@irrlicht And that’s a great approach as well…
I’m not opposed to it. You may want to make that suggestion as topic of discussion in it’s own post, if you haven’t already. Decentralized development is not a bad idea.
Thanks for the explanation.
1 Like
Hey, can you find the CameraApp in AppLounge? I could not open the link from the Github page. Had to install the APK directly. I also could not find it in App Lounge search.
The Graphene Camera App feels great in its UI. I need to do some further testing and from what I see already it may become my default camera app.
Offtopic: is there a way to integrate further repos in AppLounge?
As said earlier, yes it can be found on App Lounge… search for “secure camera” and select the one made by GrapheneOS. If not found it’s probably not compatible with your device / Android version (requires at least Android 10 / Q).
1 Like
I don’t agree: to me OC is still better (expecially for tons of configurable options) even than GCam too.
So, to me, \e\ camera should be based on it.
Sure, OpenCamera has a lot of options, so many that an average user can despair (and GCam has even many more …)
But the main problem of OpenCamera is insufficient noise reduction. I wrote several times about this (here in German and here, both with examples). OpenCamera makes grainy pictures, especially in the corners and under low light, even when noise reduction is on. I haven’t found a workaround for that.
Maybe GCam quality and OC options would achieve the best of both worlds then…
…anyway OC is now mutch wider compatible with older OS versions (requires Android 4.0.3+ to work).
So how can we try the hacked google cam?
I found this link to be pretty informative:
1 Like
I find this post a bit counterproductive. I personally don’t see the point of hacking the Gcam even though we are part of the adventure /e/. It is better to support the effort of /e/ or graphene in my opinion and not systematically go back to GAFAM for everything and anything. So yes newpipe hack youtube, aurorastore hack the playstore but the paradigm is different in the sense that they are content platforms with a monopoly.
In any case the /e/cam or graphene are fine 
1 Like
The point is /e/cam and graphene are unusable as camera if you want quality pictures.
I really don’t agree. The quality of cam is 80% (invented number 
) due to the hardware not the software. And by the way if you want really good photo you can perform post treatement on computer or take photograph with a real device designed for that not with a slartphone. But again it’s just my point of view
That what i thought before i started using open camera, software makes or breaks the image. We could ditch our smartphones and use a pc and nokia 3310 both designed to do their job well, google-free right? The beauty of a smart phone is its multiple usage function, camera is important and has been a weak spot in /e/ since the beginning.
And has low weight. And robustness. If you plan to cross the Alps walking from north to south in 20 days or so you really think about taking your 1.5kg reflex camera with you. For reasons. But you never think about a smart phone (for navigation, communication, emergency, …)
I agree: smatrphones cameras are not intended for quality (no small lens can guarantee the capture of an adequate amount of light for high quality shootings: my old floppy-based 1 MP Sony Mavica FD-81 quality still outclasses many modern 10+ MP HDR smartphones’ cameras) but for mobility, anyway some software features - such as OC’s artificial horizon - are very useful to take “right” pics.
ALL Android camera apps relays on Google Camera APIs, so differences is in the use app-devs does of it.
This “article” confirms that that app olso needs “your device supports the Camera2 API”, which - for example - OC can use too.
Last but not least, Graphene camera app does recieve many (excessive?) updates, once a day in the last week.
It is not possible to disagree and talk the quality difference away, its there.
Very interesting reply from Zanthed to my GH-issue:
We can’t use ANYTHING from Open Camera because they use a non-free/restrictive licence and we don’t want to include GPLv3 or any variant of GPLv3 code into our project
…'cause they choosed MIT license instead.
The GrapheneOS Camera takes far better pictures on my Tearcube 2e and my Pixel XL.
Better that the native app and better than OpenCamera.
And it is much simpler to use.
I vote for making it the native app.
This topic was automatically closed after 14 days. New replies are no longer allowed.