Rizole Overexposed

What about that lavender tint to the snow?
I'm assuming you mean in the middle pictue. I hammered the sauration to get a better look, the sky has too much yellow in too. Dropping the temprature bought the sky and snow back to a more natural colour.
 
Night mode looks promising. It looks like it takes several passes at the same scene and creates a composite but not in a simple layered way. The process takes several seconds and one I tried had a moving car in it. No light trails from the movement but a car in place like the exposure happened at day light exposure speeds.
The first one is lit by street lighting and looks clear enough.
IMG_20210209_180738.jpg

This one was taken at 10 at night on top of the moors with minimal light polution. You can't see it here but others I took from this location clearly showed stars in the sky. You can see electricity pylons 2 to 3 miles away.
IMG_20210209_215824.jpg

Here's Rochdale, falling away to Manchester at the back left.
IMG_20210209_221051.jpg


I used a tripod for all of these but it was -4C with gusting wind and cold, clumsy fingers. Even though the city light show signs of camera movement the foreground isn't too shabby
 
So I'm getting some nice shots with clarity and detail. Here's a few.
IMG_20210210_133711-01-01.jpeg

IMG_20210228_144454-01.jpeg

IMG_20210304_143509-01-01.jpeg


I find I'm using some zoom on most pictures. Either as a way to zoom into the action or to back off from my subject and bring the background foward. On my old phone I used zoom vary sparingly as the quality usually tanked out quite quickly but now it's mostly my go-to method.
 
I like the zoom but rarely go over the 10X optical zoom. The results start looking like I'm using my 5 year old Samsung again.
I've never taken a picture of a wild rabbit on a mobile before though. This is around 60X. Not great but you can see what it is without too much loss if information.
I've also tried getting a picture of a flying hawk but at high magnification I couldn't keep it steady enough in view for the camera to even pull focus on it.
IMG_20210228_161438-01.jpeg
 
So I'm getting some nice shots with clarity and detail. Here's a few.
View attachment 165252
View attachment 165253
View attachment 165254

I find I'm using some zoom on most pictures. Either as a way to zoom into the action or to back off from my subject and bring the background foward. On my old phone I used zoom vary sparingly as the quality usually tanked out quite quickly but now it's mostly my go-to method.
Love this one, the last image, much better (imho) than the version posted previously. I thought that one had a bit of a dodgy sky, maybe a Mobitog problem, but this is a beauty.
 
One of the things that's disappointing me a little is the poor handling of dark or difficult lighting.
View attachment 165256
The wall in this pic where direct light from the sun is causing the light distortion is just a mess.
View attachment 165257
You would need other phones on hand to compare. How would another make/model handle such conditions?
 
And there's a similar problem with both these in the dark, fine detail of the trees.
Look at the difference between the fine structure in the branches against the bright sky on the right compated with that mess sandwiched between the fake owl and roof.
IMG_20210217_150656-01.jpeg


In this one the detail is mostly good but there are patches where the branches end up smudged again.
IMG_20210213_131546-01.jpeg

IMG_20210213_131546-01.jpg


I'm thinking this is less an issue with the optics and more a computational problem where the software just shrugs and does the best it can. Not sure if I can explain why I think that's going on but there it is.
 
And there's a similar problem with both these in the dark, fine detail of the trees.
Look at the difference between the fine structure in the branches against the bright sky on the right compated with that mess sandwiched between the fake owl and roof.
View attachment 165258

In this one the detail is mostly good but there are patches where the branches end up smudged again.
View attachment 165259
View attachment 165260

I'm thinking this is less an issue with the optics and more a computational problem where the software just shrugs and does the best it can. Not sure if I can explain why I think that's going on but there it is.
Did you use zoom on all of these?
 
Do you miss Samsung's over saturation? I was looking through some old Galaxy S8 images just now and the colours really punch you in the face.
Not particularly realistic but they have a certain charm.
 
So I'm getting some nice shots with clarity and detail. Here's a few.
View attachment 165252
View attachment 165253
View attachment 165254

I find I'm using some zoom on most pictures. Either as a way to zoom into the action or to back off from my subject and bring the background foward. On my old phone I used zoom vary sparingly as the quality usually tanked out quite quickly but now it's mostly my go-to method.
British hard rock band Thunder have used this location for their new album's art work. Not yours by any chance!
For the record (ahem) I think your image is better.
 
For the record (ahem) I think your image is better.
Thank you and agreed.
They've lit the underside, flattening the shape. It's not even obvious the pipes aren't hollow in that light. They've also taken a low shot looking up giving it an odd outline and completely missing the context. There's a grand northern vista out there and you can't see it. 3/10, must try harder :p
 
Do you miss Samsung's over saturation? I was looking through some old Galaxy S8 images just now and the colours really punch you in the face.
Not particularly realistic but they have a certain charm.
I've not been taking enough pics recently to notice much.
And although I tend to push the sliders a bit further to the right than strictly necessary and end up oversaturated for preference, the better the equipment I get the more I find I'm after a natural feel to my pics.
TBH a lot of my over processing happened because the limitations of my camera led to mediocre pics and hammering one thing or another polished them up into something better than they would be otherwise. Still a fan of overprocessing but there's something to be said for a light touch too.
 
I like the zoom but rarely go over the 10X optical zoom. The results start looking like I'm using my 5 year old Samsung again.
I've never taken a picture of a wild rabbit on a mobile before though. This is around 60X. Not great but you can see what it is without too much loss if information.
I've also tried getting a picture of a flying hawk but at high magnification I couldn't keep it steady enough in view for the camera to even pull focus on it.
View attachment 165255
Wow, that is pretty good!
 
Back
Top Bottom