Could not have said it any better myself. Though I doubt that I will utilize ProRAW on my iPhone anytime soon. Shooting in RAW on my mirrorless camera is a no-brainer though.
EDIT: I have the 12, so I won't get ProRAW anyway.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Photographer Austin Mann Demos iPhone 12 Pro ProRAW Capabilities
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Could not have said it any better myself. Though I doubt that I will utilize ProRAW on my iPhone anytime soon. Shooting in RAW on my mirrorless camera is a no-brainer though.
EDIT: I have the 12, so I won't get ProRAW anyway.
I have several dSLRs, an Arca-Swiss 4x5, and an iPhone which I've been using exclusively for the past five years. It's always with me in my shirt pocket, ready at an instant to make photographs. That's why. Below is a recent photo.
Can't wait to get 14.3 loaded on my 12 Pro for ProRaw. That will likely open up a ton of opportunities for me.
Maybe, but it's also come a very long way in the last few years.
I played with a couple images in Adobe CC today and it is just ok to me. Maybe DXO Photolab 4 will hook into it a bit better from a well paired computational standpoint like they do with stills from my Mavic 2 Pro. Disclaimer, I shoot photos for a full time living and use Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad, Sinar, etc and do both digital and film based darkroom prints.
If....and this is a big if because it is rare I am without a dedicated camera but if I see the shot of a lifetime and only have my iPhone 12 Pro, at least I know I have a bit more to play with in order to make the image all it can be. For those who are not familiar with processing raw files and are not well versed in dedicated cameras, I don't see many consumers using RAW mode in this phone.
So it is a pretty darn niche use case really.
If....and this is a big if because it is rare I am without a dedicated camera but if I see the shot of a lifetime and only have my iPhone 12 Pro, at least I know I have a bit more to play with in order to make the image all it can be. For those who are not familiar with processing raw files and are not well versed in dedicated cameras, I don't see many consumers using RAW mode in this phone.
So it is a pretty darn niche use case really.
clearly, when you can lug a DSLR around, it has the ability to shoot higher quality pics, if you have the right gear/glass, and that can cost WAY more. At the same token, the photo quality of iPhones is amazing, and quite frankly, the low light capabilities of my 11 Pro Max beat my DSLR (6DII with L glass), definitely indoors, not so much astro shooting ...
... and if you're spending $1400 for a smartphone to only use the camera, then you have too much money on your hands ...
do you have a 11 or 12 Pro and have real-life experience? low light is amazing on those models ...
The main noise sources in a camera element are:
- Quantum/shot noise (due to limited number of photons hitting the pixels), proportional to the square root of intensity
- Read-out noise (electrons lost or added during data readout), constant
- Dark signal current (thermal electron generation and/or leakage), proportional to the exposure time
To my eye the sample images look as if they were noisy due to image shot noise, but without really trying a couple of different exposures it is difficult to say.
Pixel size does not usually have much to do with dark current. Dark current is proportional to the surface area of a pixel, so the dark current proportional to the full capacity of a pixel is constant, and I would guess the constant is approximately the same for better smart phones and DSLRs.
The main problem here is that there is so little light falling on each pixel. That, in turn, is due to the small lens in front of the camera. Some examples of aperture diameters:
- good phone: 4 mm
- cheap DSLR lens: 15 mm
- small telescope: 150 mm
- large telescope: 5000 mm
Yeah I get that, but then what? Just point and shoot? Can you edit in photos app afterwards?
Not much guidance on this from Apple on the release notes from what I can see.
After installing 14.3 and activating ProRAW, I took a couple of photos (one HEIC and the other RAW).
My query is that when looking at the EXIF Data for each, both shots displayed 8Bit!
If ProRAW is 12Bit then where is this data displayed, as it is not in the EXIF Data field?
My query is that when looking at the EXIF Data for each, both shots displayed 8Bit!
If ProRAW is 12Bit then where is this data displayed, as it is not in the EXIF Data field?
These pics look like crap compared to a FX mirrorless or even a FX DSLR.
Not saying there isn't a time and place for phone cameras when the latter isn't available, but it really irks me that these images are being called amazing or incredible when they are barely average in detail and lighting.
Below are just a couple quick shots with a Sony a7iii mirrorless. Cropped in about 70 percent because of MR's photo size limits.
Andromeda galaxy in the top pic, and Mars in the bottom pic. These aren't even the greatest shots from my amateur skills, but a far cry from the post's examples of ProRaw being amazing.
Not saying there isn't a time and place for phone cameras when the latter isn't available, but it really irks me that these images are being called amazing or incredible when they are barely average in detail and lighting.
Below are just a couple quick shots with a Sony a7iii mirrorless. Cropped in about 70 percent because of MR's photo size limits.
Andromeda galaxy in the top pic, and Mars in the bottom pic. These aren't even the greatest shots from my amateur skills, but a far cry from the post's examples of ProRaw being amazing.
The actual format itself can, at the present time, be edited with Apple's own software, but it's up to developers to add support for it.
So for instance, Adobe would need to update Photoshop to support this file format in order to fully take advantage of it.
The reason why you would want to switch to this file format if you take photography seriously is purely for future-proofing
Actually in low light and at night it might not. At least not without quite a bit of effort on your part.
Phones have MUCH better processing than DSLRs due to computational photography.
So with a DSLR, first of all, if you get a DSLR for $1400, let's say Sony A6600, then you need a lens, because the kit lens is not good. It's all about the lenses. A good lens costs $600-1000, so you're already looking at over $2K.
Then you need to learn how to use the camera properly, have a tripod with you for a longer exposure or take multiple bracketing shots and combine them. A phone does that for auto automatically. If you do astrophotography, you have to do it all manually, remember stars move, you can't just do one long exposure or else you get light streaks. Phones, again, do all of that for you automatically.
For a phone that we always have on us; it’s amazing. Can’t wait to see what future phones bring.
You started on the right track. But then appear to not consider or giving weight to the context the images were made; ie, using a phone cam that you can put in your shirt or jeans pocket, a camera that is always with you. Why does that irk you? Not everyone has or needs a Sony a7iii. Those who don't but have a phone cam that can still make a good photo considering its limitations and put a smile on their face sounds good to me.
That's like complaining the Zapruder film was made by an amateur using amateur equipment with poor technique and thus technically flawed is therefore not worthy.
Don't sweat it. No one is purchasing a phone cam for astrophotography. Photography is about making photos, not wielding the best gear.
I've used an iPhone exclusively for the last five years. Even though I have two dSLRs, a mirrorless, and an Arca-Swiss F-field 4x5. They're all good. But having a camera with me all the time that I can make photos on a moment's notice is priceless.
I didn't dismiss the camera phone. That's why I said there is a time and place...where you aren't going to have your Mirrorless or DSLR with you.
Add:
And the point of my post to begin with is how the phones are being perceived photograph-wise. Are they adequate for social media? Sure.
Are they amazing for any type of photography, which is what people are being led to believe that these pictures are, amazing? No.
Like I said, there is a time and place, but when these articles tote a "professional photographer", it really leads many to believe these camera phones are on a professional-for-hire level, and they are not.
Last edited:
good that you can have it on as default as well so you don't need to keep switching It off and on again
Then start by first going to Apple. They themselves call it ProRAW https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211965
I dunno. Why can’t you just put really big glass on the phone to offset the sensor size? Isn’t that what micro 4/3 people do anyways?
Is not that simple, the bigger the lens the bigger the chromatic aberration and distortion. Also include that the focal lenght is so short that if you put a big lens in that focal lenght you'll have a big eyefish lens
I’m not going to bother approaching anyone about it! I also dislike incorrect use of lower case / upper case letters in ordinary use, such as iPhone v Iphone, adidas v Adidas, etc., but meh.