Magic RAW processor for photogs that think iPhone is better than Canon Nikon etc

[earlybird]

I enjoy spending time with my digital darkroom applications. Having grown up trying to exploit every advantage available to film and wet room print processing, I very much appreciate learning new RAW conversion and Photoshop techniques, etc.

Having said that,  is there a one-click image processor that would enable an owner of a Full Frame digital camera to effortlessly make like to like comparisons of images based upon his RAW files to those made by his auto-HDR iPhone 14?

I have more than one friend who insists on insisting that he does not use his real camera anymore because his iPhone is so freaking awesome.

I can't take it anymore. :-)

It makes me wonder if there is any desktop application for RAW files that levels the playing field in terms of providing the unseen and unacknowledged post-processing that an iPhone photo "benefits" from so that people who have abandoned their good cameras might reconsider their need to impress others with the magnificence of their iPhone.

It may be time to buy some belated holiday gifts.

Full disclosure: I went on a hike a week ago and left my DSLR because we ventured into unknown and treacherous terrain. I used MY iPhone to make a few photos of a geologic feature. When I got home and looked at the photos in Photoshop, they were horrifically ugly. The exposures were magically well-balanced and refined, but the impressionistic blocks and blobs of color swatches, blurring over texture and detail, left me wondering how anyone could accept such vulgar results. Yesterday, I went hiking to the same location with a few friends. This time I took the DSLR to take some good photos and spent the day listening to my fellows extol the amazing virtues of their iPhones.

I find it hard to deal with the mass hysteria.

These guys all have nice cameras, which they have begun leaving at home because they have never embraced an enthusiasm for post-processing.

I can't help but wonder how they would feel if there was an easy no-work application for their full-frame cameras that provided the same type of automated results that the iPhone spits out.

Any suggestions?







 

[Peano]

I used MY iPhone to make a few photos of a geologic feature. When I got home and looked at the photos in Photoshop, they were horrifically ugly. The exposures were magically well-balanced and refined, but the impressionistic blocks and blobs of color swatches, blurring over texture and detail, left me wondering how anyone could accept such vulgar results.

I'm persuaded that people who are overjoyed with their iPhone cameras either can't see the smeared textures, or they can see them but just don't care. Either way, I see no point in trying to convince them that a quality DSLR with a quality lens takes photos with far superior image quality.

[earlybird]

It seems like you are making a point of seeing no point.

Do you have any suggestions for an automated digital imaging processing application for 35mm frame photography that matches the results of iPhone processing?

[fdisilvestro]

The recent iphones such as the 14 may take multiple exposures to produce an image, and have an HDR screen. You will not be able to match that with a single capture from your DSLR viewed on a SDR monitor.
For someone that always uses auto-everything on the camera, does not go beyond the out of camera Jpeg, and have a SDR monitor, the iphone image could easily win.

Are the iphones good enough to substitute a full frame camera with a good lens? Not yet, at least for me.

In any case, as Peano said, it is a waste of time arguing about which is better. Just use what you like best regardless of what others might say.

[digitaldog]

The very best camera is the one you have with you.
Sometimes, that's an iPhone.
For the OP, there's a huge amount of proprietary capture and processing used in the Apple image pipeline.

[earlybird]

I agree that the best camera is the one you have with you, but if you left your best camera at home, then at best, your best camera is the next best camera you could have had with you.

OK, I get that the iPhone is making algorithmic "decisions" about what exposures are required, making multiple exposures if required, and combining them via HDR tone mapping. I understand that the processing is proprietary, but that does not preclude other clever developers from attempting to replicate the results.

Many reviews quote a 14 stop dynamic range for an iPhone with the HDR processing, while many "35mm" full frame cameras have a 12-stop range with good exposure practice.

I can push and pull a single exposure on my full frame to go places the iPhone doesn't. If I work with multiple exposure HDR it's hardly a worth a comparison.
 
Obviously, the iPhone capture and tone map processing software is excellent. I have an iPhone. I get it.

I don't get out photo consumering much. So, I am unaware of what might be for sale in the marketplace.

Are any applications offering even a slight attempt at providing quick and easy processing with the same goal of instant satisfaction?

[Kwraber]

This may help. This was written when I had the iPhone 15 Pro Max. I now have the iPhone 16 Pro Max. I always shoot RAW. I import unmodified into LR and process it normally. As the article explains, if I need to upscale, I use GigaPixel. These prints are shown at the beginning of my print classes, and people can't believe they are made from the iPhone.  There is a big jump from the 14 to the 16.  My RAW files go up to the cloud in photos.  A smaller image is left behind on the iPhone so I always have space.  I have 140,000 images on my iPhone, and full-res RAWS are downloaded to one of my raid drives.  So, I have a full-size catalog in the cloud and one on my hard drives.  The ProRAW profile in LR is really good.  I'm working on 48mp files for the normal lens and wide angle.

Some of my best-selling images this past year were from the iPhone.  I'm a firm believer in it.  I also own an a7r5, a1, and a fuji XH2 and XT5, and I am also playing with and testing the Phase One 150mp XC40.  Having all these cameras, I have complete faith in the camera I have with me all the time the iPhone 16 pro max.

I think it may be time to upgrade.

https://photopxl.com/how-big-can-it-go-iphone-raw-and-gigapixel/

[earlybird]

"I shot these images with the iPhone on a tripod"? I guess it's also true that the best tripod is the one you have with you.

iPhone "RAW"? The last time I looked at an iPhone 12bit DNG I opined that the damage had already been done.

"Gigapixel"? Been there...



I am still asking for suggestions about a software package that converts actual RAW files from "35mm" full frame cameras with a similar effect to iPhone processing.

[fdisilvestro]

Give a try to DxO Photolab 8. There is a 30 day free trial available. Not necessarily iphone results, but great presets IMHO

[earlybird]

Give a try to DxO Photolab 8. There is a 30 day free trial available. Not necessarily iphone results, but great presets IMHO

Thank you for the suggestion.

I will see if my hiking fellow and neighbor would like to try out Dxo with his R5 photos.

I tried Dxo a few years ago and was impressed with many features, but I ended up sticking with Adobe Camera RAW and Photoshop.

I did not try the Dxo presets and am curious to see if they would please him. I would like for him to appreciate his "35mm" camera enough to distract him from repeatedly telling me about his awesome iPhone as if he has forgotten that I also have one. :-)

Thank you!

[Peano]

Off topic, like a red-haired second cousin, but here it is: Even though it's been done a billion times, I still twitch when I see raw images referred to as RAW images. I suppose it's because I made my living as a writer and tend to be more aware of nuances in language.

Acronyms are put in all caps because each letter is the initial letter of a word: NASCAR, NAACP, GOP, TWA, NFL, GPA -- there's a million of 'em. But "raw" isn't one of them. It isn't an acronym. It's just a word: raw meat, raw vegetables, raw files.

I could go on. Aren't you glad I didn't?

[digitaldog]

Yup, not an acronym (the camera data) and thankful Adobe calls and named its raw converter correctly. 🤔

[fdisilvestro]

raw or RAW? Definitely a first world problem!

[earlybird]

Well, if you all want to have a pissing match about who can be more pedantic...

I subscribe to the philosophy and methodology employed by the Oxford English Dictionary, whereby the use of words is documented rather than prescribed.

I am not impressed, nor even bemused when others mount their Calvinistic high horse and ascribe to the strict prescriptions ordained by the Merriam-Webster philosophy of "we're right, and you're wrong."

For example, "RAW":  https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/s/article/ART102836

Here is a documented case where "RAW" is used repeatedly, as published on July 22, 2024.

Additionally, I was introduced to the concept of "RAW" via experience within the Canon ecosystem, so "RAW" works fine for me. Plus, I don't usually have the need to be the internet's know-it-all authority.

So, we can see that, indeed, some people spell the word raw as "RAW" while others choose to spell it "raw", or even "Raw" and everyone can be happy, if they can be happy, that is.

Did I win the internet today? I doubt it. Others will surely claim the last word.






I am surprised there is no obvious product that endeavors to provide the sort of automated process results the iPhone offers, that is made for owners of cameras that can't make phone calls.

If anyone else has some helpful suggestions for software, I would be glad to learn of them.

Thank you.

[digitaldog]

Canon is wrong too.
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."-Bertrand Russell

[mcbroomf]

I am surprised there is no obvious product that endeavors to provide the sort of automated process results the iPhone offers, that is made for owners of cameras that can't make phone calls.

I'm not too surprised.  The cellphones files need custom processing to be at their optimum and the maker works on their in-camera software knowing the attributes of their own raw files (noise, colour balance etc).  Specifically so (ie they only deal with their files).  By contrast you're asking for a software company like Adobe to have a "Magic" button that would do the same as Apple (if importing Apple's raws), but then also the same (ie best quality outcome) for all different models of Sony cameras, Canon's, Nikon's, Fuji just to name the top tier.  Whatever raw files are thrown at it.  There are hundreds of different cameras, sensors, CFA recipes etc.  One button could not rule them all (IMO) and of course the current Auto button will not make panos or merge bracketed images for a print HDR.

I believe that a comparison CAN be made, and if you want your friend to shut up it's on the pair of you to have a friendly contest.  Same scene, same lens (FOV), same output size.  But you both do the best you can on your own system.  So it would be up to you to take images using your settings (ie not a copy of the 'phones) process your images (including HDR, Panos etc) and show your friend that the camera in your hand is (for now) the better option under the specific conditions used.

Let us know how it goes ...

[earlybird]

Let us know how it goes ...

I am hesitant to embrace the idea that a vast difference between the output of various sensors is the reason.

I understand that more than a few cameras use sensors that are quite different from the sensors sold by the big 2?, 3?, or perhaps 4? camera manufacturers. Still, the reasoning that these varied sensors preclude the development of processing software would pertain to all general-purpose RAW converters regardless of the goal.

I imagine we could all agree that for the most part the sky is supposed to be "blue", or orange, or pink, or grey... and it is often found at or near the top of the frame.

I do know that not every camera model's RAW output can be converted by any or every RAW converter.

I don't know of any camera and RAW converter combinations that get the basics terribly wrong if they do support the camera model.


Anyways, I don't want to, nor did I come here to disagree about why there are no converters such as I am asking for.

I have yet to confirm that none exist.

If, indeed, none exists, I may still feel surprised, but I will not dwell on it long enough to argue a case that such a thing should exist.



I am simply trying to elicit recommendations for a Digital Image Processing package.

Out of 10 replies to my original request about software, only one has included a suggestion. For that, I am grateful.

Thank you.



.

[fdisilvestro]

Adobe has recently introduced "Adaptive Profiles" (currently in beta & available only in Adobe Camera Raw) that give you an improved starting point in some cases. Check these with a couple of raw images to see what you think.

[Simon J.A. Simpson]

Canon is wrong too.
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."-Bertrand Russell

True.  I prefer ‘UNCOOKED’; but I don't think it'll catch on somehow.   

[digitaldog]

True.  I prefer ‘UNCOOKED’; but I don't think it'll catch on somehow.   

That didn't work  :