GCam for Poco X3

vanpoko

Member
Dec 2, 2020
23
25
23
These are my definitive xmls for NGCam 2.0 and trCamera_Xmas_Release; everything is working OK and smoothly and auxiliary lenses are almost perfect now, as they were the most difficult to achieve a good level of quality and denoise (for me, the premade noise models are horrible).
 

Attachments

rudix78

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2015
198
67
48
Kwidzyn
These are my definitive xmls for NGCam 2.0 and trCamera_Xmas_Release; everything is working OK and smoothly and auxiliary lenses are almost perfect now, as they were the most difficult to achieve a good level of quality and denoise (for me, the premade noise models are horrible).
Thanks. I loaded your settings into ngcam and made two changes:aspect ratio to 9/16 (12 MP) and set iso limit to 500 (my personal preference). Can you guess -just for fun- which of the two pictures was taken with your settings (the other one was taken with different xml). Which one more appeal to you?

Ps. Also EIS3 not working for me does it do the job for you?
 

Attachments

Last edited:

rudix78

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2015
198
67
48
Kwidzyn
Here are to pic with astrophotography that I shot. The first is with with Urnyx05 2.5 and the second with trgcamera with final xml.
There is no comparison between them.
Astrophotography? Are you sure? Astrophotography is for night stars. Were these two pictures taken at night? No daylight?
 

temporarium

Senior Member
May 16, 2012
745
368
93
Thanks. I loaded your settings into ngcam and made two changes:aspect ratio to 9/16 (12 MP) and set iso limit to 500 (my personal preference). Can you guess -just for fun- which of the two pictures was taken with your settings (the other one was taken with different xml). Which one more appeal to you?

Ps. Also EIS3 not working for me does it do the job for you?
I think the second one looks a bit better.

Also, does the ISO setting work for you? No matter what I set the bank camera to, it still shows as ISO 1700+. 🤔
 

rudix78

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2015
198
67
48
Kwidzyn
I think the second one looks a bit better.

Also, does the ISO setting work for you? No matter what I set the bank camera to, it still shows as ISO 1700+. 🤔
Generally it works. Maybe try to restart camera. I had the same problem with tigr camera. His version has manual iso adjustment in the viewfinder. Which all cameras should have (pro settings). In the beginning it didn't work (I applied my settings but pictures were saved with higher iso. After camera restart, manual iso adjustments were properly applied.
 

temporarium

Senior Member
May 16, 2012
745
368
93
Generally it works. Maybe try to restart camera. I had the same problem with tigr camera. His version has manual iso adjustment in the viewfinder. Which all cameras should have (pro settings). In the beginning it didn't work (I applied my settings but pictures were saved with higher iso. After camera restart, manual iso adjustments were properly applied.
Nope. None of the pro settings make any difference. The photos come out ok, but they're all obviously automatic. Neither the ISO note the exposure time makes any difference. Restarted tr camera various times. On RR A10. Any other ideas/suggestions?
 

vanpoko

Member
Dec 2, 2020
23
25
23
As I said, the xmls that I shared are intended to get good and quality normal pictures with all the lenses. For astrophotography or to take photos in dark rooms you always can make some changes to the configuration and try different ones until you get the one you like most.
 
Last edited:

rudix78

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2015
198
67
48
Kwidzyn
Those are taken on midnight. Tried some many different version and only on urix version I find night mode works good.
If those pictures were taken indeed at night then both are unacceptable. They don't look as taken at night but rather at noon.

PS. Here you have example of ngcam night photo. First is just night mode, second with astro on. You can clearly see they look as taken at night. That's what I would expect from night photography.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vonichi

surferbyter

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2007
299
160
73
If those pictures were taken indeed at night then both are unacceptable. They don't look as taken at night but rather at noon.

PS. Here you have example of ngcam night photo. First is just night mode, second with astro on. You can clearly see they look as taken at night. That's what I would expect from night photography.
I completely agree. The night photo must not distort the atmosphere otherwise it becomes a useless artifice ...
 

rudix78

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2015
198
67
48
Kwidzyn
That is a matter of personal preference and totally depends of the use and purpose the photographer has.
On personal level we don't object that someone may prefer sth to sth. But on general level one needs to look for some objective criteria that allow to state that one photo is better that the other. And one has to be able to support the claim with some objective criteria. In night photography we want object to stand out without loosing "night atmosphere".
 
  • Like
Reactions: vonichi

_phk_

Senior Member
Mar 6, 2012
176
53
48
@vanpoko thanks for you xml settings. Unfortunately all pictures at daytime look quite pale. I don't know what causes it. When I see the preview window at the bottom right corner, colors are normal. When opening it I see strong colors for about 1 second and then the colors are pale. I don't understand which setting causes this.
 

vanpoko

Member
Dec 2, 2020
23
25
23
@vanpoko thanks for you xml settings. Unfortunately all pictures at daytime look quite pale. I don't know what causes it. When I see the preview window at the bottom right corner, colors are normal. When opening it I see strong colors for about 1 second and then the colors are pale. I don't understand which setting causes this.
I've changed the color configuration in new xmls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _phk_

fox_xda2

Senior Member
Oct 31, 2016
103
36
38
These are my definitive xmls for NGCam 2.0 and trCamera_Xmas_Release; everything is working OK and smoothly and auxiliary lenses are almost perfect now, as they were the most difficult to achieve a good level of quality and denoise (for me, the premade noise models are horrible).
Tried these, and found the colors were sligthly too saturated in the blues (the sky was significantly bluer than it is. Nothing big mind you, just a wee bit).


On personal level we don't object that someone may prefer sth to sth.
Where does this royal "we" come from now?

one needs to look for some objective criteria ..... In night photography we want object to stand out without loosing "night atmosphere".
Wanting the subject to stand out from a dark background is a pure subjective criteria. There is no such thing as an objective "atmosphere". Plus as soon as you start increasing luminosity by technical artifacts, and doing selectively so, your are deep in the realm of personal preference.

Note that the initial post was about using astrophotography on landscape, resulting in an almost day feeling. This I find
1/ Useful for artistic (purely personal) and technical (think industry photography at night to show progress/damage with no esthetic purpose) purposes,
2/ Coherent from a technical POV. increasing received light applies ot the whole picture. ***for astro*** I think this solution give more interpretive room for photograpghs, while keeping night sight with a more subject selective light enhancement (which is what you advocate for apparently).
3/ An argument for keeping darks lighter is that it is easier to post-process the image back to darker than to post-process it to lighter (easier to reduce information than increase it). Not that I care about it myself, but just to show there are several valid ways to address the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picard20