Help Best way (settings) for taking pictures

I have the same problem. So I'm listening to any advice out there.

Well, I'm definitely not an expert but the camera on mine takes very good pics without any lag. I did change "tap to take pics" to the on position when I first got the phone. It snaps the pic as soon as I tap it. Its in the settings while in camera operation.

I was wondering too. I'm not exactly a photographer, but I know I can do better than I've been doing.

I've read a lot that the issue is Samsung's camera app, and not the camera itself. People have recommended various camera apps but I've never really tried any so I'm not sure which is the best.

I have looked in settings and see no HDR setting..
Is it available??

darkcyber said:

I will try that. I hope that helps because so far I have been less than impressed with the camera on mine. Any action shots are hopeless...even in the sport mode, nothing but complete blur.

Click to expand...

I haven't changed my settings at all. Still lifes and landscapes turn out really well. Sports will require the best lighting possible. Even then, don't expect miracles.

Cellphone sensors are tiny and way overpacked anymore. Sports shooters are using massive cameras (compared to these at least) that are dedicated to imaging and imaging only. The max listed ISO on the camera app is 800 and even that won't be pretty. The camera might have the ability to go beyond that in auto but it will get ugly.

For sports I'd still suggest something bigger than a cellphone. Even the smaller compact system cameras would do heaps better.

Sonnydigs said:

I have looked in settings and see no HDR setting..
Is it available??

Click to expand...

Under mode, there should be Rich Tone (HDR).

chimphappyhour said:

I haven't changed my settings at all. Still lifes and landscapes turn out really well. Sports will require the best lighting possible. Even then, don't expect miracles.

Cellphone sensors are tiny and way overpacked anymore. Sports shooters are using massive cameras (compared to these at least) that are dedicated to imaging and imaging only. The max listed ISO on the camera app is 800 and even that won't be pretty. The camera might have the ability to go beyond that in auto but it will get ugly.

For sports I'd still suggest something bigger than a cellphone. Even the smaller compact system cameras would do heaps better.



Under mode, there should be Rich Tone (HDR).

Click to expand...

Thank you.

The 'problem' with the GN3 camera (and many stock cameras these days) is that they are just TOO complicated. Too many features, WAY too large resolution and way too many settings. You really have to just jump in and learn all the settings. Play with them and see what works, and what does not.

The first thing I highly recommend people do is bump down the resolution that the photos will be. No one needs a 13 megapixel photo unless they plan to print out HUGE photos, and who does that? Or if they need to really scan in to the smallest detail. Seriously, a 1200 x 1600 is more than enough for general computer use, let alone cell phone. Full resolution photos are also HUGE in size, like 3 to 5 meg. Just not needed.

After that play around with some of the features and modes. If you have lag taking a photo you likely have something turned on like image stabilization that needs for the camera to be held still for a certain amount of time before the photo will snap. Take a little time and go through all your settings and see what they say. Download the manual (available here) and explore even more.

It also helps to have a basic understanding of photograph techniques and the use of lighting. What I have found is that the stock GN3 camera app does a good job when you get the settings right, but it can be a little slow. To compensate for this I use an aftermarket app called Snap HDR. What I like about this app is that it has a fast mode where I set the settings in advance for very fast photo taking. I use this when I need to get a quick photo and I'm not too worried about the quality (although it takes very nice photos). Then when I really want to play around with different settings and get the best photos I'll use the stock app and take many photos of the same thing using different modes.

That is probably the single best thing you can do. Spend a day (or a couple days) and go around and deliberately find cool things to photograph. Do people, scenery, objects, indoors, outdoors - what ever - but on each photo take the same photo multiple times using different modes. You will quickly get a good feel for what works, and what does not.

I did this a few months back during the fall foliage season. I went out on my motorcycle and would just stop when I saw some nice scenery and then took multiple photos using the various modes. You will be surprised by just sitting at your desk and taking the same photo of a coffee cup over and over with different modes, different flash patterns, different resolutions, how much you'll learn.

darkcyber said:

I know this thing has got a beast of a camera but so far I am not able to consistently take good pictures with mine. Sometimes I take a picture and it will take forever to actually take the picture. I have pressed the "take a picture" button and held my phone still for like 10 seconds and thought it took the picture and then when I move the camera then it takes the picture and I have a blurred mess.

Click to expand...

The camera on the GN3 is average at best. It's the one area I feel the iPhone kills it. The situation you're facing sounds like is due to the camera's optional software based stabilization. Perhaps the delay is it awaiting a more still moment to capture the shot. If the images are turning out blurry, it's likely due to slow shutter speed. Post up an image with Exif Data embedded and I can review the details and post back.

Overall I still say it's average as the internal jpeg processing is too aggressive and removes too many details. Results might be different once the ability to shoot RAW is enabled.

Methos1979 said:

The first thing I highly recommend people do is bump down the resolution that the photos will be. No one needs a 13 megapixel photo unless they plan to print out HUGE photos, and who does that?

Click to expand...

Me. Although, I still haven't decided if I want to attempt 16x20 out of this or if I want to step down a size. So far, I haven't shot anything with the Note3 yet that needs to go large. I have shot stuff with my Note2 though that needed to go large. Worked out quite well at 11x17.

pdqgp said:

The camera on the GN3 is average at best.Overall I still say it's average as the internal jpeg processing is too aggressive and removes too many details. Results might be different once the ability to shoot RAW is enabled.

Click to expand...

You might want to download Snapseed and give it a try on your photos.

I'm getting files out of my Note3 that easily rival my first DSLR. The files out of the Note3 came out just as good as the LG G2 when I did a side by side and zeroed out any interest I had in the Sony Z. (Then again, so did my Note2.) A lot of other side by sides seem to compare the Note3 camera favorably.

If I can fool a photography curator... it isn't the camera that's the issue.

I also downloaded a photo editor application that I have found to be really useful when it comes to editing my pictures after taking them that is much better than the stock one.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iudesk.android.photo.editor&hl=en

chimphappyhour said:

You might want to download Snapseed and give it a try on your photos.

I'm getting files out of my Note3 that easily rival my first DSLR.

If I can fool a photography curator... it isn't the camera that's the issue.

Click to expand...

Haven't tried anything with Snapseed, but I will say if your images rival and SLR, then it must be a poor SLR. I'm a professional photographer and own and run multiple studios with more years of experience that I care to admit. I put the Note 3 camera on par with a basic P&S. Again, IMO it's pretty clear it's the processing internally though.

pdqgp said:

Haven't tried anything with Snapseed, but I will say if your images rival and SLR, then it must be a poor SLR. I'm a professional photographer and own and run multiple studios with more years of experience that I care to admit. I put the Note 3 camera on par with a basic P&S. Again, IMO it's pretty clear it's the processing internally though.

Click to expand...

That's nice. You must be the only photographer on the whole of the boards. Congrats. I bow to your being the only person here who must know anything and all things about photography. /sarcasm

chimphappyhour said:

That's nice. You must be the only photographer on the whole of the boards. Congrats. I bow to your being the only person here who must know anything and all things about photography. /sarcasm

Click to expand...

What's nice is you seem to feel you're the only one on "the whole of boards" entitled to an opinion. Please allow me to bow to you sir..... :adore:

You really see the on board image processing of the N3 equal to that of an SLR?
Do you even think dynamic range is anywhere close to that of an SLR?
And if the quality of the bokeh you're seeing equals that of the SLR Lens you're shooting with then, then go buy some good glass already...and learn to shoot/process RAW.

Try less Sarcasm and more reality of N3 Camera not being equiv. to an SLR

pdqgp said:

What's nice is you seem to feel you're the only one on "the whole of boards" entitled to an opinion. Please allow me to bow to you sir..... :adore:

You really see the on board image processing of the N3 equal to that of an SLR?
Do you even think dynamic range is anywhere close to that of an SLR?
And if the quality of the bokeh you're seeing equals that of the SLR Lens you're shooting with then, then go buy some good glass already...and learn to shoot/process RAW.

Try less Sarcasm and more reality of N3 Camera not being equiv. to an SLR

Click to expand...

Ahem. Are you really sure you want to continue assuming like that? I can tell you right now, you won't win this argument.

chimphappyhour said:

Ahem. Are you really sure you want to continue assuming like that? I can tell you right now, you won't win this argument.

Click to expand...

If you wish to continue the conversation about technicals and capabilities of the N3 versus an SLR please continue I will enjoy that conversation.

However, anyone stating the images from an N3 rival an SLR has lost that argument all on their own.

pdqgp said:

If you wish to continue the conversation about technicals and capabilities of the N3 versus an SLR please continue I will enjoy that conversation.

Click to expand...

And that's exactly why you have already lost this argument. You seem to be the type of photographer that lets on to having a basic understanding of the science side of photography but you seem to be lacking greatly in the understanding of how to apply it artistically. If your measure of a camera lays in bokeh and a massive dynamic range, then all those years of photography you don't want to admit and those multiple studios you run are worth just as much as every person who got their first dslr last Christmas and decided they were ready to start their own portrait business. (And let's face it, Sears has more photo studios than you do. So what does boasting about that really say? Not much.)

Meanwhile, real photographers, the ones that actually apply their knowledge artistically don't get hung up on whether they have sufficiently blasted the background into oblivion or making sure they've captured every detail in every shadow and kept every highlight at the same time. Not once have I heard a conversation with real photographers, photography dealers, curators, instructors or historians turn to bokeh, dynamic range or fapping over specs. Not once. Ever. The conversation is always about making photographs... using whatever means they choose. Using tools they know will get the image they need. And guess what? They're out there using large format cameras, medium format, 35mm sized sensors DSLRs, APS sized sensors, digi P&S's, old film P&S's with on board flash, toy cameras and even.... cellphones. They don't get hung up on specs, they get hung up on the final image or in the case of digital, the final file. So if I can sneak a few shots from my cellphone past the "nose" of a good photo curator and have my gallery representative be ok with selling them, then I think I can confidently say that you need to stop boasting about your studios and years of shooting and go back to school. It sounds like you still have a lot to learn about photography.

darkcyber said:

Well, on mine its a miracle to get a good picture if they are standing still...forget about moving...LOL. Maybe the lag is the software...think I will try some different camera apparently and see.

Click to expand...

Hmm, I'd be interested in seeing a side by side with a Verizon version of this phone to see if there wasn't some sort of odd tweak that's been done. I'm sitting in a so-so lit basement right now and it still takes a photo as soon as I push the shutter "button".

chimphappyhour said:

Hmm, I'd be interested in seeing a side by side with a Verizon version of this phone to see if there wasn't some sort of odd tweak that's been done. I'm sitting in a so-so lit basement right now and it still takes a photo as soon as I push the shutter "button".

Click to expand...

I agree with darkcyber on this one, I tried taking a pic of our Christmas tree the other day and it took at least 5 actual seconds to take the pic, from when I hit the "button". Trying to get a good shot of my 4yr old is hard too, I'm sure it may be something I'm doing wrong, but any movement and its a bad pic.

DevinNJ said:

I agree with darkcyber on this one, I tried taking a pic of our Christmas tree the other day and it took at least 5 actual seconds to take the pic, from when I hit the "button". Trying to get a good shot of my 4yr old is hard too, I'm sure it may be something I'm doing wrong, but any movement and its a bad pic.

Click to expand...

Interesting. You're both on Verizon. I can't imagine that a carrier would muck with the camera software but I also can't figure out what other difference there could be between what I'm using and what you guys are using. I'm using the standard app with no special settings that I can think of that would make it any faster.

Yeah its weird. Sometimes the lag isn't that bad but at times it seems like it takes forever for that thing to snap a shot.

You seem to be the type of photographer that lets on to having a basic understanding of the science side of photography but you seem to be lacking greatly in the understanding of how to apply it artistically.

Click to expand...

Now who is the one ASSuming?
Actually, I'm arguing the technicals because that's what you started debating when you replied and even quoted my points. You clearly mentioned what you're getting out of the N3 rivals your old SLR. You weren't arguing an artistic license you replied to my points about the technicals.

If your measure of a camera lays in bokeh and a massive dynamic range, then all those years of photography you don't want to admit and those multiple studios you run are worth just as much as every person who got their first dslr last Christmas and decided they were ready to start their own portrait business. (And let's face it, Sears has more photo studios than you do. So what does boasting about that really say? Not much.)

Click to expand...

First, the quality of broken is determined by lens and optics. Sensor size plays in impacting the depth of bokeh but poor optics lead to poor bokeh regardless. Second, attributes of hardware such as dynamic range and processing are independent of photography skills. So sorry to disappoint you but my years of real world handling of cameras, quality shooting in studio and on site combined both in a darkroom and behind a PC far outweigh the novice who thinks artistic license is an escape route to comparing a cell phone to an SLR.

Meanwhile, real photographers, the ones that actually apply their knowledge artistically don't get hung up on whether they have sufficiently blasted the background into oblivion or making sure they've captured every detail in every shadow and kept every highlight at the same time.

Click to expand...

Nice try at covering up what you initially implied and noted by stating what you're getting out b of you phone rivals an SLR. Stated your way and artist with a crayola and a sheet of paper could put out greater quality work than Ansel Adams himself. Sorry but this thread is about the camera and your initial comment was about a phone vs an SLR. A+ for effort though.

Not once have I heard a conversation with real photographers, photography dealers, curators, instructors or historians turn to bokeh, dynamic range or fapping over specs.

Click to expand...

Not once have I ever read a camera gear thread ever go from talk of the quality level of a cell phone camera vs an SLR to now artistic license and how curators or historians view art.

The conversation is always about making photographs... using whatever means they choose.

Click to expand...

This thread isn't about art. It's about the camera on the Note 3 and struggles with it. Perhaps of the original poster had an issue winning an art fair due to subjective decisions about his work with water colors your comments might make sense.

So if I can sneak a few shots from my cellphone past the "nose" of a good photo curator and have my gallery representative be ok with selling them, then I think I can confidently say that you need to stop boasting about your studios and years of shooting and go back to school. It sounds like you still have a lot to learn about photography.

Click to expand...

Good for you on sneaking one past them if that's what you need to do n or makes you feel good.

Did I ever criticize you talent? Or was it that I respond directly to your comments about the image quality of a cell phone vs an SLR?

No more boasting done by me than you, who spoke first. I'm just staying on point with talk of the Note 3 image quality vs using blurry images or smeared processing to swing the conversation to artistic license.

Thanks for playing.