Stock Camera vs Expert Raw JPG

[Reylob]

I have noticed that the Stock Camera app creates JPGs which lack detail when zoom at 100%. In the other hand, Expert Raw, keeps loads of details on files of equivalent sizes. In this case Stock Camera 4.6MB and Expert Raw 6.8MB

Have you experienced something similar?

These are pictures taken on a lovely sunny day at the same time on a hedge that it is growing new shoots. On the left is the Stock Camera and on the right is the Expert Raw Camera, both taken with the main lens at 1x zoom.

The pictures have been set side by side and zoom to fit the window, 24%, both pictures look good.

Stock Camera v Expert Raw full

In this both pictures have been zoomed at 100% with altering the size of the windows. The Expert Raw JPG keeps considerably more detail than the stock camera.

Stock Camera v Expert Raw Zoom 100%

[Glenntech]

JPEG files are processed files to get a nice looking image and easy to share.
RAW files are not processed very much. Doing this retains more of the image detail and allows you to edit the images without losing too much detail. Hence the more muted colours in RAW images.
But the more you post edit the more details you lose.
So basically the JPEG files for want of another way of saying, are already edited by the camera software and compressed.
It's a bit of an art to setting up your RAW images with camera settings so you don't have to post edit too much.
But the results speak for themselves when you get it right.
It's definitely worth playing with Pro mode settings to get the best out of your photos.
JPEG have a place, especially if you are trying to catch something like fast moving objects where the camera AI software can help out

[Reylob]

I was not comparing RAW format versus JPG format. I was comparing JPG from the Stock Camera App and the JPG from the Expert Raw App. The compression algorithm used by the Stock Camera App produces JPG pictures that lose too much detail. In contrast the Expert Raw produces JPG pictures that contain more detail than even the 108MP JPG from the Stock Camera App. By the way, the 108MP JPG from the Stock Camera App has similar size than the Raw format DNG from the Expert Raw App.

I think that it is something that Samsung could do, improving the quality of the JPG produced by the Stock Camera App. I think most people will never bother with the Expert Raw App and very few will use lightroom or darktable to process RAW images.

[Glenntech]

Yeah there's always room for improvement and who knows what updates to come will bring camera software tweeks
So much potential from the S22 Ultra cameras and its a shame that as you say most won't use expert RAW or lightroom etc

[Reylob]

It is understandable that most people will not use post-processing images software unless photography is a professional interest or serious hobby. However, in my opinion, most people will use proper cameras and lenses on a professional capacity. It is impressive how mobile photography has improved, but I assume that it is used for professional shots occasionally.

Post-processing raw images is space and time consuming; it needs decent computing resources and most of us produce some many shots that I think it is unfeasible doing it as a regular practice.

IMHO, the camera is one of the main features of this phone. Producing really good JPGs by simply pointing and shooting with the Stock Camera App will be a serious plus for the phone. It is quite clear that the phone has the hardware, the Expert Raw App is the proof of that, its JPGs are impressive. Of course, I could be making the wrong assumption and general shooter is not buying this type of phone.

[Galaxy22U bad camera]

Can you kindly recommend what settings you use to capture your jpeg in either stock amd/or expert RAW camera app!?

[Reylob]

I was using just the default settings. The only change is the resolution. I set the resolution to be the best possible.