Moto X4 review: A mid-range phone done right

Not everyone wants to spend top dollar on a phone — if that’s the case, the Moto X4 is a fantastic choice a couple steps below that top level.

The quick take

Project Fi was in dire need of a new, solid, mid-range phone — and now it has one in the Moto X4. Motorola’s $399 phone offers build quality that will make you feel like you paid far more, with hardware features like waterproofing that are great to see. And Google has managed to make a Motorola software experience even more appealing by adding guaranteed updates through the Android One program. Performance, battery life and camera quality are all befitting a phone of this price range. The Moto X4 is a capable leader in the sub-flagship space.

The Good

• Excellent software
• Great build quality with nice materials
• Good cameras for the money
• High quality display in all respects

The Bad

• Just average battery life
• Notable step down in performance from the high-end
• Android One version limited to Project Fi
• Confusing variety of SKUs globally

See at Motorola
See at Project Fi

The internals

Moto X4 Tech Specs

Great for the money

Moto X4 Things you’ll love

Motorola has its hardware processes absolutely locked in. For all of the valid criticism that it doesn’t vary things much from generation to generation, every phone it’s put out in the past few years has been built like a tank out of great materials — the Moto X4 is no different, even at $399.

The Moto X4 feels fantastic, and has hardware features you don’t expect at this price.

You get the same solid metal frame with tasteful texturing, and finely milled edges that join the glass on both sides perfectly. It feels great all around — befitting a far more expensive device — even though the glass on the back is definitely a weak point when it comes to long-term durability concerns. Yes it’s rather generic, looking like just about every other Motorola phone, but that’s no big deal in this price range — I’d rather have time and money spent on the actual build of the device rather than extra flare that serves no purpose.

Beyond the external design, the Moto X4 also gives you a set of nice-to-have features you wouldn’t always expect for this segment. You get USB-C with fast charging, IP68 water-resistance, dual cameras on the back, a front-facing camera flash and a great one-touch fingerprint sensor on the front. (And hey, a headphone jack!)

The 5.2-inch 1080p display is much better than I’d expect for the money, with punchy colors and surprisingly good viewing angles. It’s not the biggest, highest resolution or brightest screen out there, but I would have no qualms with it even if it were on a $650 phone — that’s high praise. The only downside is having the older Gorilla Glass 3 on the front, rather than the newer GG 5.

Before receiving my Moto X4 review unit, I was expecting the Android One software experience to differ from what I had seen previously on the “international” Moto X4. Thankfully that isn’t the case at all — the Android One Moto X4 has the exact same set of software features and tweaks from Motorola as the unlocked non-Android One version. And that’s a really good thing.

You get Motorola’s excellent software, backed up by Google’s guarantee of updates with Android One.

So you get Motorola’s camera app, its super-great ambient display and notifications, and the little gestures like twisting the phone to launch the camera or doing a “chop” motion to toggle the flashlight at any time. But because this is an Android One device, Google guarantees that it’ll get “at least two years” of software updates, and that’s the one area where Motorola has not done well in the past — especially on less-expensive phones like this.

Put simply, the Moto X4’s software is fantastic. Motorola’s additions are super useful and perfectly fit in with Google’s vision for Android, and features like Moto Display are in my opinion better than what Google ships on the Pixel 2. Nothing is duplicated in the system or unnecessary like you’ll so often find on the less-refined phones in this price range. This is software befitting of any phone at any price.

Motorola’s other historic weak point is the camera, but it has done a solid job with the Moto X4. Interestingly for a cheaper phone this is Motorola’s first rear dual-camera setup, and it’s gone with an LG-like pair of a “standard” lens next to a wide-angle one. The main camera’s hardware is just better in every way — higher resolution, larger pixels, wider aperture — but it’s still fun to have the wide-angle shooter at your disposal.

A surprisingly good pair of cameras, with shortcomings in the usual places.

And you know what? The cameras are actually pretty good! I took a whole lot of photos, many of which you can see above, that were really good in terms of color production and detail. Even the wide-angle shooter is capable of some fun shots, provided you don’t tax it with a low-light scene. The main camera can handle low light pretty well, but its processing doesn’t match high-end phones in mixed scenes — Motorola’s HDR just isn’t that great. The camera app itself is relatively quick, but capture times are understandably slow with this processor.

Not much to dislike

Moto X4 Things you’ll hate

This section is a whole lot shorter than the previous one — there just isn’t much to dislike about the Moto X4. If there’s one negative you can point out, it’s that the external hardware and software are of a flagship level, but the specs and performance show you that the phone is, indeed, $399. The Snapdragon 630 processor is capable, but not on the same level as flagships with an 835 or even 821. If you’re in North America, you’re getting 3GB of RAM and 32GB of storage instead of the 4GB (if not 6GB) and 64GB or more.

The only place you notice you’re using a cheaper phone is in the performance and battery life.

In real-world use, these number discrepancies don’t translate into a huge performance delta, but it is noticeable at times. You don’t ever see dropped frames or stutters or crashes, but you do notice things just take an extra couple of beats here and there when compared to the hottest phones out today. Everything you do pushes that Snapdragon 630 closer to its maximum capabilities than it’d ever push a Snapdragon 835, and having 3GB of RAM means you’re just a bit more likely to see apps dump out of memory than on other phones with 1-3GB more.

Battery life, too, is just okay. With your processor working harder to do all of the typical tasks, it has to be up and running for longer and that takes up some of that precious 3000mAh battery. The capacity in itself is totally fine, and we’ve seen other phones do pretty well with it when paired with more efficient processors, but here it equates to just average battery life. I could get a full day just fine, but that’s on an average day with nothing extraordinary happening — and it didn’t have much left in the tank at the end. This aligns well with what our own Daniel Bader found in his Moto Z2 Play review, which is built on a very similar recipe.

A great choice

Moto X4 Should you buy it?

As an editor at Android Central, I have access to just about any high-end phone I could want. Currently, I’m using a Google Pixel 2. I could swap my Project Fi account over to this Moto X4 and use it every single day and really not notice any drop-off in quality for ~80% of what I do in an average week. In terms of the quality of the hardware, the characteristics of the display, the range of available features and the intuitive nature of the software, things are imperceptible from a $650 phone.

So much of the Moto X4 experience feels like a flagship … at $250 less.

There are just a few places where you notice the Moto X4 isn’t a flagship-level phone. Its cameras are very good, but they can’t handle some difficult scenes or low-light shots. Even though the processor and RAM are good enough for the basics, you can find their limits if you push your phone hard. Battery life, as a result, is just average. But nothing is bad on the Moto X4. And outside of these few things, everything else is top-notch — and that’s awesome because it means there are lots of people who can save $200-300 and still get a great phone here.

For $400, it’s tough to find a better overall experience than the Moto X4 today. The best option, if it works for you, is to get the Android One version that has a guaranteed update path. That is, of course, limited to Project Fi — making it an option for a small subset of people. But even if you have to go with the regular unlocked version from Motorola, you’re going to be happy with the Moto X4. This is a mid-range Android phone done right.

See at Motorola
See at Project Fi

The $24 Lumsing TV wall mount lets you watch your favorite shows from any angle

This thing is built to last.

Is this deal for me?

The Lumsing dual articulating arm TV wall mount is down to $23.99 with code DSUMLN65 on Amazon. This wall mount normally sells around $40 and has never dropped much lower than that through direct price drops.

The dual articulating arm is a key component to this wall mount because it gives it a huge range of motion and allows you to move the TV to the best possible angle for you whether you’re chilling on the couch or watching a game with a bunch of friends.

Features include:

• Fits most of 27-70-inch TVs up to 99lbs
• Fits VESA (mounting hole pattern): 75x75mm, 100x100mm, 100x200mm, 200x200mm, 300x200mm, 300x300mm, 400x200mm, 400x300mm, 400x400mm, 600x400mm
• Low Profile mount retracts to 4.3-inches to save space, extends 20-inches from the wall
• Tilt: 15 degrees down/forward
• Total Rotation: 60 degrees right/left
• Easy installation, installation manual and fitting screws and bolts included
• NOT suitable for 16-inch wood stud spacing. Fit below 12-inch wood stud spacing.

If you have a TV smaller than 27-inches or want a wall mount with a smaller footprint, you can get this AmazonBasics mount that is also on sale.

TL;DR

• What makes this deal worth considering? – This is one of the best prices we’ve ever seen. Beats any direct price drop on this item.
• Things to know before you buy! – Read the features and make sure this mount will work for what you’re trying to do. Check your stud spacing, your VESA mounting holes, and TV weight before making this purchase.

See at Amazon

More from Thrifter:

• 8 weird things you probably have in your house that sell on eBay
• How to save money when driving

For more great deals be sure to check out our friends at Thrifter now!

Get Fallout 4: Game of the Year Edition on PlayStation 4 for just $40

Time to go back through on Survival mode.

Is this deal for me?

Fallout 4: Game of the Year Edition is down to $39.99 on Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC. This game normally sells at $60 on the consoles and $50 on PC. This is its first direct price drop on the physical game on Amazon.

The Game of the Year Edition includes the base Fallout 4 game plus all the downloadable content released for it: Automatron, Wasteland Workshop, Far Harbor, Contraptions Workshop, Vault-Tec Workshop, and Nuka-World. These aren’t included on the disc but rather through a code available inside, so you’ll need Internet access to get them.

Fallout 4 is a post-apocalyptic open-world adventure game. It has elements of shooters, RPGs, and stealth games all rolled into one. There are so many quests to do, paths to take, and places to explore that if you buy this today we might not see you again until next year. You can go through the whole game on Easy as an all-out brawler using mini nukes and automatic shotguns, or you can run through on Survival mode as a stealth melee fighter. And whichever one you do first, you can eventually start a new game as the other and have an all new experience.

TL;DR

• What makes this deal worth considering? – This is the first direct price drop we’ve seen on the Game of the Year Edition, which only just released in August.
• Things to know before you buy! – Fallout 4 is an older game, but it has been regularly updated for a long time now. With the addition of mods, the game looks as fresh and new as anything being released this year.

See at Amazon

Happy thrifting!

Verizon’s Total Mobile Protection brings screen repairs down to $29

Complete protection against loss, theft, and damage starts at $9 per month.

Verizon’s Total Mobile Protection offers coverage for loss, theft, or damage to your phone as well as an extra layer of customer care using their Tech Coach experts. It’s available for both single lines and multiple lines and starts at $9 per month. It’s a pretty good deal as far as insurance goes, with perks like next day replacement and three claims per year.

One awesome feature is being able to get your cracked screen fixed while you wait in over 150 cities, and it got even more awesome as the price for the service has dropped from $49 to just $29.

Normally this is something you’ll need to set up when you first bought your phone, but Verizon has an open enrollment period each year for folks who regret not doing it. That starts today (October 19) and runs until November 19.

Get started by visiting Verizon’s Total Mobile protection portal and having a read, and you’ll be able to sign up online if you’re convinced.

Expert tech support and peace of mind knowing you can get your phone replaced the next day is great. Being able to get a cracked screen fixed for less than 30 bucks at one of Verizon’s 296 carry-in locations is just plain awesome.

See at Verizon

Five Great Starter Apps for Daydream VR

To dream is to use Daydream.

I know what I’m planning to do on Christmas Day: Get my family believing in the dream that is Google’s Daydream.

I’ve been having tons of fun exploring the different virtual reality apps offered in the Play Store and there are a surprising number of ready-to-go games and movies available. If you’re like me and you’re planning to evangelize wonder of virtual reality at the holiday dinner time, here are five apps to load up on your smartphone before you start the showcase.

Read more at VR Heads!

Chelsea Handler’s Netflix talk show will end after two seasons

More than three years after Chelsea Handler and Netflix teamed up to “revolutionize the talk show” their quest is coming to an end. Handler tweeted that she has decided not to return after the second season of Chelsea wraps up (later this year), instead focusing on “becoming a more knowledgeable and engaged citizen” ahead of upcoming elections. That doesn’t mean she’s through with Netflix however, as she says the two will release a documentary where she engages with “people of different ethnicities, religions and political philosophies.”

Netflix hasn’t backed off of plans for original content and plans on spending more money than ever next year. Still, the attempt at diving into late night-style talk with Handler — who launched Chelsea as a worldwide show after ending her Chelsea Lately show on E! in 2015 — hasn’t generated as much discussion as other high-profile originals like Stranger Things. In its second season, the show switched from posting three new episodes every week to weekly hour-long episodes.

pic.twitter.com/X4zEJXeDQY

— Chelsea Handler (@chelseahandler) October 18, 2017

Source: Chelsea Handler (Twitter)

Octopus-like rubber skin could lead to shape-shifting robots

Octopuses are awe-inspiring creatures. They’re smart, and they can camouflage themselves by changing colors and changing the texture of their skin to mimic the environment’s. A group of scientists from Cornell University in New York and the Marine Biological Laboratory in Massachusetts wanted to give soft robots the same ability, so they created a synthetic elastic skin that can morph into different shapes and change textures.

The team designed a material based on the muscle underneath octopus skin that controls the animal’s dermal papillae. Those are the protrusions in the cephalopod’s skin that pop up when it wants to blend into its surroundings. That material is composed of several layers, including a fiber mesh and the rubber skin itself. When you pump air into the structure, some parts of the skin expand, while others get held back by the mesh to form various shapes, like rocks and plants.

The team still has a lot of work to do to perfect their creation, including giving it the ability to form multiple shapes at once. But in the future, the material could be used not to only to create soft robots with the ability to camouflage themselves, but also to immersive VR experiences. Imagine coming across a strange alien from another planet and being able to touch its skin with the help of a prop. Sounds cool, doesn’t it?

Source: IEEE Spectrum

GoPro Hero 6 review: Slow-mo, stabilization and subtle refinements

If you look at the GoPro Hero 6, it’s nearly impossible to tell it apart from the Hero 5, even on close inspection. The older, silver GoPros used to have the model number marked in black text on the front. The only way to tell the most recent cameras apart is small gray-on-gray text on the left side of the camera, and the word “power” on right (replacing “mode”). I even have to hold the camera up to the light to make sure the tiny number 5 isn’t a 6 (and vice versa).

But use the Hero 6 for more than a few minutes, and the improvements become apparent. There are three standout features that I think make the world of difference between these otherwise-identical GoPros. Here’s what they are and why they matter.

Image stabilization (EIS)

Before the Hero 5, GoPro cameras didn’t have any kind of image stabilization built in. Your options were to either make sure you have a steady hand or fix in post. The former is harder than you think depending on what you’re doing; the latter is a pain in the ass for most people. The Hero 5 introduced Electronic Image Stabilization (EIS), which cropped the image 10 percent in exchange for smoother video. The EIS only worked on two axes in most resolutions, and not at all in 4K or over 60 frames per second (FPS).

EIS certainly helped smooth out your clips, but if you were moving at a certain angle, there was often notable warping or artifacts. The Hero 6 offers improved stabilization with an extra axis added, meaning diagonal/rotational movements are much less of an issue. It also works at 4K30 and up to 120fps in 1080p. The Hero 6 also has dedicated hardware to remove any warping right in the camera. Perhaps most important, the crop is now only 5 percent, so you’re losing less image in exchange for that stability.

This one feature is my favorite upgrade between the Hero 5 and the 6. I took both cameras out, mounted side-by-side under different conditions (walking, skateboarding and so on), and every time the difference between the two was stark. The Hero 6 consistently comes out looking not just smoother, but more natural, with almost no visual distortion. If you’re mounting the camera in a place that’s already fairly stable (your head, in a gimbal, or on a car, for example), it’s better not to use EIS and keep the stabilization out of the mix. But for most hand-held recording or mounting on shaky surfaces, it’s a godsend.

Professional “pixel pushers” will still lament that the stabilization is being handled by software (rather than the superior optical “OIS” method), but for most users, it’s a solid tool. We’d all love OIS to come to future GoPros, of course, and maybe it’s on the roadmap, but for now, the Hero 6 is close to what most people need.

Slow-mo

When the Hero 4 arrived, it ushered in the era of usable 4K for GoPro. Older cameras (the Hero 3 and 3+) could shoot in UHD, but only at low framerates (15fps), which wasn’t entirely useful. The Hero 4 did 4K at 30fps, though, making it the go-to setting for maximum impact (and large file size).

Shooting in 4K still isn’t all that practical for most people; even pros don’t use it all that much yet, but people like to have the option. That 30-fps limit meant no chance for slow-mo, though. Your perfectly landed lazerflip would either look choppy, slowed down to 15fps or, you would have to choose a lower resolution to get smooth slow-mo. Hero 6 can shoot 4K at 60fps, giving you a modest UHD slow-mo option for the first time on GoPro. Yi’s 4K+ action camera has offered this combination for a while, but it’s still not that common, even in phones.

What’s really useful is that every other resolution has pretty much had its framerate doubled compared to the Hero 5. Now you have options for 2.7K at 120 and FHD/1080p at 240fps. That last combination — 1080p/240 — is going to be your go-to slow-mo setting for anything action-related. That’s an eight-fold slowdown over regular 30fps — perfect for catching exciting moments in high definition. Note that the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus also shoot in 4K/60 and 1080/240, so if you use your phone for a second angle, you can match the slow-mo shots at the same framerates — handy. Sadly, Google is a little behind here — the Pixel 2 shoots only 4K/30 and 1080/120.

There’s something important to note at this point. While GoPro’s new camera can pump out high-framerate video, it’s using HEVC compression for most of the new speeds. This file format isn’t universally supported yet. Mac users, for example, can’t open these files on anything other than High Sierra without downloading dedicated (and often not very good) media players. I tried the latest DivX player, which claims to do it, and ended up going in circles trying to get it to work. VLC opens the files but barely plays them (for me). Elmedia player works, but it’s frankly not much use.

That’s a huge inconvenience if you’re a casual user and want to edit these clips (and you probably do). Until your operating system catches up, you’ll need to string together a few workarounds, but with Apple also adopting HEVC in iOS 11, be sure that compatibility will improve swiftly. The upside is that HEVC helps keep file sizes down. Shooting 4K at 60fps is doubling the number of 4K frames of an already large image, so files get huge, fast. With HEVC, files are anywhere between half and 80 percent the size of h.264 (the previous encoding format) at the same framerate.

Image quality

Image stills taken from video recording. Left: Hero 6; Right Hero 5.

Features like slow-mo and stabilization are nice to have, but they count for nothing if the basic image isn’t good. With the Hero 6 (and its GP1 chip), GoPro has made some subtle tweaks to the image quality that should give on-the-fence upgraders a nudge over the edge. Technically, this isn’t “one” feature, but rather a collection of tools and improvements that conspire to make the Hero 6’s imaging capabilities superior to that of its predecessors.

The first improvement I noticed with the Hero 6 is that everything looks sharper. I flew with both cameras in the Karma and shot a landscape with water, buildings and grass, which really spelled out the differences. For example, leaves on trees are much more textured with the Hero 6, even when the Hero 5 is closer. Likewise, water in the distance appears as a fairly plain gray-blue mass on the Hero 5, but the new GoPro shows shadows and ripples that I couldn’t see before. The same with the sky. Hero 6 showed a level of detail and contrast with clouds that the Hero 5 simply couldn’t muster.

The sharpness is aided by improved color, too. Everything on the Hero 6 (using the “GoPro” color mode) simply pops. While flying over gravel and asphalt, the Hero 5’s images looked dull and gray, while the Hero 6 showed a broader range of colors, even within the same dull parking lot.

If there’s a downside to this, it’s that sometimes, colors on the 6 can look too poppy. On a day out in the California sunshine, the blue of the sky was so saturated in shot that it almost looks unreal (it was very, very blue, but still). There is a natural/flat color mode if you find the GoPro levels not to your liking, but in general use, it wasn’t unnatural. Side note: The Hero 6 now has an HDR mode for still photos (the Hero 5 has something called “WDR”). This is good news for those who want to take snaps, but also an encouraging sign that we might get HDR video in the future.

You have to dig a little deeper into the settings, but there are a few options that also bolster the Hero 6’s image cred. GoPro’s “ProTune” menu has had advance controls over your exposure for a while, but the shutter speed and white-balance menus now offer more options, allowing you to dial in your shot, and ISO control has been split into min/max rather than the single max option from before. Small details, for sure, but for those who like to get hands-on with their settings, these really make a difference. I personally like being able to lock the ISO to a set number, making sure I get the sharpest image possible at all times.

The last feature in this section is the new linear-zoom option. Before, you basically chose between narrow, medium or wide FOV. With the Hero 6, you use a slider to dial in the amount of zoom/field of view that you want, giving you much more control over what’s in the shot. The good news is that zoom also works with the horizon-friendly Linear mode, too. Being able to digitally frame your shot via the camera is a godsend for casual users (pros will likely prefer to do that in post).

So, it’s hardly a surprise that the Hero 6 is better than the Hero 5. But it’s better in important ways, rather than just “lots” of (less important) ways. Voice control and other auxiliary features are nice, but it’s good ol’ photography that really matters, and there’s enough improvement here that I think it warrants the upgrade.

That said, the Hero 6 is pricier than the Hero 5, which retains its $399 launch price to this day. You’ll have to cough up an extra $100 for all the features I mentioned above, making the Hero 6 an expensive investment for most people. Most of the features mentioned here are available on rival cameras, but with trade-offs. Sony’s $400 X3000 has better (OIS) stabilization but lacks many of the higher framerate options. The budget Yi 4K+ cam ($300) offers 4K/60, but the GoPro still bests it for slow-mo at most other resolutions, but it’s always worth looking at those to see if they suit your needs too. But at the end of the day, if you want a GoPro, the choice is clear, even if it comes at a price.

The Surface Book 2’s secret weapon is ceramic, says Panos Panay

With the Surface Book, Microsoft delivered yet another way to rethink traditional computers. It resembled a laptop more than the earlier Surface devices, which were basically tablets with keyboard covers. But it also packed in one new trick: A large screen that you could easily remove at the touch of a button and use as a tablet. At the heart of that feature was a unique hinge that looked unlike anything else on the market. It had no big problem, though: it wasn’t very stable.

It was something that was hard to ignore when you used it on your lap; the screen would shake as you typed, as if the display was barely holding on for life. It made the Surface Book feel more like a prototype than an expensive high-end laptop — not exactly inspiring. So when it came time for the sequel, it was one of the first things Microsoft addressed.

“The hinges are completely redesigned; it’s all from the learnings of the first one, because you want more stability,” Microsoft’s Panos Panay, the creator of the Surface line and its VP of devices, said in an interview with Engadget. “We redesigned the connection mechanism, we went to ceramics, we lightened the whole product.”

Yes, ceramics. That’s not something you’d typically find in a notebook, but it’s ability to deal with high temperatures better than metal made it the ideal material. Specifically, the notebook uses a small ceramic part [above] that works together with muscle wire to attach and detach the screen, as well as keep everything steady.

“We didn’t invent muscle wire. But we went and found it and thought, how would you include it with a hinge that could lock these two together, with a mechanism that felt robust and premium,” Panay said. “You had to hear it when it was open. You had to know when it was locked… That disconnect moment should be emotional, it should be connected to you, you should understand it.”

The ceramic (center) and muscle wire hinge mechanism in the Surface Book 2.

Devindra Hardawar/Engadget

Based on my hands with the Surface Book 2, it’s definitely much more stable than the original. And, oddly enough, removing and reattaching the display to the keyboard base felt easier than before. It makes a satisfying click when it connects to the base, but it also smoothly detaches. It might sound like a small change, but it’s a truly meaningful one for Surface Book users. We were promised the laptop of the future — and the future shouldn’t have screens that wobble like a bobble head on a dashboard.

Naturally, the Surface Book 2. It’s more powerful than before, and there’s a new 15-inch model joining the family. But is that enough to take on Apple’s MacBook Pro, not to mention other powerful laptops?

“With the [Surface Book 2] hardware, we redesigned everything on the inside, period,” Panay said. “To get to that next level of performance we needed — it’s three times more powerful — we put in a quad-core Intel 8th generation CPU. Now you’re in a totally different class of computing from gen 1 to gen 2.”

Even though the Surface Book was generally well reviewed, early users were plagued with a variety of issues, including screen flickering, power problems and bouts of instability. We talked with Microsoft representatives about those problems shortly after the laptop’s launch, and, for the most part, they acknowledged that they still had work to do.

“When we launched the Surface Book, we had some challenges from the silicon through the software,” Panay said. “This is why the Surface Book 2 is so important… Right now we look at Surface Book quality and it’s off the charts. Did it take some learning to get it to where we needed to be? Absolutely.”

While he wouldn’t point to any specific changes that helped stability, Panay noted that they have a better understanding of how they’re pushing the CPU, GPU and hinge components. The Surface Book design is unique among laptops: it houses its CPU in the display, but holds its graphics hardware (and additional battery) in the keyboard base. In particular, dealing with those early issues strengthened Microsoft’s relationship with Intel, which was essential as they developed Surface Book 2.

Panay didn’t say much about what his team is cooking next, after reinventing laptops three times, as well as all in one desktops with the Surface Studio. But, not surprisingly, he’s excited about the vision of seamless computing Microsoft is pushing to consumers.

“There was a point in time where you had to switch between your pen, your touchscreen, and your keyboard,” he said. “There was literally a break in flow… The most inspiring thing about our categories today, whether its Cortana with the dual array mic, or interacting with Office with a Pen and touch… As they continue to evolve into a seamless way, we’re going to get the best out of people… We’re now in a generation where, if you want to get something done: Start. Go. Move.”

Photo credit: Mike Kane/Bloomberg/Getty Images (Panos Panay)

Adobe’s ‘Cloak’ experiment is a content-aware eraser for video

Glamorous show-reels from shows like Game of Thrones get all the fame, but a lot of VFX work is mundane stuff like removing cars, power lines and people from shots. Adobe’s research team is working on making all of that easier for anyone, regardless of budget, thanks to a project called “Cloak.” It’s much the same as “content-aware fill” for Photoshop, letting you select and then delete unwanted elements, with the software intelligently filling in the background. Cloak does the same thing to moving video, though, which is a significantly bigger challenge.

Engadget got an early look at the tech, including a video demonstration and chance to talk with Adobe research engineer Geoffrey Oxholm and Victoria Nece, product manager for video graphics and VFX. At the moment, the technology is in the experimental stages, with no set plans to implement it. However, Adobe likes to give the public “Sneaks” at some of its projects as a way to generate interest and market features internally to teams.

An example of that would be last year’s slightly alarming “VoCo” tech that lets you Photoshop voiceovers or podcasts. That has yet to make it into a product, but one that did is “Smartpic” which eventually became part of Adobe’s Experience Manager.

The “Cloak” tech wouldn’t just benefit Hollywood — it could be useful to every video producer. You could make a freeway look empty by removing all the cars, cut out people to get a pristine nature shot, or delete, say, your drunk uncle from a wedding shot. Another fun example: When I worked as a compositer in another life, I had to replace the potato salad in a shot with macaroni, which was a highly tedious process.

Object removal will also be indispensable for VR, AR, and other types of new video tech. “With 360 degree video, the removal of objects, the crew and the camera rig becomes virtually mandatory,” Nece told Engadget.

Content-aware fill on photos is no easy task in the first place, because the computer has to figure out what was behind the deleted object based on the pixels around it. Video increases the degree of difficulty, because you have to track any moving objects you want to erase. On top of that, the fill has to look the same from frame to frame or it will be a glitchy mess. “It’s a fascinating problem,” Oxholm said. “Everything is moving, so even if you nail one frame, you have to be consistent.”

Luckily, video does have one advantage over photos. “The saving grace is that we can see behind the thing we want to remove,” says Oxholm. “If you’ve got a microphone to remove, you can see behind the microphone.” In other words, if you’re doing shot of a church with a pole in the way, there’s a good chance you have a different angle with a clean view of the church.

With 360 degree video, the removal of objects, the crew and the camera rig becomes virtually mandatory.

Perhaps the one thing making content-aware fill for video much more feasible now is the fact that motion-tracking technology has become so good. “We can do really dense tracking, using parts of the scene as they become visible,” said Oxholm. “That gives you something you can use to fill in.”

The results so far, as shown in the video above, are quite promising. The system was able to erase cars from a freeway interchange, did a decent job of deleting a pole in front of a cathedral and even erased a hiking couple from a cave scene. The shots were done automatically in “one quick process,” Oxholm said, after a mask was first drawn around the object to be removed — much as you do with Photoshop.

It’s not totally perfect, however. Shadow traces are visible on the cave floor, and the cathedral is blurred in spots where the pole used to be. Even at this early stage, though, the tool could do much of the grunt-work, making it easier for a human user to do the final touch-ups. I’d love to see Adobe release it in preview as soon as possible, even if it’s not perfect, as it looks like it could be a major time saver — I sure could’ve used it for that macaroni.