Underlying tech in the Evo 3D - qHD, 3D, dual-core SMP

[you2]

I think the advantage of taking a 720p or 1080p video is if you display them on another device that supports the higher resolution. Obviously the phone's display isn't going to do either of those resolution justice.
-
Also one catch here is the quality of the encoding (how much detail is kept). Moving lots of bits take cycles and quality encoding takes more. Then again the compression rate might not be that great. Hum. oh well. Lots of unknown.
-
I should mention one thing here that should be obvious but I suspect is not. Think of a video as a highly compressed jpeg. A jpeg is a lossless compression of a bitmap; for a 1080p resolution a bitmap compressed or otherwise preserves every pixel. A jpeg is an approxmiation. A video is an approxmiation of an approxmation (lossless diffs are taken of each frame to form the moving image). The resolution merely sets the number of pixels displayed not the quality (or quantity) of details in those frames. So for a video you have quality and resolution and they are independent values.

With a small lens and small sensor, I'd be happy with good 480p, personally. (And I'm srsly ok with that - the Evo's 720p recordings are doggy on mine.)

Be it the sensor or whatever else, if a feature isn't acceptable and ready for prime time, I'd rather they leave it off. IMO - better to leave it off than have prospective customers thinking they're getting something, only to find it unusable.

If the 720p recordings are good, not jerky or frame rate limited by an over-sensitivity to perfect lighting conditions, then I'd be happy with the upgrade to a good HD, wide-screen recording capability.

But for those who demand 1080p recordings, then dropping the feature if it's not 100% ok is at least honest (something we could use more of with smartphones) and this will alert those users to assess other choices.

 

[Jensen]

You want to provide some context there? I see two youtube videos; the first is a review of the Evo 3D. The second looks like a random video shoot. What exactly am I comparing? The youtube videos only go up to 720p, so how could this possibly represent a 1080p resolution comparison? Or are we comparing something else? Clarification please?

I would love to provide context in a simple clickable way, but this forum software is driving me up the wall with the way it is handling my youtube links.

Skip to 5:13 in that review. Bob embeds the EVO 3D's 720P video capture into the video.

You can compare that to the sensation's capture at 1080P. The EVO 3D has a nice framerate and looks fine, but it's not as detailed as the sensation at the higher resolution.

 

[you2]

The sensation has an 8mb camera; the evo 5mb. That is hardly the only difference. For all we know the resolving power of the lens on the evo might be 23lpm and 80lpm on the sensation. If the phone allows any controls over the details preserved in the encoding (not sure what options are available here) they might have been set radically different. I.e, I assure you I can find 720p videos that blow 1080p videos out of the water. In fact I can happily make you a 100kb/s 1080p video and a 5mb/s 720p video if it will help make you feel better.

I would love to provide context in a simple clickable way, but this forum software is driving me up the wall with the way it is handling my youtube links.

Skip to 5:13 in that review. Bob embeds the EVO 3D's 720P video capture into the video.

You can compare that to the sensation's capture at 1080P. The EVO 3D has a nice framerate and looks fine, but it's not as detailed as the sensation at the higher resolution.

 

[novox77]

Yeah, there are more variables to consider for video. I would feel comfortable qualifying that video quality at 1080p on the Sensation is better than the 720p on the Evo3D.

Now, if we could hold some variables constant, especially the optics, sensor, and encoding, and/or use one phone, then we might be able to draw some conclusions about differences between 720p and 1080p recording.

1080p (or 2MP) is about as high as I would want any sensor resolution to be on a cell phone camera. I have yet to see any cell phone camera optics resolve light in a way that would justify any more pixels. I know; I've said this in many threads, so I won't get into the science of it here.

But I bring it up again because I think the optics are strong enough to deliver image quality that lies somewhere between 720p and 1080p, which means 1080p-quality video is justified on these devices, provided that the CPU and encoding does the recording (and to a lesser extent, native playback) justice.

 

[falconey]

Just speculating - it would seem to me that you can't have decent 1080p without a better/faster SD card. I wonder if this is a US/Sprint move to control costs and they're just including their standard 8 GB SD card?

The HTC web pages, both international and US/Sprint - are stunning in their uncharacteristic lack of specs for this particular phone. Hopefully, it's because it's coming soon and not a sign of things to come.

The Wirefly guy said he couldn't find the feature - not sure if that means it's not there, or he couldn't find it.

I don't think it's there. Sprints specs say 'HD video capture at 720p and playback up to 1080p'.

 

[mwalt2]

Just speculating - it would seem to me that you can't have decent 1080p without a better/faster SD card. I wonder if this is a US/Sprint move to control costs and they're just including their standard 8 GB SD card?

Since I've wasted enough time on youtube watching unboxing videos of the sensation, I'm pretty sure one of them said it comes with a 8gb class 4 sd card .

 

[EarlyMon]

NOTE ON FORUM USE OF YOUTUBES:

Many YouTubes have options you can't see in the forum-embedded version.

That's the case in Jensen's Sensation comparison videos above.

In those cases - just click on the green title bar above the tube - it will launch the full YouTube page for that vid (in a separate tab or window depending on your browser).

In the case of the second vid, you'll find options to see that presented to you in 1080, full screen.

Hope this helps!

 

[EarlyMon]

Yeah, there are more variables to consider for video. I would feel comfortable qualifying that video quality at 1080p on the Sensation is better than the 720p on the Evo3D.

All speculation of details to the contrary, that's telling me that the Sensation has a superior recording subsystem for HD vid.

That may be overreaching on my part - but - we expect hardware encoding is same between HTC software and the 8660 - leaving a system difference.

If the 3vo can't handle 720p as well as the Sensation doing roughly the twice the bit rate/resolution (all things being equal), the Sensation wouldn't obviously do worse de-stressing it to the 720p case.

Very disappointing if that's all true.

 

[RichboyJhae]

I'm hoping that the E3D has 1080 recording for 2D. It was touted all over CTIA during the interview period and during the announcement that Hesse made. Maybe 720p statement on Sprints website refers to 3D only since they are saying that's the most important part of the phone. If not, it'll really suck for them to sereptitiously change specs on the phone.

 

[legacy]

I'm hoping that the E3D has 1080 recording for 2D. It was touted all over CTIA during the interview period and during the announcement that Hesse made. Maybe 720p statement on Sprints website refers to 3D only since they are saying that's the most important part of the phone. If not, it'll really suck for them to sereptitiously change specs on the phone.

Sprint seems to like to offer last second "surprises" about premium phones. Maybe 1080p recording is one of them.

 

[you2]

If the 3vo can't handle 720p as well as the Sensation doing roughly the twice the bit rate/resolution (all things being equal), the Sensation wouldn't obviously do worse de-stressing it to the 720p case.

Very disappointing if that's all true.

--
Is this a known quantity at this point ? I wonder how they sample data to produce videos. I.e, waht camera resolution is required to produce 1080p videos (not pixel quantity) ?
-
Do you think there really is a difference in video pipelines from a hardware perspective ?

 

[Jensen]

Sprint seems to like to offer last second "surprises" about premium phones. Maybe 1080p recording is one of them.

Well they initially said it would do 1080P in 2D. So the "surprise" now is that it doesn't.

Look, yes the sensation and the 3vo both use the same qualcomm chip, but they have totally different camera systems. My guess is that the 3vo is using the same dual 5mp part that the LG thrill is using. As you can see, both were originally specced at the same frame rate for 2D 1080P:

LG Thrill 4G - Full phone specifications

HTC EVO 3D - Full phone specifications

The source of that 1080P 24fps spec is probably directly from the manufacturer of the dual 5mp cameras. The part is probably capable of that, but HTC couldn't get the software/drivers ready in time to pull it off.

It seems I get dog piled on in these forums every time I suggest that the 3vo isn't the best at something. But I'm guessing that even if/when HTC adds 1080p 2D recording down the road in a patch (and I think they will) the frame rate won't average more than 24FPS which is not as good as the Sensation or the SGSII.

For that matter, I don't think the 2D stills that I've seen so far are as good as either of those other phone cameras. It looks like there was definitely a trade off to get the 3D thing going.

 

[ebolamonkey3]

Well they initially said it would do 1080P in 2D. So the "surprise" now is that it doesn't.

Look, yes the sensation and the 3vo both use the same qualcomm chip, but they have totally different camera systems. My guess is that the 3vo is using the same dual 5mp part that the LG thrill is using. As you can see, both were originally specced at the same frame rate for 2D 1080P:

LG Thrill 4G - Full phone specifications

HTC EVO 3D - Full phone specifications

The source of that 1080P 24fps spec is probably directly from the manufacturer of the dual 5mp cameras. The part is probably capable of that, but HTC couldn't get the software/drivers ready in time to pull it off.

It seems I get dog piled on in these forums every time I suggest that the 3vo isn't the best at something. But I'm guessing that even if/when HTC adds 1080p 2D recording down the road in a patch (and I think they will) the frame rate won't average more than 24FPS which is not as good as the Sensation or the SGSII.

For that matter, I don't think the 2D stills that I've seen so far are as good as either of those other phone cameras. It looks like there was definitely a trade off to get the 3D thing going.

I certainly hope that's not the case. But we'll find out soon enough.

Speaking of which, where are the reviews??!

 

[EarlyMon]

--
Is this a known quantity at this point ? I wonder how they sample data to produce videos. I.e, waht camera resolution is required to produce 1080p videos (not pixel quantity) ?
-
Do you think there really is a difference in video pipelines from a hardware perspective ?

I think Jensen probably nailed it one in his post following yours.

Whether it's pipeline or other, this is really looking like a whole subsystem issue, as he pointed out.

 

[novox77]

Well they initially said it would do 1080P in 2D. So the "surprise" now is that it doesn't.

Look, yes the sensation and the 3vo both use the same qualcomm chip, but they have totally different camera systems. My guess is that the 3vo is using the same dual 5mp part that the LG thrill is using. As you can see, both were originally specced at the same frame rate for 2D 1080P:

LG Thrill 4G - Full phone specifications

HTC EVO 3D - Full phone specifications

The source of that 1080P 24fps spec is probably directly from the manufacturer of the dual 5mp cameras. The part is probably capable of that, but HTC couldn't get the software/drivers ready in time to pull it off.

It seems I get dog piled on in these forums every time I suggest that the 3vo isn't the best at something. But I'm guessing that even if/when HTC adds 1080p 2D recording down the road in a patch (and I think they will) the frame rate won't average more than 24FPS which is not as good as the Sensation or the SGSII.

For that matter, I don't think the 2D stills that I've seen so far are as good as either of those other phone cameras. It looks like there was definitely a trade off to get the 3D thing going.

I was on board with everything you said until the last paragraph

I have yet to see a still image from any Android phone really stand out from any other. For one, there have been no controlled tests that I've seen for me to make a valid comparison. When I look at the best case scenario photo taken by my Evo 4G, it looks on par with the best case scenario photo taken from an Epic, iPhone4, Nexus S, and a handful of other phone cameras I've tried.

OTOH, for any given phone, I can show you a really shitty shot (human error excluded).

I don't think the presence of the 3D feature diminished the still image capturing capability of the Evo 3D's camera. Or at least I haven't seen any evidence indicating this. The 3D capability should have nothing to do with the 2D functionality. I'm definitely open to the possibility that the firmware's post-processing of the raw image is not as good as another phone model, but again, that has nothing to do with the presence of the 3D feature on the phone.

 

[Jensen]

I was on board with everything you said until the last paragraph

I don't think the presence of the 3D feature diminished the still image capturing capability of the Evo 3D's camera. Or at least I haven't seen any evidence indicating this. The 3D capability should have nothing to do with the 2D functionality. I'm definitely open to the possibility that the firmware's post-processing of the raw image is not as good as another phone model, but again, that has nothing to do with the presence of the 3D feature on the phone.

Let me clarify; I don't think the 3D capability has any impact on the 2D functionality either. What I'm postulating is that the part that they sourced (the dual 5 mp sensors) which was necessary for 3D imaging, is simply not as good at 2D stills as the 8MP shooters on the sensation or the SGSII.

I also would have to completely disagree with you that all "best case scenario" photos from android phones don't really stand out from each other.

Here is as good a "controlled test" as you are probably going to find:

AnandTech - Gallery - Lights On - Controlled Smartphone Camera Comparison - 18 Photos

Keep clicking on the image.

 

[EarlyMon]

From last year:

OmniVision OV8812- Camera in HTC evo 4g.

OmniVision OV5642- Camera in the Apple iphone 4g

OmniVision OV2640- Camera in Blackberry storm and curve.

So, I went to their web site to see if I could find a two-sensor assembly or the like - so far, no soap.

Here's a link to their 5MP page to get us started.

OmniVision

~~~

PS, just saw this on the update -

I also would have to completely disagree with you that all Android phone camera sensors are created equal.

novox77 said that??

 

[Jensen]

From last year:


~~~

PS, just saw this on the update -



novox77 said that??

Re-worded my post for you.

 

[hakujin]

The sensation has an 8mb camera; the evo 5mb. That is hardly the only difference. For all we know the resolving power of the lens on the evo might be 23lpm and 80lpm on the sensation. If the phone allows any controls over the details preserved in the encoding (not sure what options are available here) they might have been set radically different. I.e, I assure you I can find 720p videos that blow 1080p videos out of the water. In fact I can happily make you a 100kb/s 1080p video and a 5mb/s 720p video if it will help make you feel better.

This + your post on other variables = precisely the point.

Also, the vids; I downloaded the 1080p sample and the 720p sample. Difference is negligible to me sitting 11feet away from a 46" Sharp Aquos.

1080p isn't a crucial factor on a mobile phone imho, but 720p is a welcome break from the lousy vid on every phone I've previously and currently own. If I wanted pristine 1080p video (in something that can at least be carried around, I would not use a HTC Sensation per se, but I would use a Canon EOS 5D Mark II. A layman should see a more meaningful difference between it and the Evo 3D/Sensation video test reviews, where a/v encoding (i.e. choice of codecs, compression artifacts, and SQ) is concerned in both 720p and 1080p modes.

720p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOHO_EphELA
1080p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDXZZUqL5vc

Is it an apples to oranges comparison? Certainly. But my point is I think 1080p is better left to devices that do it justice. The very minor differences I perceive on the aforementioned videos isn't worth the much larger file size. And... both are spectacular as far as smarphones are concerned. When I saw the first Evo HD video, I was let down. Now I am bedazzled.

Now... if phones are created completely equal and one comes w/ 1080p anyway and I can kick it down to 720p, then sure, that's a better option. However, it's not a primary comparison to me (720p vs 1080p), and I won't even be looking at the Sensation since it's not Sprint. NO other carrier is going to give me two all-you-can-eat data/text/m2m 1400 min 4G android devices for $112.50/mo (CDP).

my .02.

 

[EarlyMon]

Re-worded my post for you.

Oh, thanks - wasn't nit-picking you, I'm not catching all posts as I usually do, so I was just saying - if he'd said that, I'll join the party!!

There's all sorts of actual sensor differences!

OK, gotcha - sorry to butt in there.

 

[some.devil]

Have any of you guys know if you can see the screen while wearing polarized sunglasses?

 

[novox77]

Have any of you guys know if you can see the screen while wearing polarized sunglasses?

LCD screen tech uses polarization to block out light. The light that shines through is polarized, so any sort of polarizing filter, like that in your glasses, could block the light completely depending on the orientation of the polarization.

So I'm going to say that you may encounter problems seeing the screen with polarized glasses on (this has nothing to do with 3D, btw).

 

[EarlyMon]

From the Next Time Your Friends Say Android Isn't Ready For Dual-Core Department:

Now that you've read through here and are aSMP experts, you can pull out your phone on those doubters and point out, courtesy of setting, About phone, Software, that your 3vo's kernel is marked SMP PREEMPT, as in SMP preemptive multitasking.

Because by the time you need to do that, they're already arguing with their own eyes after you've shown them how insanely fast your phone is.

 

[cobalt]

LCD screen tech uses polarization to block out light. The light that shines through is polarized, so any sort of polarizing filter, like that in your glasses, could block the light completely depending on the orientation of the polarization.

So I'm going to say that you may encounter problems seeing the screen with polarized glasses on (this has nothing to do with 3D, btw).

Some good news here.

In theory, I totally agree with everything you just said. However, in practice, I just tried my polarized sunglasses with my 3VO, and they have (almost) ZERO effect on the screen. I can turn my head any which way and still see the screen perfectly. It's only as much darker as you'd expect from wearing, well, sunglasses. So if there's polarization from the LCD, I guess the conclusion is that it's not quite so simple as a simple linear polarization. I actually thought about waiting for an OLED display like a hypothetical SGS2 just because of the polarization problem, but it turns out it's no problem at all with the 3VO.

(I say "almost" zero effect because at extreme angles I see some prismatic/diffraction effect, but it's not pronounced, and I mean literally looking at the screen from the side.)

 

[EarlyMon]

Some good news here.

In theory, I totally agree with everything you just said. However, in practice, I just tried my polarized sunglasses with my 3VO, and they have (almost) ZERO effect on the screen. I can turn my head any which way and still see the screen perfectly. It's only as much darker as you'd expect from wearing, well, sunglasses.

My sunglasses are horizontally polarized and neutral filtered. When holding the phone looking at the home screen in portrait mode, it's just slightly darker. Rotate 90 degrees to landscape while looking at the big flip-clock/weather widget - the colors shift - but the top portion of the flip-numbers (already a slight gray) darken quite a bit and the lower half of the numbers go off-white.

So - the AVS panel isn't a simple linear polarization but like most all LCDs it is polarized light coming off it.

Try it like that and see if you can reproduce my results.

I tried the same in 3D viewing - however, the parallax barrier for 3D is simply an active linear polarizer, so I'd expect a bigger change. And - when rotating the glasses to the display by 90 degrees, a good part of the 3D effect is lost.