Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Before I ship it back...

Discussion in 'Pro/Adv Discussion' started by beeline, Feb 7, 2016.

  1. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    My P3P is remarkably stable, is on firmware 1.4, and takes video that looks sharp to me. So what could be the problem? Focus of stills. It seems so unusual to me that video would look sharp but stills so soft.

    So before I box her up and wave goodbye (and get an unwanted firmware "upgrade"), could I get some opinions as to whether or not I'm being obsessive about this?

    The first picture is the P3P shot d-log with sharpness set to -2. The second still was taken with an Nvidia Shield K1at default. 12mp vs. 5mp. Someone with younger eyes please confirm or deny my suspicions. Is this unacceptable?

    P3P
    DJI_0041.JPG


    This is from the Nvidia Shield K1
    20160202145835.jpg
     
  2. WetDog

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    640
    First off, the Phantom camera is a better video camera than a still camera. The biggest issue, however, is that when you set the sharpness to -2 and use D-log you expect an unprocessed photo to be pretty soft. The picture from your tablet has been processed internally. You have to do it yourself.

    If you don't want to post process, play with the settings on the camera until you find one that you like. I'd suggest doing this with the drone at rest - that just eliminates another variable.
     
    With The Birds likes this.
  3. With The Birds

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    742
    Location:
    Australia
    +1 for Wetdog's advice....

    The phone coys spend a lot if time rooting around with internal processing settings so that any donkey can take a reasonable looking photo AND so they stand out in magazine reviews of the canera function.

    Have you noticed the trend in recent years where the most commented and liked images online are overpricessed horrid looking HDR style shots more resembling radioactive cat vomit than any depiction of reality.

    Might i suggest before you go to the inconvenience of shipping back you dropbox the original raw file and link it here. Im sure a few users could post the jog after a bit if post oricessing and you can then make an informed decision.
     
  4. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    OK I did some quick color correction and probably too much unsharp mask but this does not look right either. I was holding the Phantom for this pic.

    DJI_0041cc2.jpg
     
  5. jiggyb21

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Vermont
    Your first still looks just like all of mine. I am not blown away by the still shots I get from my P3a but at the same time I cut it some slack only imagining the technology and execution taking place to take a picture from a moving, hovering aircraft. Still blows my mind. Others will chime in and I'm curious what they say, but comparing any grounded camera to a floating one isn't fair IMO..
     
  6. With The Birds

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    742
    Location:
    Australia
    From what i can see on the phone i suspect an exchange unit will give simillar results. The camera is basically a high end mobile phone sensor with better optics. You saying the video looks good gives further confidence there is unlikley to be an issue. Same sensor and lens for still and video.
     
  7. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Thanks for everyone's input! I will also tell you the only video I've yet to record is 1080p, which looks fine (but maybe 4k would reveal softness?).

    I've uploaded 2 raw files to Dropbox. The shot of the house was set to -2 sharpness. The shot of the trees was set to 0 sharpness. If you can spare the time I would be very appreciative of your effort!

    Dropbox - DJI_0041.DNG

    Dropbox - DJI_0045.DNG
     
  8. Rus_Knights

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is my topic with the same issue that also contains a few DNGs:
    P3P Camera Quality
     
  9. With The Birds

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    742
    Location:
    Australia
    Yours look a bit off.
     
  10. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    If anyone has a few minutes please download one or both of these images (post #7) and give me your opinion as to whether or not I should send back for repair. I have the RMA from DJI so just need another set of eyes to have a look.
     
  11. LSZ1318

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    12
    Greetings beeline! Okay, not sure what's going on with the images you posted here but they look absolutely terrible. Both of them. I'm not sure how you saved them out as jpgs or what, but taking a look at your .DNG files - everything looks exactly as you would expect with this quality of camera. I saved the DNGs down to jpg - kept the resolution of your stills here - and they look 100x better than the examples you've posted. :) Perhaps I'm not understanding the issue properly but, based on the DNGs you provided, nothing wrong with the P3P!

    Oh, and first post after lurking for a bit! Happy to be on board!
     
  12. LSZ1318

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    12
    Here's my jpg - reduced to the same size as the one you've uploaded - saved on standard 'high' setting. Nothing fancy and no sharpening done - just the lens correction which of course doesn't alter the image quality..

    [​IMG]
     
  13. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Welcome LSZ1318 and thank you for having a look! The jpegs were straight from the P3P without any CC or sharpening (-2) so that may be why they look so bad. Will have another look at the .DNG files and hope to see the same results you do this time around. My eyesight is not what it used to be!
     
  14. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Mercy, that is quite an improvement! What's curious is how poor the the P3 jpeg looks compared to your example (and your jpeg is less than half the size, in bits, of the P3P version). Twice the size, half the perceived resolution?! Jpegs from my (former) GoPro looked way better (although it couldn't shoot raw).
     
    LSZ1318 likes this.
  15. Wolfiesden

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    400
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI, Ft Walton Beach, FL
    RAW images are unprocessed data from the sensor. In DLOG and -2 sharp the jpeg from the P3 will look flat and icky.

    I had uploaded unprocessed images for a comparison for another board. The unprocessed versions were loaded into lightroom and then exported with no changes. The processed versions were loaded into lightroom, color corrected, exposure corrected and sharpened.

    Unprocessed:
    [​IMG]
    Processed:
    [​IMG]

    Unprocessed:
    [​IMG]
    Processed:
    [​IMG]
     
  16. LSZ1318

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    12
    Yeah, my guess is the settings they are using to save the jpgs within the P3 must be really low - not intended to be used for anything other than a quick look see with some viewer programs!
     
  17. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    You are correct, but I was simply wanting to illustrate a focus issue and decided not to process the image for fear of introducing artifacts. Your pics look nice but I am not able to view them at 100%.

    So far I've got about the same number of people saying send it back as I do people who say that's just the way it is and accept it. What to do...

    Here is a jpeg (saved from the .DNG) of the second image linked in post #7 with a bit of sharpening. Shutter was 1/380 s. Notice how sharp it looks in the bottom left corner (and generally along the bottom of the frame) as compared to everywhere else.
    DJI_0045.jpg
     
  18. beeline

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Your file size was much smaller than what the P3P produced so there was plenty of data to produce a clean image. Maybe the Phantom just uses a really bad compression scheme? I can live with that having the raw option. Maybe DJI thought the same.
     
    #18 beeline, Feb 9, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2016
  19. LSZ1318

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    12
    A lot of factors can come into play here, including how Photoshop saves out. Look, I'd go ahead and do the return! At this point you're going to want peace of mind. You'll always wonder about it if you don't do it!
     
  20. Wolfiesden

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,187
    Likes Received:
    400
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI, Ft Walton Beach, FL
    This work?
    http://cdn.ipernity.com/200/38/26/41013826.5b88114e.jpg
    http://cdn.ipernity.com/200/02/96/41010296.a77e0f92.jpg

    BTW, you know that magnolia is gonna outgrow them other lawn ornaments right :)