S21 ultra: 108mp in RAW

[Adalbert]

Hello everybody,
I've been testing my new phone S21 Ultra for a few days.
Unfortunately, I have not found a way to save the images from the 108MP camera ( 12000*9000 ) in RAW format.
On other cameras it works in PRO mode.
Does anyone know how to solve this?
Best,
ADi

[Ichthyophthirius]

Hi,

Looks like there's no 108MP RAW output. The RAW is only available after pixel binning at 12 MP: https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-s21-u ... -the-dark/

[Adalbert]

Hi,
Yes the current software does not allow that.
I was thinking of a camera app that can save all images to RAW.
Best,
ADi

[Steve S]

In a perhaps lame effort to legitimize this thread in a macro forum, I'd like to say that closeups with the second-longest-lens camera are the first mobile-phone images I've made where DOF was becoming a problem.

I'm too ignorant to know applications that will demosaic raw files where the pixel-pitch is one-third of the Bayer CFA pitch. Gobs of (impaired) luminance information compared to chrominance information. If we had the raw file, where would we take it?

The jpgs with the longer-lens cameras are seriously oversharpened and I'm not aware of anything to do about that. The PRO mode doesn't work with those two cameras. Is there an app that will recover raws from those cameras?

Is there a forum where folks like us can geek out over these advanced mobile-phone camera questions? I've not staged a search.

[Adalbert]

Hello Steve,

yes, you can take macro photos with mobile phones.

So far I have done it with the A51, which has a macro lens.
But I also know the prejudices and I know that most of the so-called professionals
are allergic to mobile phone photos.

But I have no problem with it and try everything.
Since I've only had the thing for a few days, I can't say yet if it's any good or not.
In my opinion, the phone has a lot of potential in terms of hardware, but the software is weak.

BTW, sooner or later we will all take photos with mobile phones :-)

Best,
ADi

[zzffnn]

I am interested in this topic though I cannot contribute anything at the moment.

[Adalbert]

Hello everybody,
Enclosed you will find some JPGs 12000x9000px:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmVfrTBn
Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

Hello everybody,
Enclosed you will find some JPGs 12000x9000px:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmVfrTBn
Best, ADi

I tried several of the images and found nothing approaching that size, even when selecting the option to see all sizes.

Where exactly should I be looking?

--Rik

[Adalbert]

Hello Rik,

In this album Flickr offers me the original-size 12000x9000 for each image
e.g.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/511 ... 4437_o.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/511 ... f9a8_o.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/511 ... e4bc_o.jpg

Best,
ADi

[rjlittlefield]

Thanks, those work.

I pulled down the images and did some pixel-peeping. The extra pixels definitely help.

Here are corresponding sections of the 12000x9000 at 200%, versus 6000x4500 at 400%.

The 6000x4500 was made by Photoshop's Image > Image Size..., with Bicubic Sharper resampling.

Display using using simultaneous screen grab of overlapping windows in Photoshop, saved and uploaded as PNG.

The above is from https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/511 ... f9a8_o.jpg .

--Rik

[rjlittlefield]

By the way, I looked again.

If I go through https://flic.kr/s/aHsmVfrTBn to reach the album, then I cannot find any way to access camera-resolution versions of the images. For the scene corresponding to https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/511 ... f9a8_o.jpg , Flickr offers me only up to "Large 2048 (2048 × 1536)".

But everything is fine if I go through the direct links that Adi provided, to reach the .jpg files.

I assume there must be some difference between what Flickr will offer to Adi as owner of the album, and what it offers to me as just some anonymous guest.

I tried also after logging into Flickr as myself, but for Adi's folder that acted the same as not logged in at all.

--Rik

[Adalbert]

Hi Rik,
Not bad, but I would say that there could be more potential in the RAW files.

there must be some difference between what Flickr will offer to Adi as owner of the album

yes, probably not a bug but a feature :-)

Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

Here is another comparison that I find interesting.

These are corresponding sections, the first from 12000x9000 as downloaded, the second from 6000x4500 upscaled to 12000x9000.

The 6000x4500 was made by Photoshop's Image > Image Size..., with "Bicubic (smooth gradients)" resampling.

Again, display using using simultaneous screen grab of overlapping windows in Photoshop, saved and uploaded as PNG.

The advantages of more pixels can still be seen, but now strikes me as much less important.

For this modest improvement, I am not sure when I would find it worthwhile to store and process the 4X larger number of pixels.

--Rik

[Adalbert]

Hi Rik,
Nice comparison, many thanks!
I could imagine that the advantage could be greater if the chip were bigger.
But then the lens would also have to be bigger.
Perhaps as an attachment on a smartphone.
Best, ADi

[joeD]

Hello everybody,
I've been testing my new phone S21 Ultra for a few days.
Unfortunately, I have not found a way to save the images from the 108MP camera ( 12000*9000 ) in RAW format.
On other cameras it works in PRO mode.
Does anyone know how to solve this?
Best,
ADi

Hi , you could try with freedcam (https://www.f-droid.org/en/packages/troop.com.freedcam/) or with a gcam (googlecam) port for your phone if there is one (check with gcamator app on google store) . freedcam has many options for raw format but gcam should have better quality, hope it helps