. I noticed a considerable fps boost even in low light conditions.

I don't mean to belittle you but doesn't it go without saying that there is a lower-resolution video mode available when 720p is only just being unlocked in the most recent firmware? Whatever the case, N1 and Desire have identical hardware, if anything you might have a screen you like better than if you bought a Desire today.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before buying nexus one, I checked out desire's specifications in its GSMArena's page, and it said:
Video: Yes, WVGA (800x480 pixels) @ 15fps
So I thought its the only video recording mode that the phone has (I'm not experienced with modern phones). I wasn't expecting a cell phone to have different video capture modes like a digicam/camcorder.
Then, I downloaded a video sample that was being recorded in daylight, but was really disappointing, and the framerate was exactly 15.
And, in my experince, if you buy products, specially high tech products like modern phones relying on the informations that (you think) "go without saying" you're going to be serioulsly punished by your mistakes.
You can only rely on facts...
By the way, thanks for the experiments.

There is some work done in the developement section to optimize HTC camera 720p framerate. A guy obtained 29fps in good lighting (not perfect) but he's still working on it. Funny part is that he blew his desire while testing it.
Check this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynB0M9NeVCE
Regarding the current state, a good sd card can help with the occasional stuttering, or if you can live with AOSP roms, you probably will get a couple fps more. Otherwise you are confined to good lighting to have something on the good side of 20fps.
some examples from my phone:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6KuPCn6_2M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugjI5ygsXzQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssFnQsdz0DE

That change the ISO on the still camera seems a good tip

Marcus2388 said:
You could try switching to 800 ISO in settings camera mode, then switch back to camcorder mode. I noticed a considerable fps boost even in low light conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, that's really good tip!

when you increase your ISO your picture quality gets poor.
it helps to make videos faster and smooth but with no quality.
Ive just ordered my new Micro Sd card class 10 card... let it come and i'll let you know if something good happens...

malikahsan said:
when you increase your ISO your picture quality gets poor.
it helps to make videos faster and smooth but with no quality.
Ive just ordered my new Micro Sd card class 10 card... let it come and i'll let you know if something good happens...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll disagree about poor quality - it just gets a little worse, even in indoor lightning, but you get an acceptable video, compared to the "very creepy slide show" in auto-ISO mode.

Besides the average framerate, which is probably more due to the lens and partially to the software, isn't the stuttering problem caused by an aggressive datarate when writing to the sd ? If you compare cyanogen 720p recording to HTC, quality isn't really different, but the data-rate codec probably is, and that's why even with a class 2 you avoid stuttering in cyanogen (OD and Defrost too).

Sorry if I up this thread, I found a micro sd card A-Data class 6 with good price, this micro SD can fix the problem recording video a 720p?
Thanks to all

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.

4K Screen Resolution - real or fake?

I’ve been struggling to get a clear answer from Sony official support team on why when I run a simple screen test by three different applications I get 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) or less on my E6883. They claim E6883 screen has 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) resolution. That’s what I though we get on Xperia Z5 Premium. 4K was one of the main reasons I bought this phone. In reality, as the actual screen resolution, I get regular HD.
Here is what they (Sony) say:
“Thank you for contacting Sony Xperia™ Online Support.
The information you requested is presented in the link Agent Argelia provided:
http://blogs.sonymobile.com/2015/10...our-4k-display-technology-questions-answered/
Now to talk a little about your question, the resolution on the screen of the Xperia Z5 premium is 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) meaning that this is what the screen is capable of presenting.
Now as explained in the link above, the full 4k resolution is only used for certain content and applications that are able to use this resolution, This means that in normal operation the phone displays content in HD1080 (Home screen, certain images, settings screens, games, screen captures and certain apps).
Now if you open and app that renders in 4k the app will make full use of the native resolution and you will be presented with full 4K images: Certain video streaming apps, YouTube, Streaming video, VR videos and full 4k videos downloaded from sites or with third party apps that are able to download full 4k video from YouTube.
I myself use a third party app called Tubemate that allows me to download 4k video and then play it with the album app in the phone. (4K videos will have a white "4k" mark in the album preview thumbnail. So far the YouTube app still does not have the capability to show 4K video) Although you can view 4k video from YouTube if you open the website in chrome and then in settings (in chrome) you can request for the Desktop version of the YouTube page. (The resolution settings will then let you choose 4k)”.
I could understand all the playback explanations. However, I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) according to the testing apps I tried. How is it possible? I start thinking real 4K resolution in terms of DISPLAYING (not recording) is a faked advertisement. I wonder if someone has come across the same issue. Would be glad to hear your thoughts!

kvasok7 said:
I’ve been struggling to get a clear answer from Sony official support team on why when I run a simple screen test by three different applications I get 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) or less on my E6883. They claim E6883 screen has 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) resolution. That’s what I though we get on Xperia Z5 Premium. 4K was one of the main reasons I bought this phone. In reality, as the actual screen resolution, I get regular HD.
Here is what they (Sony) say:
“Thank you for contacting Sony Xperia™ Online Support.
The information you requested is presented in the link Agent Argelia provided:
http://blogs.sonymobile.com/2015/10...our-4k-display-technology-questions-answered/
Now to talk a little about your question, the resolution on the screen of the Xperia Z5 premium is 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) meaning that this is what the screen is capable of presenting.
Now as explained in the link above, the full 4k resolution is only used for certain content and applications that are able to use this resolution, This means that in normal operation the phone displays content in HD1080 (Home screen, certain images, settings screens, games, screen captures and certain apps).
Now if you open and app that renders in 4k the app will make full use of the native resolution and you will be presented with full 4K images: Certain video streaming apps, YouTube, Streaming video, VR videos and full 4k videos downloaded from sites or with third party apps that are able to download full 4k video from YouTube.
I myself use a third party app called Tubemate that allows me to download 4k video and then play it with the album app in the phone. (4K videos will have a white "4k" mark in the album preview thumbnail. So far the YouTube app still does not have the capability to show 4K video) Although you can view 4k video from YouTube if you open the website in chrome and then in settings (in chrome) you can request for the Desktop version of the YouTube page. (The resolution settings will then let you choose 4k)”.
I could understand all the playback explanations. However, I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) according to the testing apps I tried. How is it possible? I start thinking real 4K resolution in terms of DISPLAYING (not recording) is a faked advertisement. I wonder if someone has come across the same issue. Would be glad to hear your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this is just like how Apple do their Retina screen. They upscale the software resolution into the real 4k hardware resolution. so yes it is a real 4k screen, but only rendered 2k most of the time. do you think it's such a waste? maybe, but i'd like to see it as a feature rather than a standard. when you have that 4k video, such feature will be usable. Same as the CPU, you only get most of the core working when you need it on gaming.

kvasok7 said:
...I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To put it bluntly, you are wrong in your assessment. It is Lollipop that can't display 4K. The Z5P can and does display 4K content within apps. I could type screeds explaining this in detail, but instead, just watch this video. The display and its 4K aspect is covered from 8 minutes and 15 seconds..

nobnut said:
To put it bluntly, you are wrong in your assessment. It is Lollipop that can't display 4K. The Z5P can and does display 4K content within apps. I could type screeds explaining this in detail, but instead, just watch this video. The display and its 4K aspect is covered from 8 minutes and 15 seconds..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great video! A very detailed breakdown! Wish I watched it earlier! TY
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk

The App "AIDA64" shows a resolution of 2160x3840 (~ 801ppi)

Black_Focus_X said:
The App "AIDA64" shows a resolution of 2160x3840 (~ 801ppi)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the Dev had to 'fix' the screen resolution properties for the Z5P in the app (check the most recent changelog). It wasn't being detected via the usual checks. This is what causes some people concern or confusion when they investigate.
If you want, I can make you an app that detects 8K, or 16K, or "insert your desired resolution here" K.
All folk need to remember is that the Z5P does have a 4K resolution, regardless of what apps say

nobnut said:
But the Dev had to 'fix' the screen resolution properties for the Z5P in the app (check the most recent changelog). It wasn't being detected via the usual checks. This is what causes some people concern or confusion when they investigate.
If you want, I can make you an app that detects 8K, or 16K, or "insert your desired resolution here" K.
All folk need to remember is that the Z5P does have a 4K resolution, regardless of what apps say
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk

kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When in doubt, use microscope or something and count.
4k would be 4 times the amount of pixels compared to a 1080p screen. Dividing the pixels on Z5p with a 1080p screen should give us 4, (3840x2160)/(1920x1080)=4

kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a much better idea.
Sell your Z5P.
Or learn how to debug and see the wood for the trees.
I'm done trying to reason with you. You're irrational, facts are clearly lost on you.

nobnut said:
I have a much better idea.
Sell your Z5P.
Or learn how to debug and see the wood for the trees.
I'm done trying to reason with you. You're irrational, facts are clearly lost on you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I’ll tell you what, PAL. I got an idea too! Get off this panel with this kinda attitude and don’t come back until you learn the definition of basic “manners”. When you provided some valuable info the first time, we thanked you, which I definitely feel the opposite now.

kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It better be, otherwise how does one explain this awful battery life with over 3400mah!! Lol don't doubt it, it's working!

samsmalls said:
It better be, otherwise how does one explain this awful battery life with over 3400mah!! Lol don't doubt it, it's working!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right! I too noticed heavy battery consumption while playing 4K files. TY

kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One could do their own adb and get the readings themselves if you question someones findings. Notice no one has done their own or let alone debunk what she has said. Even MKBHD said in some apps to you see the switch happen. My guess is some apps based on resolution you will see no change at all because the content itself isn't 4K.
Here's some other evidence that the screen is 4K. There's a lot more out there a simple search could find.
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_z5_premium_4k_display_under_our_microscope-blog-13887.php
Sorry for responding to this thread but let's let it die right now. Yes it has a 4K display.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

same issue

It seems now the screenshots are in 4K Resolution

advantage of using 4K screen resolution on Note 10 plus?

Hi guys,well I want to ask you smart question and I really don't know the answer.
I got myself used Note 10 plus and because of the battery issue I switched to 1080p resolution to save some battery.
Then I opened some webpage like lets say webcam site chaturbate.
From what I know on monitors,higher resolution on monitor gives more web content on screen,so on my 1440p monitor I can see more webcam models on screen compared to 1080p monitor.
I thought then it's the same with phone screens,increasing resolution to 4K,I'll see more webcam models then 2 cams per line which was not the case,switching screen to 4K I haven't seen any difference.
So is it suppose to be like that,or I'm missunderstanding something here?
Why won't it work like on PC monitors/screen?
How can we take advantage of 4K on phones,in my case on Note 10 plus?
Does it have advantage switching to 4K when viewing websites,besides videos ofc?
Even when watching videos I doubt anyone (any human eye) will notice difference on 6.8 " screen with 1080p vs 4K on Note 10 plus.

paparazzo79 said:
Hi guys,well I want to ask you smart question and I really don't know the answer.
I got myself used Note 10 plus and because of the battery issue I switched to 1080p resolution to save some battery.
Then I opened some webpage like lets say webcam site chaturbate.
From what I know on monitors,higher resolution on monitor gives more web content on screen,so on my 1440p monitor I can see more webcam models on screen compared to 1080p monitor.
I thought then it's the same with phone screens,increasing resolution to 4K,I'll see more webcam models then 2 cams per line which was not the case,switching screen to 4K I haven't seen any difference.
So is it suppose to be like that,or I'm missunderstanding something here?
Why won't it work like on PC monitors/screen?
How can we take advantage of 4K on phones,in my case on Note 10 plus?
Does it have advantage switching to 4K when viewing websites,besides videos ofc?
Even when watching videos I doubt anyone (any human eye) will notice difference on 6.8 " screen with 1080p vs 4K on Note 10 plus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"4K" or WQHD+ on the note does not really relate to extra space on the screen like computer monitors. as the computer monitor scale back the size of the Icons and increase perceived desk space (depending on monitor size and max resolution capabilities) as the UI on smartphones must be readable the gain is barely perceivable. You can adjust the size of the icon to make it look like you gained some space but it wouldn't be accurate.
The real difference and depending on you, you may or may not perceive it, is on the pixel density.
In 1080p the Note has a certain pixel density, when you shift to "4K", you have a higher count of stacked pixel density. It looks better with some content that supports it but its sort of a cheat. The screen is not actually 4K, kind of like the 7nm vs 10 nm wafers in Intel Vs TSMC foundries. TSMC says it's 7 nanometers and intel 10, but they pack around the same transistor density, the names are mostly marketing.
You wont notice a big, if any, difference due to our own limitations (eysight), you can get a better picture of the issue looking up (Googling) "Full HD vs Quad HD" from the Oled Association.
They break it down a bit ...

Oh okay.Thank you for kind explanation.

Bomn said:
"4K" or WQHD+ on the note does not really relate to extra space on the screen like computer monitors. as the computer monitor scale back the size of the Icons and increase perceived desk space (depending on monitor size and max resolution capabilities) as the UI on smartphones must be readable the gain is barely perceivable. You can adjust the size of the icon to make it look like you gained some space but it wouldn't be accurate.
The real difference and depending on you, you may or may not perceive it, is on the pixel density.
In 1080p the Note has a certain pixel density, when you shift to "4K", you have a higher count of stacked pixel density. It looks better with some content that supports it but its sort of a cheat. The screen is not actually 4K, kind of like the 7nm vs 10 nm wafers in Intel Vs TSMC foundries. TSMC says it's 7 nanometers and intel 10, but they pack around the same transistor density, the names are mostly marketing.
You wont notice a big, if any, difference due to our own limitations (eysight), you can get a better picture of the issue looking up (Googling) "Full HD vs Quad HD" from the Oled Association.
They break it down a bit ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have 20/10 near vision and I really don't notice it. Maybe side by side...

blackhawk said:
I have 20/10 near vision and I really don't notice it. Maybe side by side...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Meh, its a color game, basicaly they put up more green leds ins ome situation which makes the colors look richer... a poor man's HDR

Bomn said:
Meh, its a color game, basicaly they put up more green leds ins ome situation which makes the colors look richer... a poor man's HDR
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't seem to use any or just slightly more battery so I guess I'll sample it a while.
Forgot about the WQHD setting.
The 10+ still has one of the best displays. Lots of issues with the high refresh rate displays it seems.

Well, I barely notice a very little difference, very little indeed, and, mostly when viewing photos or videos taken with the best resolutions, for everything else, all look just the same

winoles said:
Well, I barely notice a very little difference, very little indeed, and, mostly when viewing photos or videos taken with the best resolutions, for everything else, all look just the same
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Went back to FHD. WQHD uses more battery (probably about 1%@hr more) and didn't make a difference I noticed doing what I normally do.
It's cool that it's there like many of the other 10+ options.
I have 20/10 vision.

Question Custom Camera Mode - 6K

Question: Why can't the pixel 6 pro shoot in 5-6k? It can shoot 12.53MP and 4k is only 8.3 MP.
Thanks,

Probably due to the pixel-binning, which results in a quarter (IIRC) of the maximum resolution of the camera (~48-50 MegaPixel).

Well my question is why cant we hit 5k? 6K should be 16.6MP.. Pixel 6Pro is 12.53 so that should be a bit over 5K (5k is around 12.45MP)

Ok we talking about video capturing right?

superman25 said:
Ok we talking about video capturing right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.

The phone is theoretically capable of recording 5K. I would love to see a camera mod to do it somehow.

Doug8796 said:
The phone is theoretically capable of recording 5K. I would love to see a camera mod to do it somehow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea theoretically is capable even more sensor is not 12mpx its really 50mpx and after processing came 12mpx photos even from main camera sensor but......its about resolution/fps/ bitrate ...and all depends of cooling system and capabilities of processing of chip in phone and how wee know cooling is not what is good on pixel 6 pro

I'd love to know if any dev's could chime in.. afaik timelapse is definitely possible oat 5k.

this is likely because nearly no display that displays 5K, it doesn't make much sense to support a format that is barely used

DespairFactor said:
this is likely because nearly no display that displays 5K, it doesn't make much sense to support a format that is barely used
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'd love to get more quality out of my video. Apple makes a 5k display, and for editing purposes 5k would be nice . I like to get some shots of nature sometimes. I just wanted to know if it was possible.

Doug8796 said:
I'd love to know if any dev's could chime in.. afaik timelapse is definitely possible oat 5k.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea timelapse is definetly capable of much higher resolutions ....and its good question becouse for now we know in future will only produce 8k tvs and 4k minimum monitors .....i think phone is capable of 1080p 480p slow mo why they dont use this who knows

DespairFactor said:
this is likely because nearly no display that displays 5K, it doesn't make much sense to support a format that is barely used
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not truth pixel count and quality was always much higher then actual displays like before decade was 16 and higher pxl Fotos and no digital monitors or tvs to show....some people have same argumenst s like you ...same with 1080p when come some people still telling wee dont needed lots of people looking on videos on tvs and most of them have only Hd tv so we dont needed right now ...what? I making memories and those memories i would like to have in best possible (reasonable ) quality what i can make with good format for future .........for example imy first tv vas plasma only 720p (in real was 768p ) but doesn't matter important is i was looking on 1080p movies and making 1080p videos l... And they look much more vetter because if you're looking on content like 1080p on 720p tvs you actually getting better quality and better looking image because its working like antialiasing or super resolution on AMD cards or whatever other metod they named and this metod ....its used in videogames for years for better image quality and its much more visible on video(moving picture ) then on just stable frame but its still visible and its make sence to only some quality like its doasant make sense looking on 8k on 1080p tv but its make sense watching on 4k picture on 1440p monitor or watching 1440p video on 1080p tv .....so 5k video on even 4k tv or monitor still make sense.

superman25 said:
That's not truth pixel count and quality was always much higher then actual displays like before decade was 16 and higher pxl Fotos and no digital monitors or tvs to show....some people have same argumenst s like you ...same with 1080p when come some people still telling wee dont needed lots of people looking on videos on tvs and most of them have only Hd tv so we dont needed right now ...what? I making memories and those memories i would like to have in best possible (reasonable ) quality what i can make with good format for future .........for example imy first tv vas plasma only 720p (in real was 768p ) but doesn't matter important is i was looking on 1080p movies and making 1080p videos l... And they look much more vetter because if you're looking on content like 1080p on 720p tvs you actually getting better quality and better looking image because its working like antialiasing or super resolution on AMD cards or whatever other metod they named and this metod ....its used in videogames for years for better image quality and its much more visible on video(moving picture ) then on just stable frame but its still visible and its make sence to only some quality like its doasant make sense looking on 8k on 1080p tv but its make sense watching on 4k picture on 1440p monitor or watching 1440p video on 1080p tv .....so 5k video on even 4k tv or monitor still make sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I have been recording 4k video since Note 5 I believe.

Look up Motion Cam on GitHub. It allows you to shoot RAW files (stored in the DNG format) at the cameras full resolution.
You'll probably be limited in the frame rate and length you can record and you'll need something like Davinci Resolve, but I've messed with it and gotten good results.

asylumxl said:
Look up Motion Cam on GitHub. It allows you to shoot RAW files (stored in the DNG format) at the cameras full resolution.
You'll probably be limited in the frame rate and length you can record and you'll need something like Davinci Resolve, but I've messed with it and gotten good results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
holy thanks its worth to try .... for me video its ok for now but its really impresive how good is camrea in night mode