Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
4k Video Looks Awful in Sample Videos
- Thread starter MICHAELSD
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're still going on about stuff that doesn't pertain to the topic.
FACT: The iPhone 6S camera has artifacting on the videos posted here
FACT: Every 'evidence' video posted here also has some form of artifacting
FACT: Everyone is making judgment off of youtube videos that add even more artifacting
FACT: It is not fair to judge any footage from these youtube videos because of this.
You keep writing these long posts that have NOTHING to do with the question.
The question is why does the brand new camera on the 6S have artifacting when older phones performed better?
The answer is that even on the old phones, based on the youtube evidence given, there is the same artifacting present. Even on some professional shot videos, the artifacting is there, if not worse than on the iphone videos.
Thus, we cannot answer the question, because with the evidence in front of us, we cannot deduce which videos look better.
I don't know why you want to bring up unrelated stuff, as if that makes your post seem more intelligent or something? Just a bunch of words. I'm trying to answer the question at hand with my eyes, and its pretty clear. And i don't need to be bragging about my GPU or CPU to do it either (even though they are very good).
I can agree i bet the raw footage from your phone looks great. But at the same time, i can make the argument the raw footage from the iphone 6S probably looks great too. But until there is a valid way to judge that, there is no room for argument.
FACT: The iPhone 6S camera has artifacting on the videos posted here
FACT: Every 'evidence' video posted here also has some form of artifacting
FACT: Everyone is making judgment off of youtube videos that add even more artifacting
FACT: It is not fair to judge any footage from these youtube videos because of this.
You keep writing these long posts that have NOTHING to do with the question.
The question is why does the brand new camera on the 6S have artifacting when older phones performed better?
The answer is that even on the old phones, based on the youtube evidence given, there is the same artifacting present. Even on some professional shot videos, the artifacting is there, if not worse than on the iphone videos.
Thus, we cannot answer the question, because with the evidence in front of us, we cannot deduce which videos look better.
I don't know why you want to bring up unrelated stuff, as if that makes your post seem more intelligent or something? Just a bunch of words. I'm trying to answer the question at hand with my eyes, and its pretty clear. And i don't need to be bragging about my GPU or CPU to do it either (even though they are very good).
I can agree i bet the raw footage from your phone looks great. But at the same time, i can make the argument the raw footage from the iphone 6S probably looks great too. But until there is a valid way to judge that, there is no room for argument.
That casey neistat(sp?) video looks crispy as hell. We live in marvelous times that our cellphones can take video like this.
I have always thought that there are 2 different algorithms for youtube uploads. If you look at joe shmo's 1080p-4k uploads, they look like ass. But look at a big time guy like casey, or MKBD and everything is crisp and high bitrate.
I have always thought that there are 2 different algorithms for youtube uploads. If you look at joe shmo's 1080p-4k uploads, they look like ass. But look at a big time guy like casey, or MKBD and everything is crisp and high bitrate.
Casey's video does look a lot better on a rMBP -- still a lot of artifacting but it's not as noticeable as it is at 1080p on an iPhone. I wonder if recording at 1080p on the 6s will produce less artifacting.
Try uploading them to a better video hosting service like Vimeo. I've seen Google compression do some terrifying things to uploaded video - both YouTube and Google Drive.
Unfortunately I think you need a Pro account to stream 4k on Vimeo. The quality of the stream is really great though.
Checked out Casey Neistat's YouTube video on my 4K Samsung last night. At first, I was a bit disappointed. Then I remembered that I was watching it using my custom picture settings. I then switched the Samsung's picture setting to "Vivid" and everything popped. It was vastly improved.
I once remember watching some Samsung 4K demo videos and, prior to watching them, there was a disclaimer at the beginning saying something to the effect of, "these videos were designed to be viewed using the Vivid picture setting on your television". I wonder if iPhone 4K video has a similar requirement.
I once remember watching some Samsung 4K demo videos and, prior to watching them, there was a disclaimer at the beginning saying something to the effect of, "these videos were designed to be viewed using the Vivid picture setting on your television". I wonder if iPhone 4K video has a similar requirement.
This was shot with both a Inspire 1 and Phantom 3 pro. The Inspire 1 is mine, and the phantom 3 pro is my friends. You can actually see the other drone in some of the shots.
I am going to PM you the link to download the full quality version.
Dude I do not know what your problem is, but everything I "wrote a Long reply" about is 100 percent relevant to even how the crappy quality YouTube videos are displayed. Which to the point, to any viewer on whichever device and screen they use to view it. Unfortunately you can piss and moan about artifacts and how bad YouTube makes videos look. However FACT: Everyone and their grandmother uses YouTube to watch the videos.
So back on topic artifacts were less prominent on the recent 4K clips I made myself the other day on a Note 3 compared to 4K videos from the new iPhones. That is a FACT. You don't agree, fine with me but it's sad a 2 year old android phone with same exact 12 MP sensor can take better 4K video and look better on YouTube than the new iPhone.
As the OP mentioned, the Galaxy S6 and Note 5 look even better than my Note 3 when it comes to 4K clips on YouTube.
With that being said, No matter how bad YouTube changes the overall quality of video; artifacts, noise, colors, lighting, sharpness and the POP experience is not seen in the samples so far from the iPhone 6s models. I even downloaded the raw 4K clip from Apple.com under the iPhone 6s camera web page and you can see clearly as day in the raw video at home, noise and digital artifacts from the compression algorithm Apple uses. That raw clip on my PC compared to raw video clips from my galaxy phones and Panasonic FZ1000 does not compare or even come close to looking like 4K.
I believe all Apple used the new but not really new 12MP sensor for is to scale 1080p video up to 4K and set it to have a higher bitrate. (Technological tactic to sell a new iPhone with not much under the hood changes)
I got a new mini 4 and it's faster than an Air 1 and mini 2 but less battery size and usage time due to better screen and smaller battery. By the way they changed the 5MP camera sensor to the 8MP sensor which physically is smaller and has more noise in pictures and videos now. That's a whole other topic and thread...
Once again, I agree with the OP disregarding how YouTube makes it look.
So back on topic artifacts were less prominent on the recent 4K clips I made myself the other day on a Note 3 compared to 4K videos from the new iPhones. That is a FACT. You don't agree, fine with me but it's sad a 2 year old android phone with same exact 12 MP sensor can take better 4K video and look better on YouTube than the new iPhone.
As the OP mentioned, the Galaxy S6 and Note 5 look even better than my Note 3 when it comes to 4K clips on YouTube.
With that being said, No matter how bad YouTube changes the overall quality of video; artifacts, noise, colors, lighting, sharpness and the POP experience is not seen in the samples so far from the iPhone 6s models. I even downloaded the raw 4K clip from Apple.com under the iPhone 6s camera web page and you can see clearly as day in the raw video at home, noise and digital artifacts from the compression algorithm Apple uses. That raw clip on my PC compared to raw video clips from my galaxy phones and Panasonic FZ1000 does not compare or even come close to looking like 4K.
I believe all Apple used the new but not really new 12MP sensor for is to scale 1080p video up to 4K and set it to have a higher bitrate. (Technological tactic to sell a new iPhone with not much under the hood changes)
I got a new mini 4 and it's faster than an Air 1 and mini 2 but less battery size and usage time due to better screen and smaller battery. By the way they changed the 5MP camera sensor to the 8MP sensor which physically is smaller and has more noise in pictures and videos now. That's a whole other topic and thread...
Once again, I agree with the OP disregarding how YouTube makes it look.
Maybe the iPhone is using a more natural, flat looking picture profile? Here's an example of how a picture profile can vastly alter the feel and "pop" of an image. Shot in 4K (since we're talking about 4K) on a RED Scarlet M-X I use for work.
I'd be willing to bet those Android phones have oversharpened, punchy picture profiles when compared to the iPhone footage, leading you to think it's objectively better when picture profile is truly a subjective preference. (That really flat, washed-out looking image to me looks amazing from a videographer's standpoint because it means you have a ton of data to work with when shaping the final look of the shot)
In short, I think you're mistaking a punchier picture profile for an objectively better quality image. Now don't get me wrong; I viewed that same raw shot from Apple and didn't think the iPhone 6s's camera was anything special, but honestly all phone camera 4K video exists for is a pissing contest to write that stupid spec on their specsheets. A GoPro4 shooting Protune looks significantly better than any phone's 4K footage I've seen.
This would literally be the dumbest thing ever, and I highly doubt Apple is doing that because in high contrast, well-lit areas, the iPhone 6s footage looks clearly more detailed than traditional 1080p phone footage.
Plus, this doesn't make any sense, because if you're scaling 1080p footage UP to 4K res (which is pointless), there's no reason you couldn't do that with the old sensor too.
Because Apple has a huge team designing these phones to compete with the Galaxies of the world?
You are aware that Samsung actually make and sell dedicated cameras arnt you.. Not just buy a sensor off the shelf from Sony that's maybe a couple of years old.. Bump up the MP's and bang on about a whole New camera..
The vlogger (Casey...) did show off at the end that he was using a different/add on "lens" and mic of some sort. I'm a total n00b with this stuff, but I would assume that the biggies (MKBHD included) do a lot of post processing on their vids before they even think about posting them online.
If what your saying is true, why would anyone record video or take pictures on an iPhone to be able to alter it later which takes time, skills and expensive software to which then make it look visually appealing? There would be no point for "point and shoot" out of your pocket with a dedicated camera or phone if you got to sit around making it look like "what people expect it to look like". Typical consumer is not going to sit around editing all day due to the sensor, optics or software on device not processing it live during the shot or video to make it look great raw.
That was the mindset of your average joe that's an amateur at photography.
Now if your a professional or commercial video production producer then yes what your saying makes perfect sense in all the points you listed of the quality coming out of an iPhone can be worked with in a actual workflow to produce some stunning results with the end result in mind from software or Adobe to make it look "cinematic".
I say this since you mentioned you get to use or you own a red scarlet cam and we know what that can do with live out of the box processing and how better you can turn it into with a workflow in good software for an end result... Now I am jealous since you mentioned the "red" cam (smile)!
My androids default settings software wise using Samsung's touchwiz camera app in 4K point and shoot mode has no settings to change color, saturation, hue, brightness, contrast, iso, aperture, fstop or any manual controls. It does not even have digital image stabilization in 4K mode. Just auto focus on or off. No profiles either to set defaults for 4K video. Now for 1080p and 12MP images you can change some manual settings but not much.
If you saw my 4K clip of the flowers up close and scenery on my skyhawk21 channel using the Note3 (YouTube), I also took a picture before the video and yes the colors were a little by a hair less saturated but with full on sun behind me and the sensor on phone with no optics except main single lense cover over sensor in phone, the image and 4K video was life like in color, contrast, lighting, shadows to the real scene that day seen with the naked eye.
Fresh colorful flowers in direct sunlight with the right aperture and fstop focused correctly using a sensor that picks up colors makes flowers look like they do in real life vivid with a pop look to them. I like things being sharp instead of blurry. Everything is going digital and sharpness is good.
Anyhow no one would watch transformers 4 if the colors did not pop, we're not vivid, and the screen had a flat high contrast look with high gamma during the whole movie with noise and artifacts everywhere and a flat overall look.
You know that though because you got to use or own the expensive cam I only dream of one day getting to play with...
You may think my sensor theory of scaled 1080P video to 2160P with higher bitrate on a 12MP sensor is dumb, but company's who sell cameras and phones have done it in the past.
My 12MP sensor on my Galaxy Note3 native ratio at highest resolution is 4:3 not 16:9 like on the newer Galaxy phones.
So if the sensor is 4:3 raw, then they scale down the ratio to 16:9 by zooming it in at a lower res to record 2160P. In other words it's not 1:1 pixel mapping using 100 percent of the raw sensor. The Galaxy S6 has a 16mp 16:9 native sensor. So when it does 2160p video it's not scaling or cropping and I believe is using 1:1 pixel mapping. No scaling or cropping means better raw quality.
Do not know the native aspect ratio yet of the iPhone 6s 12MP sensor. In any event it's still an old ass sensor from phones like the Note 3 had, years ago...
Enjoy the red cam, and I'll enjoy my baby Panasonic FZ1000 wishing it was a red cam (smile)!
That was the mindset of your average joe that's an amateur at photography.
Now if your a professional or commercial video production producer then yes what your saying makes perfect sense in all the points you listed of the quality coming out of an iPhone can be worked with in a actual workflow to produce some stunning results with the end result in mind from software or Adobe to make it look "cinematic".
I say this since you mentioned you get to use or you own a red scarlet cam and we know what that can do with live out of the box processing and how better you can turn it into with a workflow in good software for an end result... Now I am jealous since you mentioned the "red" cam (smile)!
My androids default settings software wise using Samsung's touchwiz camera app in 4K point and shoot mode has no settings to change color, saturation, hue, brightness, contrast, iso, aperture, fstop or any manual controls. It does not even have digital image stabilization in 4K mode. Just auto focus on or off. No profiles either to set defaults for 4K video. Now for 1080p and 12MP images you can change some manual settings but not much.
If you saw my 4K clip of the flowers up close and scenery on my skyhawk21 channel using the Note3 (YouTube), I also took a picture before the video and yes the colors were a little by a hair less saturated but with full on sun behind me and the sensor on phone with no optics except main single lense cover over sensor in phone, the image and 4K video was life like in color, contrast, lighting, shadows to the real scene that day seen with the naked eye.
Fresh colorful flowers in direct sunlight with the right aperture and fstop focused correctly using a sensor that picks up colors makes flowers look like they do in real life vivid with a pop look to them. I like things being sharp instead of blurry. Everything is going digital and sharpness is good.
Anyhow no one would watch transformers 4 if the colors did not pop, we're not vivid, and the screen had a flat high contrast look with high gamma during the whole movie with noise and artifacts everywhere and a flat overall look.
You know that though because you got to use or own the expensive cam I only dream of one day getting to play with...
You may think my sensor theory of scaled 1080P video to 2160P with higher bitrate on a 12MP sensor is dumb, but company's who sell cameras and phones have done it in the past.
My 12MP sensor on my Galaxy Note3 native ratio at highest resolution is 4:3 not 16:9 like on the newer Galaxy phones.
So if the sensor is 4:3 raw, then they scale down the ratio to 16:9 by zooming it in at a lower res to record 2160P. In other words it's not 1:1 pixel mapping using 100 percent of the raw sensor. The Galaxy S6 has a 16mp 16:9 native sensor. So when it does 2160p video it's not scaling or cropping and I believe is using 1:1 pixel mapping. No scaling or cropping means better raw quality.
Do not know the native aspect ratio yet of the iPhone 6s 12MP sensor. In any event it's still an old ass sensor from phones like the Note 3 had, years ago...
Enjoy the red cam, and I'll enjoy my baby Panasonic FZ1000 wishing it was a red cam (smile)!
I wouldn't trust any footage from the first Youtuber (Jack & Indy). For starters, some of the footage he posted was posted on his page way before and he just simply erased it and reposted it to iPhone 6S footage. Secondly, he doesn't seem to be a reviewer or anything of the sort. His history of videos doesn't have any professional footage, and all of a sudden he's fantastic at editing videos. Lots of the footage that is shown can't be possible with just handheld as he claims. It just seems like an uploader that is out to cash in views with the new iPhone.
Yes but that should give Apple motivation to put the best camera they can in since they aren't trying to upsell you.
No, he's right. Several years ago pricey point and shoot cameras or consumer-grade dedicated video cameras can't touch the current smartphone cameras.