Expert RAW and Dynamic Range

[_vlad]

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

Windy : grass and leaves were moving

Many architectural details

Far objects such as trees

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

Thanks for samples and good analysis.

 

[Drzewoid]

Thanks for this analysis - it's great to see that complete comparasion - this is what this forum is about, but all this confirms my opnion - Expert RAW image quality and details looks very poor, stock RAW files are way better, check my conversions - it takes me half minute - it's almost untouched and it's way better than Expert RAW. Sorry for PNG files, but some reason RAW therapy can't export it to jpg. Of course You can take some time to make it better. For me it's not comparable.

 

[tokumeino]

Hi, I'm afraid that I did swap a few pictures. That's very unfortunate. For the DNG conversions, the ExpertRAW are the ones which are basicaly noise free and more micro-contrasty, while the StockApp exhibit residual noise. I'm also unsure if I removed well my import-default negative filter on every picture (I used to copy/paste the masking settings but I'm unsure everything went OK).

So if you are concerned bu microdetails invisible in actual viewing conditions, I would recommend that you try by yourself using the DNG files I've provided in my OP.

 

[tokumeino]

Great details extractions !! In less that 30s, I would be totally unable to do so with LR (and propably not with LR at all whatever the time TBH, pergaps with Darktable...).

For instance, what you get there is very good IMHO ...


Stock RAW file with RT. Crop of your picture, converted in JPG (quality=0 for no compression)

So, instead of just applying default settings, I also took less than 30s with LR to give a chance to the stock RAW files (quick custom setting of radius, details, masking, sharpness and structure, in that order). And indeed, althroug less detailed than yours with RT, it is better than my previous default conversion.


Strock RAW file with LR. Less than 30s edit as well.

To be honest, I suck at extracting details (I don't practice much because I care very little about sharpness). I doubt that I would do much better if I took more time. I would be curious to see what you get with RT and a bit more time to fine tune ; especially if you care simultaneously a bit about (micro)contrast and tone. The original scene was quite vivid and very contrasty with harsh lights and shadows. Care should also be taken with other aspects of the details, the shadows beeing very noisy, here, somehow negating the micro details of the roof grey stones.



So I've allowed myself 30s as well for the ExpertRAW DNG, and I've realised that my default negative sharpness mask was still there, so the DNG offers actually a bit more detail than what appears in my preceeding post. When I sharpen it a bit more within LR (slider=30/150), I get the following.


ExpertRAW DNG. Sharpened a abit in LR.

And you are right : blending multiple frames in the ExpertRAW app seems to have been peformed with a kind of high radius, eliminating super fine details. Plus, further sharpening produces many artifacts.

That beeing said, I disagree when you state that the quality of the ExpertRAW DNG is "very poor" and "not comparable". IMO, what you get out of the ExpertRAW app is not totally ridiculous. Plus, you get the dynamic range. Even for details and not global tones, here the DR provides more details in the shadows, for instance.

I'd also be curious of what you get if you take a bit more than 30s with the ExpertRAW DNG.

 

[tokumeino]

Following on the example here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66204022 an ExpertRAW DNG comes out of LR like the following with almost no additional sharpness.


Very high DR in the DNG file, decent details (while not impressive)

Whe compared to an actual RAW file from a single exposure, this is very clean and obvioulsy processed. IMO, it is actually too clean with a plastic and unnatural look when it comes to details. Lok at this for instance ...


Some edges are sharp, but the inside of the statue is somehow soft.

This uneven redering is odd to me, and displeasant. It ressembles to what you get out of DXO PureRAW, IMO. I prefer a less clinical yet more even redenring, so I alwys add "negative" sharpness and grain to such processings.

The result is a bit more even and natural to me, without sacrifying too much on details.


The same, but soften and noisen, itentionaly degrated.

The whole pricture is the following. This way of processing also hides most of the digital artifacts and at the end, it works (to my taste, naturally).



The plastic look is more unpleasant on people faces.

 

[FerBatista]

I definitely agree with you on the plastic look, I wish they would dial down the embedded noise reduction and sharpening a bit, but it's still impressive what a phone is capable of these days, the amount of detail is pretty decent in this sample.

BTW I also add a bit of noise to many of my images, although a bit less than you did here. It helps make it look like a photo instead of a digital painting.

One question, which version is your S22? Exynos or snapdragon?

 

[tokumeino]

Exynos

 

[phouphou]

i like your approach here. Indeed the ditigally processed look that phones are notorious for is what keeps my love towards my Ricoh GR alive. I very much deteste crazy sharpening and denoising of soft and noise RAWs (from any system) that is so common nowadays.

In fact i have a S22 (not ultra) now and i want to see if the phone can replace the GR. Therefore your input (JPG standard + RAW expert RAW) is helpful and i will try and report my findings soon.

 

[nurf]

Compare it to stock raw, you might be surprised with the dynamic range.

 

[tokumeino]

Compare it to stock raw, you might be surprised with the dynamic range.

I don't understand. I think that the above samples are meant to compare DR of DNGs from stock app and expert raw. And there is one JPEG sample from stock app. I didn't post JPEG from ExpertRAW because they really suck as soon as you enable HDR.

 

[Ben446]

Looking for a LRC preset that would get the Expert Raw DNG close to the jpeg from an S22 Ultra. (HDR on). That way would not have to deal with jpegs at all.

Using the LRC Raw import - Preferences / Override Global Setting / S22 Rear wide Camera.


Raw Import Prefs

Under the Dev Module, Profile appears as Samsung Expert Raw.


Dev settings

Manipulating the Raw file gets me in the ball park, but a mask is needed to get the sky close. Just increasing exposure blows out sky.


Mask on Sky

Not worrying about sharpness yet.

Anyone figure this out? Searching web leads to LR mobile, not classic.


DNG as appears in LRC


Expert Raw JPG


Manipulated DNG in LRC

Thanks