Other ProRAW - remove "Pro" and "RAW" from the name, please

[jajo.j]

As a photographer, I love taking photos with my iPhone. "The best camera is the one you carry with you all the time" is a very true statement and the quality of mobile photography has by far reached the level where I rarely feel a need to carry my DSLR anymore. This is a true dream come true for me and many other photographers as it allows us to take photos that was previously impossible.

However, there is one thing with the iPhone camera that bugs me a lot. That is what Apple calls "ProRAW" - a format dedicated to advanced users who wants the maximum control of the iPhone camera. Apple claims that this is a RAW format which implies that it should be the RAW data from the sensor without processing. It is not.

In fact, ProRAW is a heavily post processed format where Apple applies tons of denoise (way too much) and artificial sharpening before creating the RAW output. Also the dynamic range of the ProRAW files is very poor which greatly limits how much shadow/highlight data that can be recovered from the RAW file.

I have written extensive feedback to Apple about this numerous times and received zero response. That is why I decided to write here to hopefully start some discussion that perhaps can lead to some attention to this matter.

If Apple wants to call this format "ProRAW" they need to do a couple of changes:

• Completely remove all denoise algorithms. Removing noise by stacking/merging is ok but don't apply any denoise algorithms that remove detail from the images. Let the end user denoise it in post processing to their own liking
• Don't perform any artificial sharpening on the image data (it looks particularly bad after the heavy denoising)
• Don't perform demosaicing - let the user do this in post processing as there are many better methods for this than the one Apple is using

I understand that in some workflows it is great to have a "semi RAW format" that already has lots of post processing applied but can be used for easy adjustment of white balance and (to some extent) exposure. But don't call it Pro. Call it "QuickRAW" or something (my suggestion "NoobRAW" will probably not make it...)

Right now we are forced to use "ProRAW" if we want 48 megapixel RAW output. There is no way to get a 100% unprocessed 48MP output from an iPhone - but this is really what advanced users want and need.

If Apple wants to keep ProRAW as it is, then:

• Add streams for single frame regular RAW 48MP (100% unprocessed, unstacked) for the camera APIs so that third party apps can solve the problem for us
• Keep ProRAW as a stacked RAW format but allow the level of denoise and sharpening to be controlled through the APIs

All of this is possible on Android flagships. Apple should do some minor tweaks to ProRAW to make it the tool for professionals that it is meant to be. Hardware is great, but as of today, we cannot use it to the full potential because of these limitations.

 

[Ben J.]

As a photographer, I love taking photos with my iPhone. "The best camera is the one you carry with you all the time" is a very true statement and the quality of mobile photography has by far reached the level where I rarely feel a need to carry my DSLR anymore. This is a true dream come true for me and many other photographers as it allows us to take photos that was previously impossible.

However, there is one thing with the iPhone camera that bugs me a lot. That is what Apple calls "ProRAW" - a format dedicated to advanced users who wants the maximum control of the iPhone camera. Apple claims that this is a RAW format which implies that it should be the RAW data from the sensor without processing. It is not.

In fact, ProRAW is a heavily post processed format where Apple applies tons of denoise (way too much) and artificial sharpening before creating the RAW output. Also the dynamic range of the ProRAW files is very poor which greatly limits how much shadow/highlight data that can be recovered from the RAW file.

I have written extensive feedback to Apple about this numerous times and received zero response. That is why I decided to write here to hopefully start some discussion that perhaps can lead to some attention to this matter.

If Apple wants to call this format "ProRAW" they need to do a couple of changes:

• Completely remove all denoise algorithms. Removing noise by stacking/merging is ok but don't apply any denoise algorithms that remove detail from the images. Let the end user denoise it in post processing to their own liking
• Don't perform any artificial sharpening on the image data (it looks particularly bad after the heavy denoising)
• Don't perform demosaicing - let the user do this in post processing as there are many better methods for this than the one Apple is using

I understand that in some workflows it is great to have a "semi RAW format" that already has lots of post processing applied but can be used for easy adjustment of white balance and (to some extent) exposure. But don't call it Pro. Call it "QuickRAW" or something (my suggestion "NoobRAW" will probably not make it...)

Right now we are forced to use "ProRAW" if we want 48 megapixel RAW output. There is no way to get a 100% unprocessed 48MP output from an iPhone - but this is really what advanced users want and need.

If Apple wants to keep ProRAW as it is, then:

• Add streams for single frame regular RAW 48MP (100% unprocessed, unstacked) for the camera APIs so that third party apps can solve the problem for us
• Keep ProRAW as a stacked RAW format but allow the level of denoise and sharpening to be controlled through the APIs

All of this is possible on Android flagships. Apple should do some minor tweaks to ProRAW to make it the tool for professionals that it is meant to be. Hardware is great, but as of today, we cannot use it to the full potential because of these limitations.

Hi. Life-long photography enthusiast, at-times professional, here. Retired now, gave my DSLR gear to my son, and have been enjoying a Fujifilm x100S that fits in my pocket the last few years, with its high quality, and limitations in functionality, which can actually spur creativity.

I recently moved from a iPhone SE 2016 to a iphone 12 Mini, and noticed that I also got a much better camera. I've always been a Lightroom user, and I've had my iphones and ipads set up to use the Lightroom camera software on them, instead of the basic iOS camera, and this syncs the images thru Adobe cloud and when I open Lightroom Classic on my MBA or my Mac Mini at home, they're there.

I'll have to check for myself, of course, but you're saying that they're not true RAW?

 

[Slartibart]

This is probably one of the best intros/background on Apple‘s ProRAW… from one of the Lux founders/Halide developers.

 

[RRC]

This is probably one of the best intros/background on Apple‘s ProRAW… from one of the Lux founders/Halide developers.

This.

 

[jajo.j]

This is probably one of the best intros/background on Apple‘s ProRAW… from one of the Lux founders/Halide developers.

That was written a while back when ProRAW had much less noise reduction and more detail. Today ProRAW 48 is murdered by Native RAW 12 because of the heavy post processing. A true shame to what was once a great format.

 

[Ben J.]

This is probably one of the best intros/background on Apple‘s ProRAW… from one of the Lux founders/Halide developers.

What I took from the article was that, ok with proraw I have a complete raw, dng, file with all the dynamics available - it's just that the demosaicing has been done. Seems OK, even though I do know that demosaicing algorithms can make a difference. Fujifilm f.ex.

 

[jajo.j]

What I took from the article was that, ok with proraw I have a complete raw, dng, file with all the dynamics available - it's just that the demosaicing has been done. Seems OK, even though I do know that demosaicing algorithms can make a difference. Fujifilm f.ex.

Problem is that it is not just demosaicing. It is also heavy denoise. A real RAW file shot at a higher ISO would be full of noise (and details) not a smudgy mess that looks like it was painted.

 

[ToddH]

That was written a while back when ProRAW had much less noise reduction and more detail. Today ProRAW 48 is murdered by Native RAW 12 because of the heavy post processing. A true shame to what was once a great format.

I don’t think so. Current iPhone 16 pro max ProRAW looks and works great for me. The suggestion to shoot raw from third party apps reduces the files to 12mp (which is why they seem to have better clarity) and we are forced to use a very low ISO, otherwise the files are useless and grainy. 640 to 800 ISO is terrible and extremely noisy if used in low light. So I don’t use it. 12mp leaves no room to crop, it’s an old file size that I can’t stand to use because of that. 12mp files have been used for too long and is outdated. Sure it’s great for social media like facebook and instagram. I don’t really care for halides zero processed format. I had to use ISO 80 jut to get useable files with low noise when indoors. I prefer to use the Even Longer app and let it stack raw files to eliminate all noise, even when using high iso. The app isn’t practical in most situations because it requires a tripod. ProRAW can be edited like all raw files, even if there is additional data applied.

ProRAW at night, ISO 640. A very clean and sharp image. ProRAW just has to be edited properly and I get the full 48mp resolution. ProRAW may not be liked by you and others, but this is where I agree to disagree I suppose.

200% crop or more

ISO 2000!! Can’t say that this doesn’t look great.

150% crop

 

[nunolikeapple]

Proraw Max (Native) is not working for anyone. As i stated at least for the European people. (iPhone with sim card).
I have now tested and confirmed and contacted more than 30 owners around Europe. This issue is being investigated and confirmed by camera department engineers/specialist's.

- Also beautiful (JPEG) photos. You should continue to post those fantastic shots.

I do agree that 12MP is more convenient and versatile than 48MP.
Even tho, the 48MP is a great advantage for specific situations.
And yes; Apple should rethink about quality over fantasy (apple intelligence integration). A ridiculous subversion.

 

[black_knight]

I don’t think so. Current iPhone 16 pro max ProRAW looks and works great for me. The suggestion to shoot raw from third party apps reduces the files to 12mp (which is why they seem to have better clarity) and we are forced to use a very low ISO, otherwise the files are useless and grainy. 640 to 800 ISO is terrible and extremely noisy if used in low light. So I don’t use it. 12mp leaves no room to crop, it’s an old file size that I can’t stand to use because of that. 12mp files have been used for too long and is outdated. Sure it’s great for social media like facebook and instagram. I don’t really care for halides zero processed format. I had to use ISO 80 jut to get useable files with low noise when indoors. I prefer to use the Even Longer app and let it stack raw files to eliminate all noise, even when using high iso. The app isn’t practical in most situations because it requires a tripod. ProRAW can be edited like all raw files, even if there is additional data applied.

ProRAW at night, ISO 640. A very clean and sharp image. ProRAW just has to be edited properly and I get the full 48mp resolution. ProRAW may not be liked by you and others, but this is where I agree to disagree I suppose.

View attachment 2444743

200% crop or more

View attachment 2444744


ISO 2000!! Can’t say that this doesn’t look great.

View attachment 2444747

150% crop

View attachment 2444748

Great pics and information. I think some people get so worked up about image processing capabilities that they forget about what photography should be about…great photographs. It doesn’t matter how you get there.

 

[ToddH]

Proraw Max (Native) is not working for anyone. As i stated at least for the European people. (iPhone with sim).
I have now tested and confirmed and contacted more than 30 owners around Europe. This issue is being investigated and confirmed by camera department engineers.

- Also beautiful (JPEG) photos. You should continue to post those fantastic shots.

I do agree that 12MP is more convenient and versatile than 48MP.
Even tho, the 48MP is a great advantage for specific situations.

The shots I posted were with ProRAW max or raw max as seen on the iPhone. So it’s working great for me on both 16 pro max phones.

 

[nunolikeapple]

Great pics and information. I think some people get so worked up about image processing capabilities that they forget about what photography should be about…great photographs. It doesn’t matter how you get there.

I do not think so. Only because looks great, doesn’t mean that photos don’t demonstrate issues and abnormal artifacts. And thats why exists Raw and jpegs files.

And only because we/some are amateurs doesn’t mean that we can accept/neglect crucial defects.

 

[nunolikeapple]

The shots I posted were with ProRAW max or raw max as seen on the iPhone. So it’s working great for me on both 16 pro max phones.

As i stated, i have confirmation only from European version.
I do not know if this issue is present in the American variant.
That’s great if it works for you. For the majority i do not think so.

 

[ToddH]

I do not think so. Only because looks great, doesn’t mean that photos don’t demonstrate issues and abnormal artifacts. And thats why exists Raw and jpegs files.

And only because we are amateurs doesn’t mean that we can neglect crucial defects.

I’ve been a photographer since the film days, converted to digital in 2001 with the Nikon D1x. I know what I’m talking about regarding my iPhone ProRAW files and DSLR raw files. I don’t have pixelated images, I don’t have fragmented edges on objects. I’m not an amateur photographer, I’ve been at the pro level for a long time. My photography journey started in 1989. I see things in photos that others can’t. I agree to disagree with your statement. I know when my raw files are different as they were with one of my iPhones before I completed a factory restore. The ProRAW (Raw Max) files have the same output quality as the ProCam app on my iPhones. Anyway, I’m not going to argue with you guys, instead, I’ll be talking photos with my two iPhones. I hope you all get your issues resolved.. later!

 

[nunolikeapple]

Yes no need to argue. We all have different opinions. And they are all valid. I have my facts you have yours.
No need to create an extended justification; neither i mentioned you in my last sentence.
As a phycologist and just for your clarification i live with 2 advanced photographers. Thats why i also admire photos and art.
Have a great day and enjoy your photos!

 

[jajo.j]

I think @ToddH 's photos look better than my own ProRAW 48 in terms of detail and noise reduction. For me, ProRAW 48 is nowadays just a smudgy mess when looking at them in 100%. Maybe there is a setting or combination of settings that makes ProRAW 48 behave better?

@ToddH I know it is a hassle but do you mind taking screenshots of your Camera configuration in Settings and posting here?

 

[nunolikeapple]

That might be helpful.

BTW Those are my configurations.

 

[ToddH]

I think @ToddH 's photos look better than my own ProRAW 48 in terms of detail and noise reduction. For me, ProRAW 48 is nowadays just a smudgy mess when looking at them in 100%. Maybe there is a setting or combination of settings that makes ProRAW 48 behave better?

@ToddH I know it is a hassle but do you mind taking screenshots of your Camera configuration in Settings and posting here?

Yes.. I’ll do so as soon as I can today. Just now getting ready for work. I also use presets I have made in Lightroom as well that are applied to my ProRAW images. I basically opened a ProRAW file on my iMac 27” and edited the image there in Lightroom classic, got it looking really clean, then took those settings and applied them to Lightroom mobile for the same image, then saved as a preset. I have many presets I use for the ProRAW DNG’s, some I have made, some I have purchased and modified, then saved separately. So, give me a few hours and I’ll post my screenshots. Thanks…

 

[jajo.j]

Yes.. I’ll do so as soon as I can today. Just now getting ready for work. I also use presets I have made in Lightroom as well that are applied to my ProRAW images. I basically opened a ProRAW file on my iMac 27” and edited the image there in Lightroom classic, got it looking really clean, then took those settings and applied them to Lightroom mobile for the same image, then saved as a preset. I have many presets I use for the ProRAW DNG’s, some I have made, some I have purchased and modified, then saved separately. So, give me a few hours and I’ll post my screenshots. Thanks…

Thats great.

Maybe together we can compare all settings and find out if anything is triggering a bug or some other processing in ProRAW which is the cause to this.

I am thinking about setting my phone on a tripod and shooting the same scene over and over with different settings and then compare them in a computer to see if there is a difference in detail/post processing.

 

[nunolikeapple]

That would be amazing ! thx

 

[ToddH]

Here are my camera settings, no particular order. Y’all let me know if changing the format from JPEG XL lossless most compatible to the second option JPEG XL lossless to see if that changes the quality of the ProRAW images. On the desert, titanium iPhone that I had the most problems with in the beginning, I would change this format several times and it seemed to have made my images cleaner by forcing it to go to a different imaging format. Doesn’t seem to matter anymore since I’ve done my restore and Pull the new version of iOS down. Now it’s iOS 18.1 images are great. anyway, I hope this helps. I definitely will work with you guys to see if we can figure out what the issues are with some of these iPhones.

 

[jajo.j]

Here are my camera settings, no particular order. Y’all let me know if changing the format from JPEG XL lossless most compatible to the second option JPEG XL lossless to see if that changes the quality of the ProRAW images. On the desert, titanium iPhone that I had the most problems with in the beginning, I would change this format several times and it seemed to have made my images cleaner by forcing it to go to a different imaging format. Doesn’t seem to matter anymore since I’ve done my restore and Pull the new version of iOS down. Now it’s iOS 18.1 images are great. anyway, I hope this helps. I definitely will work with you guys to see if we can figure out what the issues are with some of these iPhones.

It does seem like JPEG XL Lossless has a little better quality vs the most compatible. Will do some more testing.

 

[nunolikeapple]

I will test that too, thanks both of you!

 

[ToddH]

It does seem like JPEG XL Lossless has a little better quality vs the most compatible. Will do some more testing.

Also check to see if launching the camera from the lock screen has better image quality versus launching it from the home screen. I think I might have seen some variances with that option in the past before my updates.

 

[Gcerdan]

Good afternoon Excellent post. A question, have you noticed that the percentage of the battery decreases rapidly when using the camera?. In my specific case, with each photo/two photos, the battery decreases by 1%. Thank you for your kindness