AnonD-909757, 13 Oct 2020Except that "this guy" show proof, talk about verifiable facts and most often simply... moreI didn't gave any facts because I wasn't giving theories.
I gave proof from reputable websites like Apple, CNET.
Anonymous, 13 Oct 2020Uncle LongPost has already explained it in detail.
You are the one running around circles not... moreYou're the one trolling here and there,
Just think about this reply of yours.
In the first sentence you troll the guy as " Uncle Longpost "
and then you're bashing me too.
Who the troller is very clear here,
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020It's really interesting how people like you behave !
You're the one who argued las... moreUncle LongPost has already explained it in detail.
You are the one running around circles not being able to grasp things.
Every thread, you are trollling with your incompetency.
How about you drop your ego and learn from someone who has way more credibility and level of expertise.
Outside of China, no-one cares because no GMS. Simple as that.
No GMS means no COVID-tracing app, which means people just won't buy. Or will buy and return instantly.
Sorry Huawei, no sale.
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020Man !
That guy is a bag of those theories.
You don't wanna hear those. Except that "this guy" show proof, talk about verifiable facts and most often simply quote facts and informations from the most reliable sources such as expert in the field, meanwhile you are only saying the same thing again and again despite hard proof of the contrary.
You are the one having theories.
Not once I saw you talking about anything backed up with facts.
I do have many theories about other things, some about quantum mechanic, some about astrophysics, some about aerodynamic, and those are indeed theory and I clearly always state that they are such and don't talk about them as facts.
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020Why do you always answer so long ! Keep it short. Talk point to point. Haven't you ever p... moreBecause :
1) I don't want this to last for a while with many comments, so I simply write a big one with precise details and explanations.
2) To avoid peoples constantly trying to find tiny details or variations of the same thing to keep the debate up despite them simply running in circle and only taking advantage of incomplete informations.
3) To prove points by both explaining how, why and giving real life exemples while explaining how they are related.
And despite that, you failed at point #2
I literally showed you exemples of ToF running in "Real Time" by literally doing constant stream, LiDAR running in non-real time by scanning bit by bit, and their opposite, you still failed at understand that.
ToF and LiDAR are NAMES, not technology, AGAIN :
ToF = Using pings/bips/waves/anything that flight in straight line and bounce back to gather distance.
LiDAR = Using Light to gather depth data and make a map out of it.
Literally phase shift ToF run continuously, and a laser rangefinder is a ToF, it work continuously and can't get a depth map clearly disproving it is a LiDAR.
And I showed you exemples of LiDAR not working continuously.
They are NOT the same technology, LiDAR is a name for anything using light to get depth while ToF sometime use light, an aircraft Radar is a ToF but clearly not a LiDAR, and structured light LiDAR doesn't work like ToF.
I mean c'mon I' gave you enough informations from what I wrote and the links that you should have understood that by now, there is enough for you to even make your own LiDAR here, how can you still not get it ?
Nick Tagataka, 13 Oct 2020"most would prefer a pop up if there wasn't false myths about it that scared peoples... moreYes it have wear, the myths, starting by the first one, is that this wear is an issue, peoples talk about smartphones as if those were monolithic block of perfectly time-proof material, the FACTS are that the wear pop up have are lower than the wear of display (Oled AND LCD), battery and electronic components, go ahead and look at online reports on forums and whatnot, for any smartphone with a pop up you'll find way more report of dead electronic components, battery heavy degradation and other issues, and display problems, while finding almost no reports of broken pop ups.
There are, but those are quite rare, which disprove the myths about wear talked as if it was an issue and supposed super fragility of pop ups.
There are machines with moving parts, including some fine watch that work since decades or even centuries and are still fine, yes there is a wear, but it is dramatically exaggerated, the pop up mechanism is the same used in CD readers and floppy disk readers head, except that rather than a plastic piece, it use steel on steel, and steel have a really low resistance, you'd need a damn millennia of continuous use to wear that out.
And the conditions it operate are way smoother than CD/floppy readers who do many sharp movements.
Compare a car electric windows and a light bulb, when was the last time you changed each and how often it happen ?
I am not saying electric windows never fail, but they operate for many years even decades, they have to deal with wide and often extreme temperatures, humidity, vibrations, weather, shocks, wind resistance, miss-use, and still last really long, a light-bulb, even LED, who sit on your ceiling untouched, within the controlled humidity, temperature and free of big vibrations and shocks still can't last as long, that's a perfect exemple of how a static electronic component is easily crushed in durability over a mechanical one.
So the myths are that the pop up will break in no time and that the rest of the smartphone will still be there in few billions years as the anti-pop up comments make it seem.
Does NOT mix up IP rating and water resistance, you can have a perfectly water resistant phone without IP rating, in fact the OnePlus 7(t) Pro, despite having a pop up and no IP rating can survive in rain and accidental water drop.
Furthermore, IP rating not only doesn't make a phone water resistant, but as a certification it doesn't even guarantee anything, it is tested out of brand new phones on pretty lab conditions with clean tap water, far from an accidental fall in a pool full of agressive chlorine or sodium equivalent that your X month old phone will endure.
IP67/68 rated phone dying or being damaged by water is a common occurrence, in fact water damage are a time bomb that can make months to show up, so most water damage are probably not even reported, and already there are many, in fact, compare any IP68 rated phone with one sold in the same approximate number that have a pop up, and you'll find way more reports of the IP68 rated one died or damaged because of water, because IP rating sound so much for too many peoples like the phone have a perfect waterproof security that they take risks while those owning a phone with a pop up are simply careful, and it can still survive the accidental occasional fall in water.
Considering that no phone company cover water damages of any kind in their regular warranty, and you get IP rating being totally useless, and even detrimental as it cause peoples to miss-use their phones, doesn't guarantee anything and cost money (it cost millions to certify a device, which obviously will impact the selling cost).
I'd take a phone well built that the company showed it can withstand water and have water damage covered over ANY IPXX phones, in fact companies doubt so much IP rating that every smartphones have water damage stickers inside, because it would cost too much to refund/replace every IP rated phone damaged/killed by liquids over having a better reputation by covering water damages.
So much for water resistance...
Pop up were really popular when they got announced, peoples wanted them, finally we could get rid of those pesky bezels and more importantly of those horrible notches, it give privacy, it is neat, what more do you want ?
But then new articles went crazy on fearmongering by stating concerns as facts, and many peoples started to copy the exact same words and phrases and are still writing them today despite the pop ups having proved to survive the test of time and are now close to the 3 year mark at which most peoples change/have already changed their phones, if you read ANY anti-pop up comments the exact same sentences and words always show up, simply because once peoples read something they tend to repeat it, but if you fact check, it doesn't match with the reality, hence why those are myths, and the decrease in popularity of pop ups can easily be matched with the increasing presence of those same sentences/words use, peoples were simply scared away as they were told the pop up were fragile, unreliable, will break soon because of wear, can't handle a single drop of water and all that.
There are many other myths, like :
*"it cost a lot" which is totally busted by cheap phones having pop ups, it is probably cheaper than punch holes.
*It is slow, busted by phones with pop up being as fast or even faster for facial recognition than flagship released the same year.
*If it break, you only loose the front camera, not the whole device despite what some peoples make it so dramatically bad if it were to break as if the phone would die.
*Dust caused no issue to the phone by getting in, the only issue it caused was to jam the pop up and it is easily fixable by using the calibration feature to unstuck it, and it is clear to go for another year or so.
*The space it take didn't prevent the Poco F2 Pro to have most of the features, with 4 cameras including the mighty IMX686 and the best Macro camera of any smartphones with a 2x optical zoom, a big graphene cooling, 3.5mm Jack, a big battery, underdisplay fingerprint scanner (which take some space), a lot of 4G bands, 5G, dual bands sat-nav, IR Blaster, NFC...
For underdisplay camera :
Underdisplay camera cause image degradation in the spot they are located in the display and have lesser image quality, you have to choose either good image quality or good image quality, you can have both and the compromise is on the middle.
It is hyper expensive, and no, the ZTE Axon 20 5G is NOT representative, it is surely sold at a loss and is basically using the futur buyers as alpha testers, even without underdisplay camera its price is almost too low, underdisplay camera itself doesn't cost that much to be built, though it isn't a négligeable cost, but it have been years that it is on R&D, and because of its hype effect, it is obvious that huge funding got into it, guess what big price increase will come with next gen smartphones ?
It will be both for covering the R&D and an excuse to over-inflate prices even further.
The same way IP rating cause peoples to think their phones are submarines and result in phones being damaged/killed by water on regular basis, underdisplay camera will have the same effect on peoples and privacy, it is the worst threat against privacy as you forget the camera is here, and it have been proven times and times again that smartphones DO collect many data on users, illegally and way more than the user agreement contract allow them to, and lack of privacy may be the greatest threat to humanity in our modern days, and it is even more frighting now that neural interfaces are closer than ever.
Also, underdisplay camera reinforce the trend to put a front camera no matter what, despite every efforts clearly showing that the best solution is either the pop up (which is the best compromise) or simply no dedicated front camera at all, but rather using one of the many methods to use display + main camera, which is superior in quality, save money and space from another front camera and is already there waiting to be used.
No front camera > Pop up/Flip camera > Bezel > Notches with 3D facial recognition (at least they have a purpose) > Notches > Punch holes (that despite looking like they take less space, have a bigger footprint in the status bar than teardrop notches) > Underdisplay camera.
Nick Tagataka, 13 Oct 2020Yes. Nothing suggests that 16-in-1 binning mode is used when shooting stills.All confusion are actually cleared now.
Anyway I have to praise Huawei for this type of thinking. It's sad that they no longer can build their own SoC, which means they'll lose their special ISP. I wonder whether Huawei will make a deal with MediaTek or Qualcomm to make their SoC on demand.
AnonD-909757, 13 Oct 2020Which doesn't match reality where ToF are basically mostly (but not always) used in real ... moreWhy do you always answer so long ! Keep it short. Talk point to point. Haven't you ever participated in "debate competition" in school ?
Now, do you even understand what "Real time" is meant here ?
Video is real time and photo is not.
But they share similar technology but slightly in different way. Same with the ToF and LiDAR. They share the same technology. When it's a single take it's a ToF but when it's continuous it's LiDAR.
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020The website which shows 16 pixels also said it's a quad bayer.Yeah, and I'm not arguing with that.
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020Again saying,
If a ToF is used for real time 3D depth mapping then it's called LiDAR.
... moreWhich doesn't match reality where ToF are basically mostly (but not always) used in real time while other implementation of LiDAR like Structured light also exist in non-real time.
ToF = Using time to measure distance, either directly through time from emission to reception or as a phase shift.
It is LITERALLY in the name, ToF = Time of Flight = Time it take of something travelling at constant speed and in straight line as if it did a flight, which is NOT limited to light :
LiDAR = Using Light (often as Laser, but not only) as a mean to gather distance and to build a depth map from it.
Either called "laser imaging, detection, and ranging" or "light detection and ranging" indicating you are using LIGHT, regardless if you use timing (ToF) or triangulation (Structured Light), which are the two most common type of LiDAR, to get distance.
"3D viewing" methods are mostly either of those and sub-versions of them :
It is debatable whatever the stereo camera setup is a LiDAR or not though as it doesn't use any active light but still rely on light.
Some searchers have called this "pseudo LiDAR" :
Leica laser scanners are indeed LiDARs, and it is NOT scanning in real time despite using ToF, it is basically a laser rangefinder on a vertically rotating head that measure many points per seconds while the whole base also rotate horizontally, creating a point cloud scan that can be matched with pictures to make 3D representation with colors.
It is a ToF, it is a LiDAR and it is not real time.
Yes, it have 2 sensors, but it still work on the SAME principle than the iPhone, using structured light :
Which can work as well with a single camera than with two, structured light can take advantage of two camera for precision by triangulation, but a single camera already allow triangulation as you have 3 components : Camera, Sensor and object where the point is displayed at, two of them are in known location, allowing to compute where the third is as the video already explained.
The main advantage of a second camera is actually to avoid spots where the pattern projection and/or camera don't have line of sight, though it really only help where the angle difference between projector and camera prevent the camera from seeing some of the pattern projection.
Which on non-real time structured light scans who are performed by many scans of the same object (and are not photogrammetry as real depth data are taken from each shots) by rotating them, allowing for dealing with those masked areas :
This video show the use of two camera, but most structured light are using a single camera and work well.
And I know what is triangulation and the purpose of two camera, which is why I made my fictional concept smartphone with a 3D facial recognition with 2 IR camera :
Except that in my case they are used for both Structured light with a dynamic pattern projection (the dot projector both make it as densely as possible on the face for maximum resolution and perform motion for having a scanning action to increase the resolution).
Again, you'll note that I don't talk all this out of my butt, but I use real world references, exemples, serious scientific and professional sources, it is not what I THINK is real, it is about me simply quoting facts.
Nick Tagataka, 13 Oct 2020I mean, there's a website that shows a picture of IMX608 having 16 pixels grouped togethe... moreIf Huawei itself says it's 16-1 bayer. Then that's what happening whether it's hardware or software binning.
I have a theory.
Is it possible that the 16-1 binning is happening for videos only ?
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020Well,
I can't say anything about these thing with confident as I didn't follow muc... moreI mean, there's a website that shows a picture of IMX608 having 16 pixels grouped together as 1, Huawei's official statement that it is 16-in-1 binning sensor, and the actual RAW image suggesting that 10MP is not the default (fully binned) output mode, and then I have a theory about how it managed to record slow mo that is 2x slower than other sensors. If the sensor was a regular 4-in-1 QB like IMX689 then none of this would've made any sense.
As for whether it is QB or not, like I said in my previous comment, I will no longer complain about how some call this sensor because technically it is still a QB sensor where 4 pixels are grouped together - it's just each of those 4 pixels consist of another set of 4 pixels.
"They said the 16MP tele camera is 1/3.6" with 1 micron pixel size. That is impossible"
I agree, i looks like they completely got the maths wrong there.
Nick Tagataka, 13 Oct 2020IMX689:
-Binning mode: 12MP < The output mode that Oppo uses for a regular auto
I can't say anything about these thing with confident as I didn't follow much about Huawei. As you follow it you might tell it better.
Sometimes websites include wrong info. But it's highly unlikely that all of them are doing mistakes. All say IMX 608 is quad bayer. So, unlike you say the resolution should be 10MP default.
So, IMX 608 binning mode : 10MP.
Huawei is probably doing something different here.
About mistakes, GSMARENA put Pixel 4 camera details all wrong. They said the 16MP tele camera is 1/3.6" with 1 micron pixel size. That is impossible. Also I think Pixel 4 doesn't have ToF.
AnonD-754814, 13 Oct 2020Well.
That makes more sense.
But it's not happening as it happens with other sensor. ... moreIMX689:
-Binning mode: 12MP < The output mode that Oppo uses for a regular auto
-Remosaicing mode: 48MP
-Binning mode: 2.5MP
-Remosaicing mode: 10MP < The output mode that Huawei uses for a regular auto
Yes, Huawei could've enabled full resolution 40MP output if it was practical, but they didn't because the pixels with different colours are so further apart that the image quality would be horrible after remosaicing. In fact shooting in 40MP mode on Mate 30 Pro's UWA camera results in upscaled 10MP shots, in contrast to the main camera's "real" 40MP shots.
I can now see that why some websites call this sensor Quad Bayer - It can be perceived as a Quad Bayer sensor where each pixel is further split into 4. It does technically makes sense, so from now on I will shut up about how it's supposed to be called or that kind of stuffs. Sorry for confusion.
Nick Tagataka, 13 Oct 20204 to 1 for 10MP mode and 16 in 1 for 2.5MP (used for FHD recording and super slow motion) mode... moreYour source says it's a quad bayer.
So, do the other websites,