Note 7 - Show off your photo(s) here!

amyf27

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2015
9,884
197
63
Visit site
bded11359f1e351b2225680c587300a3.jpg
 

CincyGuy

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
299
0
0
Visit site
Re: Photos taken with your note seven

Just starting to read this thread and didn't want to read all of the posts before commenting on any of them.
Did you know that the 16:9 basically just crops the top and bottom and does not give you any more field of view? Because of this, I am taking all of my pictures in 4:3 12MP.

I just tried taking a picture of a framed photo hanging on the wall in my office in both formats, doing my best to keep my hands steady between the two while I changed formats. It seems like the frame is the same size in both photos, and since the resolution is different (16:9 is 4032x2268 and 4:3 is 2880x2160) it would seem to me that more pixels/picture data is being added on either side, which to me would be better than cropping a 4:3 I took to achieve a 16:9 format.

In other words, if I want to end up with a 16:9 format for a picture, which is what I would have preferred for that pic I posted, I would end up losing a lot of data by cropping the 4:3 into 16:9, effectively electronically zooming in to the picture, and potentially exposing the pixelated grainy details in doing so. Conversely, if I wanted to crop a 16:9 by I took into a 4:3, I would typically only be chopping off the sides while keeping the same area top to bottom. This would keep more original data in tact and prevent me from electronically zooming in (as much) and showing pixels. So, in most cases I would be better off defaulting to 16:9 and cropping those when needed, especially for natural/landscape photography.....?

Am I missing something here? I will admit I am not great at math, so the impacts of different resolutions and focal lengths is pretty much over my head.
 

CincyGuy

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
299
0
0
Visit site
Re: Photos taken with your note seven

I just tried taking a picture of a framed photo hanging on the wall in my office in both formats, doing my best to keep my hands steady between the two while I changed formats. It seems like the frame is the same size in both photos, and since the resolution is different (16:9 is 4032x2268 and 4:3 is 2880x2160) it would seem to me that more pixels/picture data is being added on either side, which to me would be better than cropping a 4:3 I took to achieve a 16:9 format.

In other words, if I want to end up with a 16:9 format for a picture, which is what I would have preferred for that pic I posted, I would end up losing a lot of data by cropping the 4:3 into 16:9, effectively electronically zooming in to the picture, and potentially exposing the pixelated grainy details in doing so. Conversely, if I wanted to crop a 16:9 by I took into a 4:3, I would typically only be chopping off the sides while keeping the same area top to bottom. This would keep more original data in tact and prevent me from electronically zooming in (as much) and showing pixels. So, in most cases I would be better off defaulting to 16:9 and cropping those when needed, especially for natural/landscape photography.....?

Am I missing something here? I will admit I am not great at math, so the impacts of different resolutions and focal lengths is pretty much over my head.

Ok so I just took two more pictures in both formats, making sure there was something on the very edge of the frame when it was in 4:3 format. When I reviewed the pictures, a *tiny* bit more was in the frame on the sides, but the greater impact by far was the reduction in the frame of stuff on the top and bottom. So it does appear to *not* be adding more stuff on the sides and in fact just cropping the top and bottom. 1)Weird and 2)why the hell are the 16:9 pictures a higher resolution??

This makes my head hurt.
 

ericisthename

New member
Aug 24, 2016
2
0
0
Visit site
Re: Photos taken with your note seven

Hey everyone I'm new here! well i mounted my note 7 to my telescope Saturday night and took this great shot of the moon.. it was shot in pro mode with a moon filter on my telescope lens. Enjoy!

20160820_232904.jpg
 

xxaarraa

Well-known member
Aug 16, 2016
151
0
0
Visit site
You're right! It was the Summer of Love in Central Square, yesterday. (I live in the South End)

You live in the fancy part of town! I go to the whole foods in south end a lot (my girlfriend's a hippie) :)

That last photo "dosa factory" - I have been there, and it's not that good :confused:
 

Nakrohtap

Trusted Member
Nov 16, 2011
3,078
37
0
Visit site
Re: Photos taken with your note seven

Ok so I just took two more pictures in both formats, making sure there was something on the very edge of the frame when it was in 4:3 format. When I reviewed the pictures, a *tiny* bit more was in the frame on the sides, but the greater impact by far was the reduction in the frame of stuff on the top and bottom. So it does appear to *not* be adding more stuff on the sides and in fact just cropping the top and bottom. 1)Weird and 2)why the hell are the 16:9 pictures a higher resolution??

This makes my head hurt.

Exactly. It doesn't make any sense why they did it this way. I did the same type of (less than :p) scientific tests myself. That's why I am going to keep it at the highest resolution, which is 4:3 12MP 4032 x 3024 and not 16:9 9.1MP 4032 x 2268. I think you used the 4:3 6.2MP 2880 x 2160 setting the first time you went back to 4:3 to compare the two formats. If you are getting more pixels and 4032 pixel width maximum either way, you can always crop out the top and bottom or only top or only bottom.
 

CincyGuy

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2013
299
0
0
Visit site
Re: Photos taken with your note seven

Exactly. It doesn't make any sense why they did it this way. I did the same type of (less than :p) scientific tests myself. That's why I am going to keep it at the highest resolution, which is 4:3 12MP 4032 x 3024 and not 16:9 9.1MP 4032 x 2268. I think you used the 4:3 6.2MP 2880 x 2160 setting the first time you went back to 4:3 to compare the two formats. If you are getting more pixels and 4032 pixel width maximum either way, you can always crop out the top and bottom or only top or only bottom.

Duh, now I see the higher res 4:3. Thanks. I think I need a nap, I'm missing too many things today. :confused:
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
942,387
Messages
6,913,838
Members
3,158,389
Latest member
johndoe11