>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
General
> High definition mobile phone photos
Bookmark topic
HD is great, but I still haven't seen a sensor capable of producing good video at VGA resolution let alone HD. Let's get sensor quality improved before we start obsessing about a megapixel race in video.
--
Posted: 2009-09-20 12:23:40
Edit :
Quote
the n82 produced excellent vga video...
--
Posted: 2009-09-23 13:32:00
Edit :
Quote
crossmatched Posts: > 500
is the author referring to HD output of photos in an HD display such as Bravia LCD tvs?
in that case, we have those HD pics way back 2005 when k750 was released.
just stick a memory stick pro duo in a dedicated slot in a bravia.
the 2mp pics will be seen in full HD
--
Posted: 2009-09-23 14:21:52
Edit :
Quote
Well as max said, a sensor with such impressive sensitivity and framerate is the first to consider when considering HD video on a phone. also include the hardware that decodes and encodes them. Samsung's step with OmniaHD is only for the purpose of fame as digital cameras still beat it when it comes to overall quality and we have not seen any cam phones with true HD video. and the highest video resolution so far that a cam phone can achieve is 720p (1280x720) which is just 1 megapixel compared to the Full HD that some DSLRs and prosumer digicams have reached was 1080p (1920x1080) and is actually 2mp. Samsung's new 5mp sensor is a good step towards Full HD video but still we have to have a capable hardware encoding platform at least as powerful as the one used on HD video capable digicams like Canon SX1 or Sony HX1.
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 04:56:47
Edit :
Quote
While we're on about HD Video recording on phones, let me take the opportunity to remind that while we can have HD and over HD Resolution photos, there is no thing called as a HD Image. You can call an image HD just because it is over 1920×1080 if you wish to. But that resolution is "HD" for moving images, commonly known as videos.
The basic issue here is that for moving images, HD resolution is enough (in fact, very good!) because it is moving and even with the highest eye of detail, human eyes will not be able to spot discrepancies (if any). That however is not the case with still images which we can ogle at for hours. I do not know of any resolution benchmark that will be the minimum requirement for an image to be termed a HD image but if image resolution is the benchmark for an HD Image, there are some really huge images out there. Look
here
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 08:27:14
Edit :
Quote
On 2009-09-24 08:27:14, whizkidd wrote:
The basic issue here is that for moving images, HD resolution is enough (in fact, very good!) because it is moving and even with the highest eye of detail, human eyes will not be able to spot discrepancies (if any). That however is not the case with still images which we can ogle at for hours.
Tell that to those people here at Esato who insist on posting piddly 0.7MP shrunken photos from their expensive 5MP camphones and saying that full size is not needed!
(For those people, camphone development should have ended with the 1MP S700i...)
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 11:01:50
Edit :
Quote
LOL
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 11:33:02
Edit :
Quote
@Abu Basim:
Well i would love to see an S700 having 720p video recording! its still my most favorite camphone from SE. it still has the best sensitivity of all the camphones available imo.
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 12:22:51
Edit :
Quote
Anyway I think I was not thinking when I posted this thread. For some reason I kept thinking when I seen a HD still camera I thought of HD images. But realising its video. Silly me.
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 12:23:00
Edit :
Quote
Actually its not your fault, but the fault (deliberate) by the companies trying to mix things up and confuse their users.
--
Posted: 2009-09-24 12:34:05
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
