The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
04-04-2014 07:06 PM
158 12345 ...
tools
  1. JustToClarify's Avatar
    It is so, just a few old timers refuse to believe it.
    well, maybe we'd rather believe our own eyes :)

    The only caveat to my comments is "no tripod, no SteadyCam, no artificial support, just good old handholding".
    what's "artificial" support? do you consider it artificial if I rest the phone with the hand against my other arm or chest(self-timer is a very handy thing)?

    No, the 1020's real BIG advantage in macro lies in the minimum focusing distance. You can get MUCH closer to the subject with the 1020, whereas the distance for 808 is much further away. So you need to rely less on digital zooming with the 1020.
    I don't think the difference is that big as you state, bigger advantage for 1020 is manual focus

    Interesting discussion. I saw a review on YouTube comparing the 808 VS the 1020 and my conclusion of that one was that no matter the lighting, both cameras have different strengths and that they both are great. Sometimes the shots made by the 808 got lightning and sharpness wrong, and so did the 1020 with color being a problem. But overall the 1020 performed better. When the 1020 got the picture right it kicked the 808 in the scrotum.
    But also the picture quality comes down to taste. So I see the 808 and 1020 as different cameras with different strength with the 1020 winning in the long run, mostly due to it being newer and today more developed technology. Just the nature of things I guess.
    (almost)all those Internet reviews are done in auto-mode, difference between auto and manual on 808 are literally night and day, especially at night

    also, newer doesn't have to be better, especially if it's physically limited by sheer size

    This is mostly due to 1020 prioritizing sharpness over noise reduction in their downsampling algorithm. Damian has indicated that if you run the 1020's image through post-processing, the result will be very similar to that of the 808's. From the looks of it, the difference is more software than hardware.

    I'm sure Nokia engineers are plenty clever. After all, your beloved 808 was their brainchild. As for OIS, I disagree with you. It is an extremely useful feature for lowlights. As I mentioned earlier, I do not carry a tripod everywhere I go. Even if I brought my DSLR, I would still leave the tripod behind. What you're saying is, leave the DSLR at home but bring along the tripod instead? Doesn't make sense. If the new OIS technology can replace the tripod and make your life easier, why not? If you carry a bunch of stuff with you everytime you go photographing, why bother with phone-cams? You're better off bringing your entire DSLR rig with you since you obviously don't mind the inconvenience.
    1. oversharpening is there more because of nature of BSI sensor not because of software...pictures look oversharpened even in full res mode

    2. stabilising DSLR is tricky as they often weigh more than 1 kilo, stabilising ~170g phone is very easy even without tripod, believe me...there are 1/100 situations where I can't stabilise my phone

    I also want to add this. Before I bought the 1020, I was using my 808 to shoot a concert. I was sitting somewhere at the back of the concert, and used maximum zoom for video recording. I think I was using 360p and 10x zoom or something. Oh yes, the video was shaking like CRAZY. That's when I wished I was recording on the 920, but then the 920 didn't have good zooming capability.
    then again you can stabilise the video on your PC, I know it can be tiresome if you record important videos with zoom every day but then you probably already use a professional camera :)

    I'm sorry to be the bearer of sad news, my friend, but I'm afraid you've been duped. Any decent quality image resize algorithm does resampling, aka oversampling. Despite Nokia's marketing efforts and whitepapers, they don't actually have any special algorithm that outperforms a standard image resize algorithm. Don't just take my word for it though. It's very easy to prove to yourself. Simply take one of the real full-res images (~38MP), resize it down yourself using software such as Photoshop, Paint.NET, or IrfanView to the same size as the phone's "special" image (5MP or 8MP), and compare the two low-res images at 1:1 zoom level or greater. The results speak for themselves.

    I've demonstrated in another thread here what the 1020's resize from 38MP to 5MP does exactly, and showed here how IrfanView is able to produce a resized image that is just as sharp as the phone's 5MP version but actually has slightly higher quality due to less severe artifacting.

    If you look closely at what Nokia has said, they don't actually claim to have anything beyond the benefits afforded by high resolution. They originally wanted optical zoom, but they gave up on that because they thought going with high resolution was a better tradeoff when all factors were considered. The truth is that the high resolution alone is what makes it possible to resize images down and get better quality at lower resolution. Part of that is related to the Nyquist theorem, and part of it is related to compensating for shoddy sensors that do chroma subsampling (what they call "conventional 8MPix sensors" in the quote above).

    This is nothing against Nokia. They've done a good job with the 808 and 1020. I just think it's unfortunate when marketing gets in the way of understanding reality, especially in cases when that understanding could aid in making properly informed decisions.
    huh, there is a difference between oversampling straight from the sensor and oversampling from file, one clear example is 808&1020, full res 1020 photos show almost the same amount of grain as oversampled...
    10-09-2013 05:56 PM
  2. Tech friend's Avatar
    Here, and make sure to click on it for full resolution.

    http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam...43DrX30k_n.jpg
    Brilliant shot. Clearly demonstrating the 808's superiority.

    Also your photos presented here are absolutely stunning, especially this one impresses me.

    Very well done.
    10-09-2013 07:29 PM
  3. vlad0's Avatar
    Brilliant shot. Clearly demonstrating the 808's superiority.

    Also your photos presented here are absolutely stunning, especially this one impresses me.

    Very well done.
    Thank you, but they are not mine :) They belong to this guy: Flickr: 9 Destiny's Photostream

    The ones from post number 49 are mine, and this is my account Flickr:

    :)
    10-09-2013 08:36 PM
  4. Tech friend's Avatar
    Thank you, but they are not mine :) They belong to this guy: Flickr: 9 Destiny's Photostream

    The ones from post number 49 are mine, and this is my account Flickr:
    For the former photos the credit then goes to Kamil (mobile shooter/9 Destiny), but your set of photographies is every bit as marvellous as his one, regarding both the photo motives and the technical side. My two favorites from your post 49 are


    I still hope that Nokia will realize that there is a great and growing demand for being able to take photos with the 1020 in that 'pure' 808-style.
    10-09-2013 09:48 PM
  5. vlad0's Avatar
    ^ thanks! Very kind..

    Can someone please try the 1020 a longer exposure @ 100iso ? Any dark scene should do..

    I decided to try a long exposure so I put the 808 on a table while waiting for my friend to get some food..

    2.4 seconds @ 50iso


    100%
    10-09-2013 11:25 PM
  6. tgr42's Avatar
    huh, there is a difference between oversampling straight from the sensor and oversampling from file, one clear example is 808&1020, full res 1020 photos show almost the same amount of grain as oversampled...
    Ok, and the difference is...?? If there was a benefit, it would be visible in the results. It is not. The reason you can still see grain in the 1020's 5MP images is because they are oversharpened during the phone's resize process. This is not a desirable thing.

    I'll back up my claims with evidence. Attached, find some images that demonstrate very clearly what I'm talking about using a photo I took with my 1020:

    1) 5MP.jpg: Cropped from the phone's 5MP image
    2) 5MP-irf.jpg: Resized from the phone's 38MP image to 5MP using IrfanView with "Apply sharpen after Resample", then cropped
    3) 5MP-pdn.jpg: Resized from the phone's 38MP image to 5MP using Paint.NET, then cropped
    4) 38MP.jpg: Cropped from the phone's 38MP image

    The first three images have been further resized by 300% using nearest-neighbor to allow for a close look at the unaltered pixels. Open them in separate tabs, make sure you're viewing them at 1:1 zoom level, and flip between the tabs for a proper in-place image comparison. The last image (38MP.jpg) is only cropped, no additional resize.

    As I see it, the phone's 5MP resampled image is VERY close to what IrfanView produces from the 38MP image, except IrfanView does a slightly better job in my opinion. Personally I consider both to be oversharpened, and prefer the third image which has been resized with no additional sharpening. Of course, the desirable level of sharpness is both situational and subjective.

    Also note that because of the JPEG compression, the 5MP you get from the phone's 5MP image is not as good as the 5MP you get from resampling the 38MP image. This is very noticeable along the edge of the face by the ear where the head is bleeding into the background in the phone's 5MP image.

    In summary, the 5MP oversampled image is sufficient for casual use such as sharing images on social networking sites, especially if the image is going to get resized down further. But if you're going to keep the image at 5MP and really want the best quality, you're only deluding yourself if you think the phone's resizing is somehow producing a result that is superior to resizing the full-res image on your own.
    Attached Thumbnails 5mp.jpg   5mp-irf.jpg   5mp-pdn.jpg   38mp.jpg  
    10-10-2013 08:34 AM
  7. jeetu4444's Avatar
    I think future update can make the camera processing better...if iam right...even 808 had got few updates fr camera... am I right ? And 1020 is very new...maybe will gdr 3 we will get camera improvement....
    10-10-2013 08:51 AM
  8. vlad0's Avatar
    ^ yes, the 808 got several camera updates, but the changes were mostly performance and UI more so than image quality. They pretty much got it right when they shipped it.

    You can be sure that the 1020 will be getting numerous camera updates.. they have to fix that yellow tone when using the xenon in auto mode, it will be nice to add sharpness settings, and also several different presets for the settings so you don't have to change them every time.
    10-10-2013 09:30 AM
  9. jeetu4444's Avatar
    Guys my lumia 1020 is here...soo happy to have it...love the yellow colour and the.feel....awesome built and screen ...will tranfer all my stuff frm 808 to 1020...and start using it as my main fone......will soon give a short review ...hiw it feels frm symbian to windows...
    10-11-2013 04:47 PM
  10. JustToClarify's Avatar
    Ok, and the difference is...?? If there was a benefit, it would be visible in the results. It is not. The reason you can still see grain in the 1020's 5MP images is because they are oversharpened during the phone's resize process. This is not a desirable thing.

    I'll back up my claims with evidence. Attached, find some images that demonstrate very clearly what I'm talking about using a photo I took with my 1020:

    1) 5MP.jpg: Cropped from the phone's 5MP image
    2) 5MP-irf.jpg: Resized from the phone's 38MP image to 5MP using IrfanView with "Apply sharpen after Resample", then cropped
    3) 5MP-pdn.jpg: Resized from the phone's 38MP image to 5MP using Paint.NET, then cropped
    4) 38MP.jpg: Cropped from the phone's 38MP image

    The first three images have been further resized by 300% using nearest-neighbor to allow for a close look at the unaltered pixels. Open them in separate tabs, make sure you're viewing them at 1:1 zoom level, and flip between the tabs for a proper in-place image comparison. The last image (38MP.jpg) is only cropped, no additional resize.

    As I see it, the phone's 5MP resampled image is VERY close to what IrfanView produces from the 38MP image, except IrfanView does a slightly better job in my opinion. Personally I consider both to be oversharpened, and prefer the third image which has been resized with no additional sharpening. Of course, the desirable level of sharpness is both situational and subjective.

    Also note that because of the JPEG compression, the 5MP you get from the phone's 5MP image is not as good as the 5MP you get from resampling the 38MP image. This is very noticeable along the edge of the face by the ear where the head is bleeding into the background in the phone's 5MP image.

    In summary, the 5MP oversampled image is sufficient for casual use such as sharing images on social networking sites, especially if the image is going to get resized down further. But if you're going to keep the image at 5MP and really want the best quality, you're only deluding yourself if you think the phone's resizing is somehow producing a result that is superior to resizing the full-res image on your own.
    you have just confirmed my statements, 1020 does "software" resampling thus you have both 38&5MP pictures on your phone, if 808 would do the same (as you state) it could save all 38&8&5&2 MP pictures at the same time

    but it doesn't, and there is proof somewhere on dpreview forums that 808 hardware oversampling does different things than resize on a PC, too lazy to find it for you though
    10-11-2013 08:13 PM
  11. tgr42's Avatar
    I didn't confirm any of your statements. If Nokia wanted to, they could've easily made the 808 save multiple sized versions of the same photo regardless of whether the resize was implemented in hardware or software. And if you have visual proof that the 808 really uses a resampling algorithm with higher quality than the 1020 and standard resize algorithms implemented in PC-based software, let's see the images.
    10-11-2013 11:21 PM
  12. JustToClarify's Avatar
    they couldn't unless 808 had two parallel sensors :) there is a 3rd party app for 808 that does save both 38&5 pics and results vary greatly in comparison with stock oversampling... also there is a significant difference between 808 full res and 8/5/2 pictures, not the case with 1020 though

    tried to find it now, it seems they have removed 808 test from dpreview...shame
    10-12-2013 07:31 AM
  13. Tech friend's Avatar
    These two articles might be of interest:


    They don't look exactly into the matter discussed here in the very latest posts, but touch it partly.

    Considering what this thread in general is about they are worth reading always.
    WanderingTraveler and tgr42 like this.
    10-12-2013 08:02 AM
  14. Tech friend's Avatar
    tried to find it now, it seems they have removed 808 test from dpreview...shame
    Due to a lack of time I wasn't able to follow your discussion with tgr42 in detail, but are you perhaps looking for this article?
    tgr42 likes this.
    10-12-2013 08:12 AM
  15. tgr42's Avatar
    they couldn't unless 808 had two parallel sensors :) there is a 3rd party app for 808 that does save both 38&5 pics and results vary greatly in comparison with stock oversampling... also there is a significant difference between 808 full res and 8/5/2 pictures, not the case with 1020 though

    tried to find it now, it seems they have removed 808 test from dpreview...shame
    Why would they need two parallel sensors? You can already set the 808 to save an image at 38, 8, 5, or 3MP. Why would it require additional hardware to just save the image at one size, then save it at the next size? Sure it would take additional time, but so what? You don't think the 1020 isn't just doing this sequentially behind the scenes, do you?

    When it comes to the difference between full-res and resized images, people seem to want to assume that Nokia's "proprietary algorithm" or using the raw sensor data instead of reconstructed RGB as the source for the resize automatically yields higher quality results than resizing the full-res reconstructed RGB data with a standard resize algorithm. These were some good articles that Tech friend has linked here. But unfortunately they don't contain a single test of taking the full-res image from the 808 and then resizing it down with a standard resize algorithm to see how that result compares with the same size 808-resized version. Without doing such a test, it's impossible to prove an advantage in the 808's resize algorithm when all of the other characteristics of the 808 are being mixed into the results as well.

    If I had an 808 myself I would just do this test, the same way I did for the 1020 in my last post with the attached images. It would take less than half an hour. But alas, I only have a 1020.

    I do think it's kind of amusing how some 808 and 1020 fans feel the need for there to be some greater advantage than just pure high resolution. Do you not realize the advantages of high resolution? Resizing an image down with a competent (but not otherwise special) resize algorithm corrects a great number of problems and will ultimately yield the pixel-perfection that we love to see in images once the image has been resized down far enough. Even Juha presents it this way in his whitepaper about the 808. It's all about the resolution. Nokia has distinguished themselves from the megapixel race of the past in two ways: 1) by offering high resolution in a compact physical space as an alternative to optical zoom, and 2) by being more direct with consumers about the advantages of high resolution, building some convenience around it by integrating it into the phone and the picture-taking experience. Of course everyone was already capable of doing these operations on the PC since the beginning of time: resize and crop. They're two of the simplest tools in the image processing arsenal, but they're also extremely powerful and should not be underestimated.
    10-12-2013 09:57 AM
  16. JustToClarify's Avatar
    Why would they need two parallel sensors? You can already set the 808 to save an image at 38, 8, 5, or 3MP. Why would it require additional hardware to just save the image at one size, then save it at the next size? Sure it would take additional time, but so what? You don't think the 1020 isn't just doing this sequentially behind the scenes, do you?
    you can't bin bixels and use full resolution at the same time, in 808 case it's not (only) additional time, it's additional picture as well (different from the first one) since you can't physically use the sensor twice in the same moment, it would work in case you use tripod (or have a very steady hand) and the scene is static, in all other situations you would get two different pics

    1020 takes full res picture and then uses the resize procedure to get 5 MP file, so it's essentially the same picture only with different resolution

    When it comes to the difference between full-res and resized images, people seem to want to assume that Nokia's "proprietary algorithm" or using the raw sensor data instead of reconstructed RGB as the source for the resize automatically yields higher quality results than resizing the full-res reconstructed RGB data with a standard resize algorithm. These were some good articles that Tech friend has linked here. But unfortunately they don't contain a single test of taking the full-res image from the 808 and then resizing it down with a standard resize algorithm to see how that result compares with the same size 808-resized version. Without doing such a test, it's impossible to prove an advantage in the 808's resize algorithm when all of the other characteristics of the 808 are being mixed into the results as well.
    well first of all it's not technically a resize, since 808 internally bins pixels to form 5 MP of a big size pixels, it doesn't take full 38 MP photo and it never exists in 808 RAM thus it can't be saved

    I do think it's kind of amusing how some 808 and 1020 fans feel the need for there to be some greater advantage than just pure high resolution. Do you not realize the advantages of high resolution? Resizing an image down with a competent (but not otherwise special) resize algorithm corrects a great number of problems and will ultimately yield the pixel-perfection that we love to see in images once the image has been resized down far enough. Even Juha presents it this way in his whitepaper about the 808. It's all about the resolution. Nokia has distinguished themselves from the megapixel race of the past in two ways: 1) by offering high resolution in a compact physical space as an alternative to optical zoom, and 2) by being more direct with consumers about the advantages of high resolution, building some convenience around it by integrating it into the phone and the picture-taking experience. Of course everyone was already capable of doing these operations on the PC since the beginning of time: resize and crop. They're two of the simplest tools in the image processing arsenal, but they're also extremely powerful and should not be underestimated.
    sure resolution is very important but it's not everything, you have 8 MP cameras that are junk and some that are professional(although old models they are still very good), for example 808 takes much better 2 MP pictures than HTC One which has 4 MP

    808&1020 also differ greatly, 808 has hardware DSP, bigger FSI sensor and better optics while 1020 has OIS and sharper BSI sensor
    10-12-2013 02:07 PM
  17. tgr42's Avatar
    you can't bin bixels and use full resolution at the same time, in 808 case it's not (only) additional time, it's additional picture as well (different from the first one) since you can't physically use the sensor twice in the same moment, it would work in case you use tripod (or have a very steady hand) and the scene is static, in all other situations you would get two different pics

    1020 takes full res picture and then uses the resize procedure to get 5 MP file, so it's essentially the same picture only with different resolution

    well first of all it's not technically a resize, since 808 internally bins pixels to form 5 MP of a big size pixels, it doesn't take full 38 MP photo and it never exists in 808 RAM thus it can't be saved
    Why would you need to "physically use the sensor twice in the same moment" to create multiple output files at different sizes? You just need to capture the data from the sensor once, then do the multiple resizes from that same original data. Yes, they could've designed it in such a way that all of the RGB reconstruction (demosaic etc), resampling, and JPEG encoding happens in real-time taking its input from the sensor in the short window of time while the shutter is open, with only one of several resampling sizes available during the pipeline. One can easily imagine a simpler and more flexible design that stores the raw sensor data in a memory buffer and then does whatever it wants with it after that.

    sure resolution is very important but it's not everything, you have 8 MP cameras that are junk and some that are professional(although old models they are still very good), for example 808 takes much better 2 MP pictures than HTC One which has 4 MP

    808&1020 also differ greatly, 808 has hardware DSP, bigger FSI sensor and better optics while 1020 has OIS and sharper BSI sensor
    Of course there's much more to a camera than resolution, I totally agree. I intended my comments to be limited to the context of resolution and resampling. The 808 and 1020 share the same major distinguishing advantage: high resolution. This is what sets them apart from the competition. Good execution on a number of fronts helps too. But the resampling is nothing special, on both the 808 and 1020, whether it's done in hardware or software. I don't believe it gives you any substantial advantage over resizing the full-res image yourself in a decent paint program. Actually it seems worse, since Nokia doesn't (currently) give you any control over the process - most importantly the level of sharpening.
    10-12-2013 05:16 PM
  18. JustToClarify's Avatar
    Why would you need to "physically use the sensor twice in the same moment" to create multiple output files at different sizes? You just need to capture the data from the sensor once, then do the multiple resizes from that same original data. Yes, they could've designed it in such a way that all of the RGB reconstruction (demosaic etc), resampling, and JPEG encoding happens in real-time taking its input from the sensor in the short window of time while the shutter is open, with only one of several resampling sizes available during the pipeline. One can easily imagine a simpler and more flexible design that stores the raw sensor data in a memory buffer and then does whatever it wants with it after that.
    the problem is that DSP bins pixels on-the-fly, so there is no information in memory about all 38 million of pixels... 808 receives only 5 MP (or whatever resolution you have chosen) from DSP

    nice article if you have the time to read it

    http://www.imageval.com/public/Paper...inningSPIE.pdf
    10-12-2013 08:14 PM
  19. vlad0's Avatar
    the problem is that DSP bins pixels on-the-fly, so there is no information in memory about all 38 million of pixels... 808 receives only 5 MP (or whatever resolution you have chosen) from DSP

    nice article if you have the time to read it

    http://www.imageval.com/public/Paper...inningSPIE.pdf
    So.. correct me if I am wrong here, but what you are saying is that the 808 oversamples "raw" data from the sensor at time of capture, while the 1020 can't do that since it records all the pixels into a jpeg, and then resizes that into a smaller 5Mpix image ?

    But if they are using some clever software algorithm to do that on the 1020, wouldn't be possible to get a very similar result ?
    10-13-2013 03:15 PM
  20. vlad0's Avatar
    the problem is that DSP bins pixels on-the-fly, so there is no information in memory about all 38 million of pixels... 808 receives only 5 MP (or whatever resolution you have chosen) from DSP

    nice article if you have the time to read it

    http://www.imageval.com/public/Paper...inningSPIE.pdf
    So.. correct me if I am wrong here, but what you are saying is that the 808 oversamples "raw" data from the sensor at time of capture, while the 1020 can't do that since it records all the pixels into a jpeg, and then resizes that into a smaller 5Mpix image ?

    If that's the case, its probably a hardware limitation.. I am guessing that with Snap 800 it shouldn't be an issue and they will be able to do exactly what they are doing with the 808's DSP.

    But if they are using some clever software algorithm to do that on the 1020, wouldn't be possible to get a very similar result ?
    10-13-2013 03:17 PM
  21. tgr42's Avatar
    the problem is that DSP bins pixels on-the-fly, so there is no information in memory about all 38 million of pixels... 808 receives only 5 MP (or whatever resolution you have chosen) from DSP

    nice article if you have the time to read it

    http://www.imageval.com/public/Paper...inningSPIE.pdf
    Thanks for the link. This paper raises many interesting questions. I learned a lot and it turned out to be a good starting point for further investigation.

    This has been a difficult subject to discuss because pixel binning, resampling, and resizing are frequently used interchangeably, and in such cases when differentiation is attempted, they tend to still not be very well defined. But this paper clearly describes the two methods under study: pre-ADC binning vs. digital resizing. Going by its definitions, I can imagine how the 808 might use pre-ADC binning to reduce the amount of data coming out of the sensor when doing resampling. This would speed things up and could possibly have a noticeable advantage when it comes to noise reduction in low light environments. It would also imply the limitation you mentioned: the impossibility of saving both full-res and resampled images for a single shot. Note that this is pre-ADC binning, which implies that it's not the DSP doing the binning as you say. Wouldn't the noise reduction advantage of binning be lost if you did it post-ADC?

    In any case, the paper raises a critical point:

    In conditions when there is no significant ADC rate or channel bandwidth limitation, it is advantageous to read the entire high resolution image. In this case it will be possible to resize the image later to produce an image that is very similar to that obtained by binning. A resized image can be further blurred to match a binned image with respect to vSNR and MTF50. There is an image quality tradeoff between noise and blur, and depending on the application users may prefer one error over another. This question is open to experimental investigation through user-preference studies.
    Now, Nokia's proprietary implementation and unique set of conditions may somehow exempt them from this assertion, but there's no evidence to support that. It sounds to me like there's probably no quality reason to use pre-ADC binning... only a performance reason. And with the data rates involved, It seems likely that the 1020 is doing this for video. They probably just managed to avoid it for still images this time around, and that's a good thing. It doesn't seem like it would necessitate any sacrifice in quality compared to what they did with the 808.

    Finally, this paper led me to an interesting GSMArena interview with the head of the team that developed the 808. He pretty much comes right out and says there's no advantage to the PureView resampling compared to Photoshop, other than his strange view that being stuck with Nokia's preferred tradeoff between noise and sharpness is somehow an advantage (seems quite the opposite to me):

    Nokia 808 PureView in focus: Interview with D. Dinning - GSMArena.com

    The interviewer tried to help him out by pointing out that saving only the phone-resampled images saves space on your phone while shooting, but he didn't seem too interested in that.
    10-13-2013 06:18 PM
  22. JustToClarify's Avatar
    So.. correct me if I am wrong here, but what you are saying is that the 808 oversamples "raw" data from the sensor at time of capture, while the 1020 can't do that since it records all the pixels into a jpeg, and then resizes that into a smaller 5Mpix image ?

    If that's the case, its probably a hardware limitation.. I am guessing that with Snap 800 it shouldn't be an issue and they will be able to do exactly what they are doing with the 808's DSP.

    But if they are using some clever software algorithm to do that on the 1020, wouldn't be possible to get a very similar result ?
    no, dedicated silicon is a dedicated silicon and Snapdragon 800 is no Cray...

    Finally, this paper led me to an interesting GSMArena interview with the head of the team that developed the 808. He pretty much comes right out and says there's no advantage to the PureView resampling compared to Photoshop, other than his strange view that being stuck with Nokia's preferred tradeoff between noise and sharpness is somehow an advantage (seems quite the opposite to me):

    Nokia 808 PureView in focus: Interview with D. Dinning - GSMArena.com

    The interviewer tried to help him out by pointing out that saving only the phone-resampled images saves space on your phone while shooting, but he didn't seem too interested in that.
    GSMArena: If we only needed a 2MP image, for instance, we would traditionally take a full resolution shot, and then downsample it with Photoshop. Does PureView provide downsampling algorithms superior to those of Photoshop or other image editing software, effectively eliminating this step?

    D. Dinning: We haven't really made that comparison. What I can say is, depending on the interpolation and downsampling you use in Photoshop, it may be possible that you'll get similar performance. But you're then handling the JPG file that was saved, so you're probably better off doing it at point of capture. I think you'll find that we probably have a different balance to what you achieve with Photoshop. How we optimize the algorithms is to retain as much of the detail as possible that we think is represented in the object, but also filter as much of the noise as possible. In Photoshop, you typically might get a sharpness that looks higher, but you might get more noise, for example. We struck a slightly different balance when we use our algorithms.

    pay attention on words "may" and "similar" ;)
    10-14-2013 03:59 AM
  23. Bahamen's Avatar
    It's been established that the 5MP image on the 1020 is sampled from the raw image from the sensor at point of capture. It is only at subsequent reframing that samples from the jpeg file. This has been explained by Juha before (through Steve Litchfield or Marc @ Pureviewclub).
    10-14-2013 07:14 AM
  24. tgr42's Avatar
    pay attention on words "may" and "similar" ;)
    Oh please. :) He was caught in a difficult question and did his best to weasel his way out of it. I do give him credit for attempting to give a "least untruthful" answer, although his remark "we haven't really made that comparison" is pretty shaky. Sure, they haven't made the comparison in their marketing and sales materials, for obvious reasons. You can bet they made the comparison in their research and development efforts. Anyone who implements resampling and cares about quality is going to compare their results with Photoshop.
    10-14-2013 07:21 AM
  25. JustToClarify's Avatar
    It's been established that the 5MP image on the 1020 is sampled from the raw image from the sensor at point of capture. It is only at subsequent reframing that samples from the jpeg file. This has been explained by Juha before (through Steve Litchfield or Marc @ Pureviewclub).
    it raises the question why they didn't leave only 5MP option that would take half a second (or so) instead of having only 38+5 MP option taking 3-4 seconds?!
    10-14-2013 07:27 AM
158 12345 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Krrish 3 Game to be Released on wp before iOS and Android
    By gautam12 in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-08-2013, 05:52 PM
  2. Lumia 1020 invisible in Canada
    By machina in forum Nokia Lumia 1020
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-08-2013, 10:22 AM
  3. Lumia 820 apps
    By jACKSON KWESI AGYEKUM in forum Applications
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-08-2013, 02:33 AM
  4. Lumia 920 audio
    By Pastorhss in forum Nokia Lumia 920
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-07-2013, 06:39 AM
  5. WP8 contacts app to auto-close after call
    By lowrider2107 in forum Applications
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-06-2013, 02:54 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD