Take our customer survey to evaluate your visit.
It should only take a few minutes to answer five quick questions. Just click the Launch survey button at the end of your visit to begin.
2019-08-14 03:51 PM
All i see on my screen are black pages and nothingelse.
As for as the conestellation thing:
The earth spins to the left so naturally the stars looks likey are spenning to the right,. so you need to track them. Any exposure over 30 seonds will see sdtar trails.
2019-08-14 07:48 PM
thank you for your contribution. Do you also have a XZ3? The "stars" on the photos are only visible in (nearly) total darkness. I use the automatic setting, and it shortly sounds "klick", and then I have these marvellous pics of the starry night! I am not talking about 30 seconds, which you need for a real pic. It is beyond any doubt for me now, that Sony was so generous to spend a software who does this. As I wrote: Five shots on the same spot, five different star-constellations. It even works, when there are some clouds! For me, this topic is done.
2019-08-15 09:44 AM
Just to be clear, you're saying that when you take a photo of the night sky, instead of giving you the photo you actually took with the camera your phone is providing you with a stock photo of the night sky?
2019-08-15 09:59 AM
not a stock photo. A "generated" photo. An augmented photo. I tell you what my theory is: Sony is big. Sony is clever. Sony loves their customers. Sony has long experience with smartphone hardware and software. So why should not a developer have this idea: When the phone is held up in the sky - no problem for the sensors to notice that - and it is dark, really dark. And some very very weak lights, like stars on a clear sky, are noticable: Why not giving the customer what he wants? How difficult can it be to design a software-component that creates random pics of a starry-night sky? As I mentioned a few times: I developed this theory, because I was suspicious about the incredible "quality" of my pics, and the longer I thought about that, the more photos I took, the clearer it became: What I got was not what my eyes had seen.
Thank you for your interest!
Regards - George
2019-08-15 10:33 AM
OK, but how do you explain what you can see on the screen prior to talking the picture? If the camera is good enough to show you the night sky live in the screen then surely it's good enough to take s photo of it.
2019-08-15 10:48 AM
Ok, I really appreciate your interest! But don't get me wrong, it is Sony's part to explain :-)
I did not investigate on how exact the live preview shows the actual situation. It is likely that the camera gets tiny tiny information - very weak rays of light - and the software immediately starts to "work". Yes, the very bright stars are clearly visible and identifyable. But that does not contradict my theory, in my opinion. That is what I mean with "augmented". By the way: I am not an optical expert. But there must be a reason that "everyone" says that you need up to 30 seconds shuttertime to get a good pic of the stars. And again: I do not "invent" this problem. My thoughts are a result of what I see. A scientist could say it is based on "empirical research".
2019-08-21 12:08 AM
I support your finding that there must be something artifical.
Whatever it is.
Next question could be if there is something artificial in daylight pictures of a blue sky as well.
It might be a faulty sensor, something with the lense, or even a software addition to every picture.
Conclusion: I am courious about a blue sky picture during the day or maybe in twilight.
(and I like your attitude of searching)
2019-08-21 10:17 AM
"Great" me? Sounds great :-) ...
For me, this item is done. I am 100% convinced, that neither a "faulty sensor" nor "something with the lense" is responsible. The next time I visit Berlin I will step into the Sony-flagship-store in the Sony-Center, show the pics, and ask for an explanation. Maybe they are honest and admit, maybe the are going to tell me nonsense. We'll see.
Finally - as far as I am concerned I am not interested in further investigations about the phone's hard- and software, sorry. But I wish you much success if you do so!
2019-08-22 01:48 PM
I am 100% certain, that there is no augmented image enhancement going on with xz3 what so ever.
For many reason, firstly being that it would be immensely damaging to Sony's imaging sector if it was found to be artificially augmenting photos off any of its products.
But mostly, and this is a bit of a Biggie, I don't think Sony mobile would order it's limited development staff to create an augmentation that does little more than add a few white dots to a jet black image.
Moderators are not affiliated with, or work for Sony Mobile, and their posts represent their own opinions and views.
Click here to find out more about the different roles on the community.
2019-08-22 03:20 PM
Hi viridis. Do you have the opportunity to take some pics in the described way? At this point, after some high quality replies, including yours, it is very difficult for me to go on with the discussion, unless my partner has not seen what I have seen. This is the source of my thoughts and posts. In other words: If somebody, whom I personally did not know before, would have told me this "story" - my replies would have been mostly the same.
Thank you and kind regards