[HN Gopher] Insta360's Ace Pro combines Leica engineering with c...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Insta360's Ace Pro combines Leica engineering with computational
       photography
        
       Author : mikece
       Score  : 25 points
       Date   : 2023-11-21 13:39 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (petapixel.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (petapixel.com)
        
       | gehwartzen wrote:
       | I have only experience with one of Insta360's product, the Link
       | tracking webcam, but was left extremely impressed. The image
       | quality was absolutely phenomenal. I imagine this action cam
       | could only be even better working with Leica.
        
         | andrewmunsell wrote:
         | They've had a Leica partnership for a while in the form of the
         | Insta360 One R (and RS) 1-inch lenses, plus with their 1-inch
         | 360 module. There's still some fundamental physics limitations
         | with gathering light on a small sensor, but I enjoy using the
         | 1-inch lens on my One RS when I can over the "normal" action
         | lens.
        
           | jjbinx007 wrote:
           | It's worth bearing in mind that the so-called "1 inch"
           | sensors are approximately half an inch in size.
           | 
           | https://www.trustedreviews.com/explainer/what-is-1-inch-
           | came....
        
         | __mharrison__ wrote:
         | I have a Link and one of their 360 cameras. I am impressed by
         | birth the hardware and the software.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | > ... Combines Leica Engineering with AI
       | 
       | So it makes photos showing people with six fingers per hand?
        
         | orbital-decay wrote:
         | Sarcasm aside, this is mostly about their custom ML denoiser
         | for the video:
         | 
         |  _> Using an onboard 5nm AI chip, the Ace and Ace Pro cameras
         | use a custom-trained AI neural network to denoise the footage
         | for a clearer image in real time, Insta360 claims._
         | 
         | ML denoisers are pretty useful in high-quality photography if
         | done right. Photographers were initially skeptical at large,
         | but quickly accepted it, as products from Topaz, DxO, and alike
         | were giving excellent results. You are extremely unlikely to
         | stumble upon any invented detail in a denoiser like this.
        
           | foldr wrote:
           | Also, any denoiser is 'inventing' details. You can't know for
           | sure what the value of the pixel would have been absent
           | noise. It's always a probabilistic guess. Guessing based on
           | higher level details just produces different kinds of
           | artifact (and possibly more noticeable ones in some cases).
        
             | hyperbovine wrote:
             | This quibble is just going to completely cease being a
             | thing in 5-10 years.
        
             | bastawhiz wrote:
             | When I ride my motorcycle with my insta360, the difference
             | between one gray pixel and a slightly different gray pixel
             | for the asphalt is really not something I care about. What
             | I care about is that I can't notice it. If the denoising
             | model does a better job of making up convincing pixels,
             | that's a win. The outcome I'm looking for is a video with
             | fewer visible artifacts caused by the limitations of the
             | hardware.
        
             | lambdasquirrel wrote:
             | I have to quibble on this one for technical correctness.
             | These denoisers remove detail, not add them. The assumption
             | is that you should have flat and even areas, not finely
             | pixelated areas.
        
               | Toutouxc wrote:
               | DxO DeepPRIME XD (their newest and greatest AI denoiser)
               | seems to actually invent details. If I take a picture
               | with my mirrorless of a bookshelf from across the room at
               | ISO 32000 and let XD go crazy at it (slider to the
               | right), it reconstructs gibberish letters on the book
               | covers.
               | 
               | If I don't let it go crazy and keep it subtle, the
               | results are incredible. Tbh for my camera (EOS R10) and
               | DxO, low dynamic range, not noise, is now the limiting
               | factor for high ISO photos.
        
       | gillesjacobs wrote:
       | Does this pivot from 360 cameras towards traditional action cams
       | means that 360 cameras are too niche a market?
       | 
       | Too bad, even for traditional action camera use cases 360 cameras
       | have several advantages, but I guess the higher cost limits the
       | market.
        
         | LeifCarrotson wrote:
         | No, Insta360 has a ton of both traditional action cams and 360
         | cameras. The fact that they have "360" in the brand name hasn't
         | stopped them from releasing a bunch of successful non-360
         | cameras.
         | 
         | I love my One RS 1" (the non-360 Leica lens). The only caveats
         | are that it's really hard to search for the accessories, and
         | doesn't have a dive case.
        
       | reedf1 wrote:
       | I went travelling recently and maybe I'm becoming grumpy and old,
       | but it was barely possible to move for people ambling around with
       | their phone/camera/selfie stick. It felt much much worse than I
       | ever remembered it being.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | Just wait. In a few years these things will have 360 degree
         | lenses embedded in people's forehead (or both shoulders) and
         | things will settle down.
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | 30w fast charge (on the Pro), good to 33ft, and a flip screen...
       | insta360 is killing it. Having a 5nm chip on a consumer device
       | like this, imo, shows a passion for excellence that you won't see
       | in most competitors.
       | 
       | I hope these class of devices can start integrating better with
       | phones. The screens on these things aren't big enough for
       | comfortably complex & advanced photo-nerdery, but even my old
       | Zcam E1 (Kickstarter 4/3" (aka MFT) 4k action camera from 2p25)
       | has a pretty ok wifi app where I can compose shots well &
       | relatively quickly change settings. It's also great for composing
       | group photos. These are amazing sensor packages, and are held
       | back by how they are marketed & targetted, but eventually those
       | designations are going to start crumbling some, and that should
       | be _amazing_.
       | 
       | If these devices did expose some kind of more prosumer interface
       | I could easily see them migrating from action cams to something
       | like camera replacements. Insta360 has already done great with
       | cameras & optics. Their One RS platform allowing the lens +
       | sensor to swap out, and it's easy for me to imagine expanding the
       | lineup from mostly wide angle ish prime lenses to also incclude
       | some optical zoom or long focal length primes.
       | 
       | Ideally phones would also integrate themselves well too. I can
       | plug a USB camera (I've had much more hit & miss situation with
       | microphones weirdly) into most Android phones and have it work
       | (alas notably Chrome often doesn't pick up the device
       | frustratingly!!); handy for conference rooms or desks with good
       | fixed infrastructure. But so far we still don't good standards
       | based ways to do this kind of thing over wifi. It'd be fun to
       | swing for the fences & see someone bake Media-over-QUIC or
       | something bleeding Edge into a device, but even an rtsp streamer
       | & Android support as a sink would enable fun weird interesting
       | advanced uses galore.
        
       | Grazester wrote:
       | Nice. GoPro's seem to always overheat and shutoff. Hopefully
       | these manage heat better!
        
         | ctennis1 wrote:
         | My Insta360 X3 shuts down quite a bit for heat too. Maybe these
         | Ace Pros are better.
        
           | canucker2016 wrote:
           | DC Rainmaker's review of the GoPro Hero 12 had a section on
           | overheating. Overheating typically occurs when there no
           | airflow around the camera. For the Hero 12, GoPro removed the
           | GPS chip, which has reduced the amount of overheating -
           | recording time more than doubled compared to the Hero 11.
           | 
           | see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgT-ZNTaRCA&t=687s
           | 
           | One Insta360 Ace Pro review on YouTube compared the Ace Pro
           | and GoPro Hero 12 and the Ace Pro kept going for at least
           | 1h15mins while the Hero 12 shutdown after less than 30mins.
           | 
           | see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJCNUF4sHo&t=603s
        
       | konraditurbe wrote:
       | I'll stick with GoPro even though Insta360 has provided me with
       | their cameras. GoPro's official APIs are just too good to switch.
        
         | eurekin wrote:
         | What the API is allowing to do?
        
         | justinator wrote:
         | I could use an Insta360 if you're looking to unload. I keep
         | scratching the lenses of the GoPro Max and I can't afford to
         | keep replacing these things.
        
         | joshu wrote:
         | really? what do they let you do? as a user i feel like insta360
         | is everything gopro hopes it could be
        
       | pdntspa wrote:
       | Computational photography = an excuse to skimp on optics and
       | traditional processing
        
         | justinator wrote:
         | Also what my iPhone does.
        
           | hexo wrote:
           | And thats exactly why we buy cameras to do actual photos, not
           | some random computational imagery.
        
         | TaylorAlexander wrote:
         | I feel like "an excuse to skimp" has negative connotations but
         | another way of phrasing it is "getting every bit of performance
         | possible out of the package".
         | 
         | I just listened to a few reviews of the Panasonic G9ii and it
         | has computational photography features too, but that's not to
         | skimp on optics (very good lenses are available) it is again to
         | get the maximum performance out of the system.
         | 
         | Why would you not spend some compute power to make your camera
         | hardware more versatile?
        
           | pdntspa wrote:
           | I don't want that versatility if it's going to compromise the
           | integrity of the image just because some AI was trained on
           | what the average yokel considers a "good picture"
           | 
           | I want the optics and processing to produce the most
           | detailed, widest-gamut, highest-dynamic-range image that is
           | possible, give it to me in a raw form, and then allow me to
           | shape the image to whatever I need it to be
           | 
           | AI R&D takes away from optics/processing R&D, and those are
           | what should be getting 100% of the R&D effort
        
             | TaylorAlexander wrote:
             | Right so maybe you aren't the target customer.
             | 
             | > AI R&D takes away from optics/processing R&D
             | 
             | Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I don't know what the
             | engineering structure of the company is like.
             | 
             | I just disagree that the goal or purpose of computational
             | photography is to skimp in other areas. The G9ii has a 25
             | megapixel micro four thirds image sensor but it can take
             | 100 megapixel photos using an automated process where the
             | image sensor is physically shifted around (thanks to in-
             | body image stabilization capability) while multiple
             | exposures are taken and then combined using computational
             | techniques.
             | 
             | But that is certainly not as an alternative to producing a
             | 100 megapixel micro four thirds sensor, which would have
             | very small pixels and thus poor noise performance among
             | other things. On the G9ii, the computational features
             | purely extend the function of the system. You could argue
             | maybe they would have gone to 30 megapixels or 35 if they
             | did not have this alternative, I don't know.
             | 
             | If you want the absolute best possibly image quality, you
             | simply will not want a pocket action camera. But all
             | cameras will adopt more computational techniques and I
             | don't think it's correct to say they are doing so because
             | they wanted to skimp in other areas. Action cameras already
             | skimp on lens quality to get a pocket form factor, not
             | because they are adding AI. Additionally on cell phones,
             | the form factor has always been the reason for low quality
             | lenses and small sensor size. AI clearly has a place in
             | extending the capability of a camera system with other
             | physical constraints. Perhaps some companies will use that
             | as an excuse to use cheaper optics than what is possible,
             | but I would argue we cannot infer they have done that
             | simply because computational photography is used. Computers
             | are simply cheap and these techniques will get added
             | because they have zero or very low BOM cost impact.
        
         | Toutouxc wrote:
         | I'm not sure how to understand this, surely doing
         | "computational photography" (combining exposures, AI denoising
         | and sharpening, smart postprocessing) is in every way more
         | complex than "traditional processing" (camera eyeballing the
         | white balance, applying a tonal curve and calling it a day).
        
         | JshWright wrote:
         | What advantage would traditional processing have over this
         | approach?
        
         | aeturnum wrote:
         | I don't think you're wrong exactly, but I would say that
         | computational photography is an explanation for why you might
         | pick this camera over similarly spec'ed ones. Most people never
         | approach the fundamental physical limits of their cameras
         | because they are quite hard to use optimally - I think there's
         | a lot of space for better software ("ai" or otherwise) to help
         | out.
        
       | kriz9 wrote:
       | I love my Gopro but the app/software experience is complete ad-
       | ridden trash. Only reason I am looking for an alternative.
       | Hopefully this is it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-22 23:02 UTC)