Expert RAW and Dynamic Range

[tokumeino]

I'm very glad that Samsung finally allows to capture High Dynamic Range DNG files (for better color and tone control) . It was the case with Pixel phones since a long time, but it is now the case for several Galaxy phones with the "Expert RAW" app. The major improvement over recording a DNG from the Pro mode of the regular app, is that the produced DNG is not only a single exposure crappy RAW file, but that it includes the computational tricks, such as multiexposure blending and such, without excessive overcooking.

[ATTACH alt="Picture with the main "WA" module of an S22."]3132894[/ATTACH]
Picture with the main "WA" module of an S22.

[ATTACH alt="Picture with the tiny "TELE" module."]3132895[/ATTACH]
Picture with the tiny "TELE" module.

These edits are to my taste, without oversharpening, a bit of added grain and avoiding an HDR look to remain quite natural. Let me share the DNG files with deep shadows as well as strong highlights so you can try by yourself : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1QkPBGN5KFThJVYphM5nvz2xG1FeIOOGq?usp=sharing

To get an idea, destpite the tiny sensor, especially for the tele module, the dynamic range is pretty nice IMO.


Exposure compensation for the highlights (sky and right building). That's actually how the DNG gets opened by LR with zero exposure compensation.


Exposure compensation for the shadows. Note that I use RNI presets by default, which compress highlights in an analogue way, that's why the sky doens't totally clip.

A the end, I'm very pleased with the tonal range I can get from these tiny camera modules. It's obviously not on par with what you get from a FF sensor, but for casual yet a bit controlled pictures, it is very decent IMHO.

The drawback - of course - is that it is possible to get unpleasant artifacts due to multiexposure.


Edited to my taste. The black car in the background is severly ghosted.

 

[Sgt_Strider]

Thank you for this post, and I got some questions to ask.

When using an aspect ratio like 1:1 with any of the cameras, will the excess pixels be cropped off, or can I retrieve them with Adobe Lightroom?

Can Samsung Expert RAW shoot a set of bracketed images?

Is there a timer?

Is it possible to shoot a long exposure? If so, what's the longest that I can shoot?

Can Expert RAW be used with the front-facing camera?

 

[tokumeino]

Thank you for this post, and I got some questions to ask.

I will only answer from the "ExpertRAW" app perspective, not the regular photo app (even in pro mode). You have more controls than a regular P&S, but less than a proper camera. The Sony app is perhaps better as far as total control goes.

When using an aspect ratio like 1:1 with any of the cameras, will the excess pixels be cropped off, or can I retrieve them with Adobe Lightroom?

Cut from the 4/3 sensors. You dont't have square "multi-ratio" sensors/orientation here. I would add that LR is not the way to go if you want to read outer pixels. Indeed, actual RAW developers such as C1P let you access to the whole image sensor area, while LR does not offer the ability to disable a lens profile when it is embedded in the RAW file, and crops the files.

Can Samsung Expert RAW shoot a set of bracketed images?

AFAIK no. The camera actually brackets to produce 16bits DNG files with a good DR, but the blending is processed internally and produces only one file (plus the JPG that you cannot deactivate, BTW). You won't get the separate RAW files to merge on your computer.

Is there a timer?

Yes : 2s, 5s, 10s.

Is it possible to shoot a long exposure? If so, what's the longest that I can shoot?

30s is the max.

Can Expert RAW be used with the front-facing camera?

No, unfortunaletly. IMO, it shoud be high on their dev list.

 

[_vlad]

When using an aspect ratio like 1:1 with any of the cameras, will the excess pixels be cropped off, or can I retrieve them with Adobe Lightroom?

Cut from the 4/3 sensors. You dont't have square "multi-ratio" sensors/orientation here. I would add that LR is not the way to go if you want to read outer pixels. Indeed, actual RAW developers such as C1P let you access to the whole image sensor area, while LR does not offer the ability to disable a lens profile when it is embedded in the RAW file, and crops the files.

Actually LR 6 (I do not know about the latest ver.) can uncrop RAW files - so you will get slightly larger size. It is hidden in Crop&Straighten button. And it is using embedded lens profile. Unfortunately some others do not. ON1 uses the full size right from the start.

 

[Sgt_Strider]

When using an aspect ratio like 1:1 with any of the cameras, will the excess pixels be cropped off, or can I retrieve them with Adobe Lightroom?

Cut from the 4/3 sensors. You dont't have square "multi-ratio" sensors/orientation here. I would add that LR is not the way to go if you want to read outer pixels. Indeed, actual RAW developers such as C1P let you access to the whole image sensor area, while LR does not offer the ability to disable a lens profile when it is embedded in the RAW file, and crops the files.

Actually LR 6 (I do not know about the latest ver.) can uncrop RAW files - so you will get slightly larger size. It is hidden in Crop&Straighten button. And it is using embedded lens profile. Unfortunately some others do not. ON1 uses the full size right from the start.

 

[_vlad]

When using an aspect ratio like 1:1 with any of the cameras, will the excess pixels be cropped off, or can I retrieve them with Adobe Lightroom?

Cut from the 4/3 sensors. You dont't have square "multi-ratio" sensors/orientation here. I would add that LR is not the way to go if you want to read outer pixels. Indeed, actual RAW developers such as C1P let you access to the whole image sensor area, while LR does not offer the ability to disable a lens profile when it is embedded in the RAW file, and crops the files.

Actually LR 6 (I do not know about the latest ver.) can uncrop RAW files - so you will get slightly larger size. It is hidden in Crop&Straighten button. And it is using embedded lens profile. Unfortunately some others do not. ON1 uses the full size right from the start.

Are you saying that if I shoot 1:1 RAW, I can "recover" the extra pixels from the 4:3 sensor in LR? I don't know if Samsung actually appends the pixels or just uses software to hide the excess pixels based on the aspect ratio that I selected.

It depends on how Samsung implemented this feature. Panasonic in M43 world always records all (nearly) pixels from sensor and then based on selected ratio just mask the rest, however keeping them in the file. This is valid for raw RAW. JPG just cropped and deleted the rest, so there was nothing to recover. RAWs when opened (in LR) show just that cropping. Nevertheless when you open them in LR (e.g. when you want to crop differently) you see all data, then you see the current crop (defined on your selection when shooting ...1:1 or so) and then you can "recrop" to your wish.

If Samsung did the same with their DNGs then you can apply the same routine.But did he?

I just want to say that LR can certainly see all data - not only those corresponding to your settings of aspect ratio.

 

[tokumeino]

You write about LR6. Note that LR Classic and CC are also able to recover hidden pixels after an in-camera crop, but you cannot disable a built-in lens profile (different thing).

About Samsung, I'm only considering the ExperRaw app here. While the regular app let's you crop during capture, the ExpertRAW app doesn't let you choose an aspect ratio : you need to crop in post.

 

[_vlad]

You write about LR6. Note that LR Classic and CC are also able to recover hidden pixels after an in-camera crop, but you cannot disable a built-in lens profile (different thing).

About Samsung, I'm only considering the ExperRaw app here. While the regular app let's you crop during capture, the ExpertRAW app doesn't let you choose an aspect ratio : you need to crop in post.

Interesting to hear about. In LR6 you can disable even embedded lens profile, select your own (there are quite some available), or make one manually.

 

[tokumeino]

It's been a feature request for a long time : https://community.adobe.com/t5/came...-disable-built-in-lens-profile/idi-p/12221146

I think that something has been done recently with newer bodies, but that you still cannot disable the profile with bodies more than - say - one year old.

 

[Sgt_Strider]

You write about LR6. Note that LR Classic and CC are also able to recover hidden pixels after an in-camera crop, but you cannot disable a built-in lens profile (different thing).

About Samsung, I'm only considering the ExperRaw app here. While the regular app let's you crop during capture, the ExpertRAW app doesn't let you choose an aspect ratio : you need to crop in post.

Oh, wow. I had no idea! I thought there would be aspect ratio frame guides. Its's pretty disappointing and feels like a major omission by Samsung.

Is there at least exposure compensation?

What about geotagging?

Would you be able to take a screenshot of the settings page of Expert RAW?

Thank you!

 

[tokumeino]

You write about LR6. Note that LR Classic and CC are also able to recover hidden pixels after an in-camera crop, but you cannot disable a built-in lens profile (different thing).

About Samsung, I'm only considering the ExperRaw app here. While the regular app let's you crop during capture, the ExpertRAW app doesn't let you choose an aspect ratio : you need to crop in post.

Oh, wow. I had no idea! I thought there would be aspect ratio frame guides. Its's pretty disappointing and feels like a major omission by Samsung.

Is there at least exposure compensation?

What about geotagging?

Would you be able to take a screenshot of the settings page of Expert RAW?

Thank you!

My settings page is in french so I'm unsure if it helps. You can enable/disable :

• Guidelines but thirds only
• Geotagging
• AF tracking
• Auto HDR (which provides the multiexposure blending thing)
• DNG compression

On the capture screen, you can select :

• Timer
• Auto exposure mode (spot, central weighted, matrix)
• Display an histogram

You have a decent exposure control :

• ISO
• Speed
• EV comp
• But not aperture

You can also manual focus and set the WB.

IMO, crop and guides are totally unimportant provided the aim of the app : offering manual control and DNGs using multiexposure for (much) better DR and thus IQ.

 

[Drzewoid]

In my opinion image quality from EXPER RAW is not very good. Normal RAW files gives much better images and excellet quality.

 

[tokumeino]

In my opinion image quality from EXPER RAW is not very good. Normal RAW files gives much better images and excellet quality.

It depends on what you call "better". And it stronlgly depends on how you process the RAW files. ExpertRAW files should not be processed the same way as stock RAW files. Since they are the result of a multi-exposure blending, they are already adequately sharpened and you should not add additional sharpening, or you mostly add ugly artifacts or fake details. Plus, what does appear as sharp edges often don't result of more details/information but rather as a kind of plasticky/aquarelle processing. ExpertRAW files look more "soft" at a fisrt glance, but according to my testing, they are not less detailled, and provide a better starting point if you aim a a more natural/analogue look.

But sharpening if mostly unimportant IMO and the point of ExpertRAW is Dynamic Range. When it comes to IQ, what provides better color and tone control is DR. This control is the whole point of the RAW/DNG thing and multiexposure blending is the key here. One could read https://www.fonearena.com/blog/357128/samsung-expert-raw-device-list.html/amp or https://www.theverge.com/22958552/samsung-expert-raw-galaxy-s22-ultra for instance, to get the point if it is not clear. The stock app doesn't blend multiple exposures in the DNG file so you loose the computational benefits when you shoot RAW. It's OK in optimal lightning condition but not in the general case. Apple and Google offer since a long time the best of both worlds whith DNG files resulting from the processing of multiple frames. Samsung did not.

If the regular app in pro mode now produces multiple-exposure DNG files, then this app could offer better result. If not, then there is no chance that it provides better IQ (I mean Dynamic Range). And I'm not aware of such an upgrade of the regular app. You need ExpertRAW for subtle tonal /color control and/or recovering. To me, RAW in the stock app is mostly pointless : better go with HEIC.

EDIT : I'll try to find examples in challenging light, and compare regular and ExpertRAW app in terms of shadows recovering vs highlights clipping, typically, and post the DNG files so people can try themselves. Posting already processed JPGs would be useless since they agregate possibly inadequate processing.

 

[Drzewoid]

In my opinion image quality from EXPER RAW is not very good. Normal RAW files gives much better images and excellet quality.

It depends on what you call "better". And it stronlgly depends on how you process the RAW files. ExpertRAW files should not be processed the same way as stock RAW files. Since they are the result of a multi-exposure blending, they are already adequately sharpened and you should not add additional sharpening, or you mostly add ugly artifacts or fake details. Plus, what does appear as sharp edges often don't result of more details/information but rather as a kind of plasticky/aquarelle processing. ExpertRAW files look more "soft" at a fisrt glance, but according to my testing, they are not less detailled, and provide a better starting point if you aim a a more natural/analogue look.

But sharpening if mostly unimportant IMO and the point of ExpertRAW is Dynamic Range. When it comes to IQ, what provides better color and tone control is DR. This control is the whole point of the RAW/DNG thing and multiexposure blending is the key here. One could read https://www.fonearena.com/blog/357128/samsung-expert-raw-device-list.html/amp or https://www.theverge.com/22958552/samsung-expert-raw-galaxy-s22-ultra for instance, to get the point if it is not clear. The stock app doesn't blend multiple exposures in the DNG file so you loose the computational benefits when you shoot RAW. It's OK in optimal lightning condition but not in the general case. Apple and Google offer since a long time the best of both worlds whith DNG files resulting from the processing of multiple frames. Samsung did not.

If the regular app in pro mode now produces multiple-exposure DNG files, then this app could offer better result. If not, then there is no chance that it provides better IQ (I mean Dynamic Range). And I'm not aware of such an upgrade of the regular app. You need ExpertRAW for subtle tonal /color control and/or recovering. To me, RAW in the stock app is mostly pointless : better go with HEIC.

EDIT : I'll try to find examples in challenging light, and compare regular and ExpertRAW app in terms of shadows recovering vs highlights clipping, typically, and post the DNG files so people can try themselves. Posting already processed JPGs would be useless since they agregate possibly inadequate processing.

Just this photo you showed is very good to show the biggest advantage of EXPER RAW. I tried on your files how RAW EXPERT would handle and it is as you say. The tonal dynamics are absolutely great. Unfortunately the problem is the details are distorted. Your photos show how well EXPERT RAW handles tonal dynamics, but I suggest you take two photos under undemanding conditions - a simple tree on a sunny day and see the difference in detail quality. If Samsung managed to combine the tonal dynamics with the image quality of normal RAW it would be something. But I think I prefer good image quality over expense of tonal dynamics.

 

[tokumeino]

In my opinion image quality from EXPER RAW is not very good. Normal RAW files gives much better images and excellet quality.

It depends on what you call "better". And it stronlgly depends on how you process the RAW files. ExpertRAW files should not be processed the same way as stock RAW files. Since they are the result of a multi-exposure blending, they are already adequately sharpened and you should not add additional sharpening, or you mostly add ugly artifacts or fake details. Plus, what does appear as sharp edges often don't result of more details/information but rather as a kind of plasticky/aquarelle processing. ExpertRAW files look more "soft" at a fisrt glance, but according to my testing, they are not less detailled, and provide a better starting point if you aim a a more natural/analogue look.

But sharpening if mostly unimportant IMO and the point of ExpertRAW is Dynamic Range. When it comes to IQ, what provides better color and tone control is DR. This control is the whole point of the RAW/DNG thing and multiexposure blending is the key here. One could read https://www.fonearena.com/blog/357128/samsung-expert-raw-device-list.html/amp or https://www.theverge.com/22958552/samsung-expert-raw-galaxy-s22-ultra for instance, to get the point if it is not clear. The stock app doesn't blend multiple exposures in the DNG file so you loose the computational benefits when you shoot RAW. It's OK in optimal lightning condition but not in the general case. Apple and Google offer since a long time the best of both worlds whith DNG files resulting from the processing of multiple frames. Samsung did not.

If the regular app in pro mode now produces multiple-exposure DNG files, then this app could offer better result. If not, then there is no chance that it provides better IQ (I mean Dynamic Range). And I'm not aware of such an upgrade of the regular app. You need ExpertRAW for subtle tonal /color control and/or recovering. To me, RAW in the stock app is mostly pointless : better go with HEIC.

EDIT : I'll try to find examples in challenging light, and compare regular and ExpertRAW app in terms of shadows recovering vs highlights clipping, typically, and post the DNG files so people can try themselves. Posting already processed JPGs would be useless since they agregate possibly inadequate processing.

Just this photo you showed is very good to show the biggest advantage of EXPER RAW. I tried on your files how RAW EXPERT would handle and it is as you say. The tonal dynamics are absolutely great. Unfortunately the problem is the details are distorted. Your photos show how well EXPERT RAW handles tonal dynamics, but I suggest you take two photos under undemanding conditions - a simple tree on a sunny day and see the difference in detail quality. If Samsung managed to combine the tonal dynamics with the image quality of normal RAW it would be something. But I think I prefer good image quality over expense of tonal dynamics.

I think that I fully understand what you mean. However, I find that pixel peepers are occasionally impressed by fake details. Sharp edges are unimpressive to me and are very different from "details". You can have plenty of details without necessarily exhibiting sharp edges.

And you are perfectly funded to prefer sharp details over tonal richness. It's a matter of taste. To me, photography is about light and I need a camera, not a microscope ;-) I attend quite a lot of photography exhibitions and I knw what does impress me : it's nots clinical details ;-)

 

[_vlad]

In my opinion image quality from EXPER RAW is not very good. Normal RAW files gives much better images and excellet quality.

It depends on what you call "better". And it stronlgly depends on how you process the RAW files. ExpertRAW files should not be processed the same way as stock RAW files. Since they are the result of a multi-exposure blending, they are already adequately sharpened and you should not add additional sharpening, or you mostly add ugly artifacts or fake details. Plus, what does appear as sharp edges often don't result of more details/information but rather as a kind of plasticky/aquarelle processing. ExpertRAW files look more "soft" at a fisrt glance, but according to my testing, they are not less detailled, and provide a better starting point if you aim a a more natural/analogue look.

But sharpening if mostly unimportant IMO and the point of ExpertRAW is Dynamic Range. When it comes to IQ, what provides better color and tone control is DR. This control is the whole point of the RAW/DNG thing and multiexposure blending is the key here. One could read https://www.fonearena.com/blog/357128/samsung-expert-raw-device-list.html/amp or https://www.theverge.com/22958552/samsung-expert-raw-galaxy-s22-ultra for instance, to get the point if it is not clear. The stock app doesn't blend multiple exposures in the DNG file so you loose the computational benefits when you shoot RAW. It's OK in optimal lightning condition but not in the general case. Apple and Google offer since a long time the best of both worlds whith DNG files resulting from the processing of multiple frames. Samsung did not.

If the regular app in pro mode now produces multiple-exposure DNG files, then this app could offer better result. If not, then there is no chance that it provides better IQ (I mean Dynamic Range). And I'm not aware of such an upgrade of the regular app. You need ExpertRAW for subtle tonal /color control and/or recovering. To me, RAW in the stock app is mostly pointless : better go with HEIC.

EDIT : I'll try to find examples in challenging light, and compare regular and ExpertRAW app in terms of shadows recovering vs highlights clipping, typically, and post the DNG files so people can try themselves. Posting already processed JPGs would be useless since they agregate possibly inadequate processing.

Just this photo you showed is very good to show the biggest advantage of EXPER RAW. I tried on your files how RAW EXPERT would handle and it is as you say. The tonal dynamics are absolutely great. Unfortunately the problem is the details are distorted. Your photos show how well EXPERT RAW handles tonal dynamics, but I suggest you take two photos under undemanding conditions - a simple tree on a sunny day and see the difference in detail quality. If Samsung managed to combine the tonal dynamics with the image quality of normal RAW it would be something. But I think I prefer good image quality over expense of tonal dynamics.

I think that I fully understand what you mean. However, I find that pixel peepers are occasionally impressed by fake details. Sharp edges are unimpressive to me and are very different from "details". You can have plenty of details without necessarily exhibiting sharp edges.

And you are perfectly funded to prefer sharp details over tonal richness. It's a matter of taste. To me, photography is about light and I need a camera, not a microscope ;-) I attend quite a lot of photography exhibitions and I knw what does impress me : it's nots clinical details ;-)

The problem is - you can do whatever you will with colors and DR (having them in the file) but you can do very little when you have bad rendering by some kind of camera estimation of what is best sharpening and what is best NR. Having bad rendering with OOC JPG (the same as with some preprocessed DNG) kills the image in the very beginning - little microcontrast, haloing along the edges trying to compensate lack of detail destroyed by NR. Pre-baked DNGs is a half way to get full control over the image. That is the plain nature of RAW/DNG development.

I do not understand what do you mean by "sharp edges" - staircased? The whole point of resolution of a sensor/lens combo (technically speaking) is to give you as good as possible DR, as good as possible colors and as good as possible details clarity. I do not think, it is to output the pic with 12/16/20/50MPix pic perfectly smooth where details has only to be guessed. If anybody like such a type of pic, then it is better to apply some kind of glow/soft/dumping micro-contrast filter in the post - because DNG processing is aimed to be post-processed. You can easily add sharpness and with no effort remove noise when you are that type of guy who knows how to postprocess. But there is no easy reversible way when what you get is not what you want (in terms of NR and resolution)

But the main picture remains - for what type of photographer are these fake DNG adressed? Being spoiled by FF/APS C/M43 a Huawei brand I have to say - not for me. But that is me. YMMV though.

--
Vlad

 

[Drzewoid]

I think that I fully understand what you mean. However, I find that pixel peepers are occasionally impressed by fake details. Sharp edges are unimpressive to me and are very different from "details". You can have plenty of details without necessarily exhibiting sharp edges.

I don't say about fake details and oversharpened images. I love natural looking photos like from real camera, and this is what I talking about. This photo comes from MI10 ULTRA GCAM - no RAW, it's standard output. It's not oversharpened image and details looks very good to me. This is balance which Samsung should introduce in cameras, but sadly it never happen, because people like oversharpened, oversaturated images, which looks better on social media.

And you are perfectly funded to prefer sharp details over tonal richness. It's a matter of taste. To me, photography is about light and I need a camera, not a microscope ;-) I attend quite a lot of photography exhibitions and I knw what does impress me : it's nots clinical details ;-)

AGREE 200%, but is this bad to expect from top notch device to take good photos or give user settings to adjust crucial parameters like sharpening, contrast etc? I would like to buy a phone and say that the pictures are better than the previous one, but reality is sad - Lumia 950 XL from 2015 taking still way better images than Samsung S22 Ultra in 2022 :/ But to be honest - there is one thing where Samsung is king - colors reproduction is perfect. It's way better than any GCAM phone or anything what i saw before.

 

[tokumeino]

I've updated the Drive folder above and I've added DNGs from the ExpertRaw and Stock apps, so you can compare by yourself. Since I don't care so much about tiny details, let me focus on dynamic range. I've quickly shot samples of a high contrast scene, at home. The overall picture is the following.


Expert RAW file quicly edited in LR (default custom auto import settings with only shadows changed). The shadows are actually quite chalenging. This LR edit includes a -100 shadows to reveal them. Try the DNG files to figure out by yourself.

To put things into perspective and give an idea of how contrasty the scene was, the following is the JPEG produced by the stock app...


Don't shoot JPEG ;-)

In the following, I've only healed a bit of chromatic noise but no luminance. I've also added no sharpness. How you sharpen and NR is a matter of taste and here you get the "actual" date in the DNG files. Focus is on the wall paper (upper-right corner).

Stock photo app capture


Exposure +2.33EV on the dark guitar in the shadow


Exposure -3EV on the bright window. Highlights are burnt.

Expert RAW app capture


Exposure +3EV (that's 0.67 more than with the stock app, to roughly match brightness).


Exposure -3EV on the bright window.

As you may see, there is absolutely no contest when it comes to Dynamic range. The shadows retain more color gradations with ExpertRAW app than the stock app, while the difference is admitidly not huge. And when it comes to the highlights, only the white wall hit by direct sunlight is burnt with ExpertRAW, while even the stone wall (much darker) is burnt with the stock app.

I've also tried when there was a light cloud in the sky and the white wall was not burnt at all.

EDIT : please don't focus on sharpness. I've just remembered that by default on import, I always add a global mask with -51 sharpness to reduce displeasant artifacts. So it is perhaps less sharp than you like.

 

[tokumeino]

I agree that when it comes to linear DNGs, demosaicing already occured, and probably NR as well so you loose control over that and you need to evntuelly need to deal with over-NR and over-sharpening that should have been avoided in a first place. I also agree that martphones often oversharpen, and I dislike it a lot. By "a lot", I mean that I my LR default import settings include a global mask with a negative -51 sharpening

But in the case of the ExpertRAW app, I think that it could be worse. The following example is the precedently posted DR test for shadows/highlights, but with my default -51 sharpening mask removed (see https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66193988 for an edit with negative sharpening and added grain).


[PIXEL PEEPING] EXPERT RAW app. Focus is on the wall paper above the guitar. The lighter guitar string interrupts at some point because of processing and this cannot be recovered, indeed ;-)

The wall paper and the curtains offer many possibilities for oversharpening and my opinion is that the result is almost OK, and can be recovered to get decent results. In the corner (floor) and the statue, there are very displeasant oversharpening, though, which moslty vanish when you apply a negative sharpening and a bit of grain. BTW, to my eyes, adding grain counter-intuitively enhances the perceived sharpness (I didn't add grain here, though).

With the DNG produced by the stock camera app (not linear but an actual single exposure "RAW" file with bayer information I think), you need to NR and sharpen by yourself, but it I find very difficult to get good results. You can setup NR and sharpening to get results such as the following for very little advantage.


[PIXEL PEEPING] STOCK APP raw file developed in LR (light NR, sharpening with adequate masking, texture added)

Just to put things into perspective, let me show where we come from...


JPEG out of the stock app

 

[tokumeino]

The pictures above are from the tiny x3 photo module, so as to provide a greater challenge for both apps, when it comes to DR. It seems that for some reason, sharpness also matters for some people. So let me provide a couple of samples from the main sensor, so as to challenge both softwares when it comes to sharpness. I post more than one because the shots were handheld.and prone to user error : on a couple of pictures (ExpertRaw) I forgot to put a 2s delay, for instance.

In the following, pictures come by 3 :

1. Stock app JPEG
2. LR conversion from the stock app DNG (with NR:+20 and sharpening:+25 just to clean most noise and make things a little more punchy and attractive). They are not super nice
3. LR conversion from the ExpertRAW DNG file (no NR et no sharpening) : as it, quite oversharpened to my taste. But things get much better as soon as you apply a global negative sharpening (I apply a global mask with -51 sharpening by default), at the cost of an overall impression of softness when pixel peeping but without loosing actual detail
4. Expert RAW JPEG : these are really ugly and should be avoided.

For the LR conversions, I've used autotone to roughly match pictures.

(I hope that I won't mix everything, wish me good luck I've uploaded the DNG files on the Drive linkes in the OP, if you want to experiment by yourself).

Eiffel tower is challenging


OOC Jpeg (stock app)


Stock LR Conversion


ExpertRAW LR Conversion


Expert RAW Jpeg

Windy : grass and leaves were moving


OOC Jpeg (stock app)


Stock LR Conversion


ExpertRAW LR Conversion


Expert RAW Jpeg

Many architectural details


OOC Jpeg (stock app)


Stock LR Conversion


ExpertRAW LR Conversion


Expert RAW Jpeg

Far objects such as trees


OOC Jpeg (stock app)


Stock LR Conversion


ExpertRAW LR Conversion


Expert RAW Jpeg

For some reason, the OOC JPEG appear quite dark to me, while I used to let autoexposure and 0 EV compensation)