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.
iPhone 13 iPhone camera is overprocessing. Will it ever end?
- Thread starter shadowboi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You have to pay for it don't you?
Many of us just want to disable the processing and not get forced into paying just to have a non messed up stock camera on our iPhone
I think there's a misconception that people who are really into photography have, that somehow the sort of photo film captures is more realistic/natural (I'm going to use those as synonyms). OP does it a bit, with phrases like:
It's not about how light works. It's about how eyes work.
I can think of two possible definitions of a "realistic/natural" looking photo:
If you're going for definition 1, then you need multiple exposures, the shadows should be detailed and visible like they would be if the person looked at them and their pupils expanded, and the sky shouldn't be washed out.
These are two arguably objective takes on what a natural/realistic photo would be. I think the truth is even enthusiast photographers aren't actually looking for objective accuracy, they're looking for a style they like, just like everybody else. Personally I wish they wouldn't talk as though they were somehow being more objective about it (I'm addressing that criticism more at some people I know than at OP).
I do agree with OP though that it'd be nice to have an easy way to turn a bunch of the processing on and off.
It's not about how light works. It's about how eyes work.
I can think of two possible definitions of a "realistic/natural" looking photo:
- It emulates what a person sees when they look at the scene in real life and move their eyes around, looking directly at all the many different areas and details of the scene.
- It emulates what a person sees when they look at the scene in real life and don't move their eyes - they focus on the centre of the scene, the same point the camera is focused on.
If you're going for definition 1, then you need multiple exposures, the shadows should be detailed and visible like they would be if the person looked at them and their pupils expanded, and the sky shouldn't be washed out.
These are two arguably objective takes on what a natural/realistic photo would be. I think the truth is even enthusiast photographers aren't actually looking for objective accuracy, they're looking for a style they like, just like everybody else. Personally I wish they wouldn't talk as though they were somehow being more objective about it (I'm addressing that criticism more at some people I know than at OP).
I do agree with OP though that it'd be nice to have an easy way to turn a bunch of the processing on and off.
Last edited:
I have been working from the assumption (my mistake, perhaps) that the following steps have been taken/attempted and the results are not up to desired levels:
1. access settings for the camera app. LOTS to play around with in there. E.g. RAW as mentioned in other posts
2. Settings within the camera as one frames the shot. E.g. exposure settings, macro mode, etc
1. access settings for the camera app. LOTS to play around with in there. E.g. RAW as mentioned in other posts
2. Settings within the camera as one frames the shot. E.g. exposure settings, macro mode, etc
That's all just working around the actual problem of forced baked in processing that one can't disable
A lot of us don't want to screw around with shooting RAW and processing or using other modes
We just want to take basic pictures that aren't screwed up by excessive processing
This isn't a large request
We are asking for the ability to have our phones "not do something"
Let me reiterate
To add, I own: Halide (not subscription-based, OG version that they decided to cripple from further updates), ProShoot, Camera+ and I guess many other photo apps names of which I really forgot.
These apps are u s e l e s s. Literal skins.
Another issue is that Apple did something to RAW processing and because of that exposure does not work – photos become either underexposed or overexposed. It would have been ok if it was just few stops of under/over exposure, but can anyone call +-5 stops ok or workable? Those are basically ruined negatives.
Let me get some free time and I will show what I am talking about and take few RAW examples and screenshot them here
For me, I use my iPhone camera for quick snaps of the kids when I don’t have my actual camera on me.
Especially with landscape images, I have found the iPhone over-processes images to HDR-like, which I’m not a fan of at all. But again, when it comes to landscapes, I usually have my mirrorless camera and lenses with me, so it’s not much of an issue.
Especially with landscape images, I have found the iPhone over-processes images to HDR-like, which I’m not a fan of at all. But again, when it comes to landscapes, I usually have my mirrorless camera and lenses with me, so it’s not much of an issue.
So, today I got a great opportunity to directly compare RAW of iPhone SE3 and iPhone 6s. Both phones have 12MP sensor, my SE has iOS 16 installed and 6s has iOS 15, it cannot go further than that.
In these examples I have not done anything, these are fully automatic RAW shots on both phones. I used ProShot app to take RAW stills. No edits were applied to any of the photos.
Example 1. Full auto. Photo from SE is wildly overexposed.
Example 2. Here I have manually changed ISO and exposure on both phones. Live image preview on SE does not work, you have to apply ISO and exposure values and shoot blindly
Here is how image looks in preview, but the problem is that it is SE, not 6s.
This is not app-specific. Same problem is in all the popular apps (Halide, Camera+ etc). The issue lies deep in the API level.
Honestly idk if the issue is related to iOS, but I had it on my old iPhone 11 Pro as well. I will have opportunity to test it on iPhone 12 as well, but I am guessing issue exists there too.
This. iPhones are still for point-and-shoot images. You want professional shots, buy some professional gear.
Straight no. iPhones ain’t cheap, neither any of the good Sony or Fuji mirrorless cameras. To be precise, basically same price. Hopefully some Nikon DSLRs are obviously cheaper and better in color reproduction than most contenders.
And I specifically said DSLR: after my M200 I am highly disappointed with mirrorless world, not only they are very inconvenient to use, have no adequate viewfinder (in direct sunlight screens are useless!) and got literally 0 grip, but also the shots coming out of them are poorly processed, yes this is another end of the spectrum – when ISP cannot even reproduce realistic lifelike colors. This is as bad as iPhone’s or Samsung’s overprocessing.
But lets get to square one: I want my always-with-me device to shoot good enough. I am not even asking them to throw 1 inch sensor inside (albeit high time! Isn’t it? Ugly camera bump must be there for something better than useless 2-3 lens array), I am asking them to make photos look realistic again, and I don’t think it is too much to ask
I still get better, sharper images off my 2011 Canon 600D than I do my iPhone. Its not that the iPhone is crap; its just the laws of physics are better on the Canon! Bigger sensor, better lenses etc.
For phone photography an Xperia is still my preferred option. It lets you take unfiltered, unprocessed images allowing you to do it all yourself (and learn a useful skill) instead of having the phone do it for you.
I don't think the comparison with film is particularly fair, but it's true the artificial processing stuff is absolute trash. (nothing to do with 'AI' FFS!)
Sitting with a friend who was keen to show off their new iPhone, we both took a photo of the same scene across the city - the new phone (vs. my old SE1) just didn't look anything like what the eye could see - it was a totally fake representation...almost as if it had gone through several Photoshop enhancement filters. And no way to turn it off.
True that it somehow had more detail in the darker areas, but yeah overall just completely fake - almost cartoon-like.
I've no idea why people prefer this processed crap.
I've discovered a really nice alternative is the Huwai P40 Pro - not necessarily a better phone, but a really natural looking camera, especially when it comes to angle/perspective distortion.
Sitting with a friend who was keen to show off their new iPhone, we both took a photo of the same scene across the city - the new phone (vs. my old SE1) just didn't look anything like what the eye could see - it was a totally fake representation...almost as if it had gone through several Photoshop enhancement filters. And no way to turn it off.
True that it somehow had more detail in the darker areas, but yeah overall just completely fake - almost cartoon-like.
I've no idea why people prefer this processed crap.
I've discovered a really nice alternative is the Huwai P40 Pro - not necessarily a better phone, but a really natural looking camera, especially when it comes to angle/perspective distortion.
Sadly the Pixel has also now gone down this route.
I "upgraded" from a Pixel 5 to a Pixel 8A, and the photos were noticeably worse. Natural look is completely gone in favour of adding too much brightness and oversharpening. Colours are all completely off too now, just to add more contrast.
We have to remember that these cameras are not created with normal users in mind, they are made for the Instagram generation and that's how they like their photos.
The weirdest over processing quirk is also related to text- photographs of documents are noticeably worse than my previous iPhones, even the venerable iPhone 6! Focal length now does not help, but it's the bizarre text processing that screws it up.
On a related note, it shouldn't be hard in 2024 to use a top of the range phone to scan documents and save as sensibly sized PDFs. The default method for doing this is utterly appalling! Laughably, insultingly, bad! Warped pages, crazy file sizes, low fidelity, etc. Baffling!
On a related note, it shouldn't be hard in 2024 to use a top of the range phone to scan documents and save as sensibly sized PDFs. The default method for doing this is utterly appalling! Laughably, insultingly, bad! Warped pages, crazy file sizes, low fidelity, etc. Baffling!
And they look better to about 1.5 billion people who take trillions of photos per year, and don't whine and moan on Apple forums.
Oh well, then the last reason to buy a Pixel instead of an iPhone is gone. I still have multiple Pixels, and the P4 to this day has better haptics than my 15 Pro that cost 3x as much and a better display than the newer P6 and P7. The Pixel hardware quality has been declining since the P4 and good riddance Google, I don't use any Google products or services anymore and I am no longer interested in their phones. First they showed off with the M4 and then decided to only give us customers the cheapest trash they can get away with from now on.
Standard fanboi knee-jerk reaction.
The overwhelming majority of Apple's customers are sheeple who don't really care much either way. ('Think Different' is a long and distant memory).
I suspect they'd only give it a moment's thought if you put a couple of options side by side, before returning to the much more interesting decision of which combination of emojis to add to their instagram selfie.
Feel free to avoid this thread if you're one of those.
They are bad compared to DSLRs and always will be. The laws of physics aren't ever going to change. I don't think iPhone photos are "bad" in general, but you're never going to shoot a wedding or anything else professionally with an iPhone.
Clearly we disagree. Shooting RAW is not screwing around, it is a one-time setting choice. If one simply sets the iP15 Pro to RAW, then does all the normal things to get good pix (light, movement, composition), very good captures can be made without "screwed up by excessive processing."
Certainly the occasional computationally messed-up image will present; when that happens do not get twisted panties, just delete it and take another pic. Take lots of pix, they are free.
Pros prefer the big gear with its far superior UI, and clients like to see the big gear as a validation of professionalism. But as someone who shoots all kinds of pro work and owns the pricey pro gear, make no mistake about what high quality pix can be captured on iPhone. Almost all of the captures of static subjects that I do now are almost always done on the iPhone 15 Pro. The Nikons stay locked in the trunk.
I am very confident that Apple could point the photogs that shoot its "shot on iPhone" marketing pix at a wedding and end up with pix better than pix from the 95 percentile of wedding photogs, which includes me.
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. I would never do portraits or other "static" subjects with an iPhone professionally. I have the 15 PM, and it's great for what it does, but it doesn't compare to my professional gear. I think the iPhone takes great photos, especially with the right conditions, but the iPhone lenses are never going to take in anywhere near the amount of light that a professional camera lens will. Photography can be described as the art of capturing light. No amount of trickery is going to make the iPhone be able to defy physics and take in more light than the its tiny lenses are capable of. I wouldn't hire you if you were taking any photos with the iPhone for a professional purpose. I don't care how good iPhone cameras get. They will never compare due to physical limitations.