Was the Uncompressed RAW feature been removed?

[UltimaGaina]

Can someone clarify why the Samsung S20 series (including S24U) stopped generating uncompressed RAW files sometime in Q1 2023?

In Pro mode, we now have JPEG compression in a DNG container. It is a 12-bit JPEG.

Expert RAW has the same JPEG compression (on 16 bits, probably because of HDR) for S22U and S23U, while on S24U it shows as "Unknown (52546)" compression. According to an article I found on Samsung India, it is said that this is a new JPEG XL compression.

Why not offer the option to get again (as we had before Q1 2023) truly uncompressed mosaiced RAW, which works with the Lightroom Denoise AI algorithm, instead of the current demosaiced compressed Linear RAW, which doesn't.

[rawshooter]

The app did not switch from real raw to a demosaiced jpg xl with no dynamic range advantages compared to the jpg by accident, of course it was their choice.

[sebas5287]

What do you define as real raw?

If you read about RAW images there can be compressed as well uncompressed should samsung offer both def.

Also keep in mind that Adobe introduced JPEG XL in the DNG specification.

Which also has dynamic range if you cared to read the specification itself.

And again if it was as designed as you mentioned the issue is that it isn't working properly on Adobe own software.

[rawshooter]

Real raw is the opposite of what I just wrote: 

I don't care about the compression (well I do partly because dng compression also means the image is demosaiced) , that is fine if done right. I care about the content of the image.

I does not matter that it's theoretical possible that JPG XL can retain the dynamic range, if Samsung is not  putting the data into it, and they are not.

And I care that a demosaiced file is incompatible with Adobes noise reduction.

No if it was designed like this logs from your phone won't do anything to resolve this. All it needs is the raw file that obviously does not show any of the advantage a raw file should have and Samsung's code that produces this file.

And the understanding on the developer side that this is not user error but a bad software/decisions. The issue is that the design is bad.

[sebas5287]

The content of the image is what I was talking about regarding showing issues on Adobe software.

Theoretical? My guy is on the specification itself, which was introduced by Adobe themselves.

The data is there even in the Adobe thread. It was mentioned that something is wrong when someone is trying to open the image.

That is the main reason I am saying to report it since it is not what it should be the result of the specification itself.

Logs can help to find the reason why the image wasn't proccesed well or if there was an error during the creation of the jpeg XL.

This goes again into the area of programming itself, which, again, have you at least tried to read how issues get fixed?

Lastly, you said it was as designed, not me. Now you are contradicting yourself.

Also, that is not compatible with Adobe is another issue that something is wrong somewhere since the DNG created is following the same JPEG XL spec that Adobe introduced.

When did I ever say it's an user error?

[rawshooter]

Yes theoretical, if Samsung is not using the capability to store more dynamic range than a standard jpg, it is theoretical.

They do not need your logs for that, they can work on their original code and recreate the issue themselves, but if you are in the "send more logs" phase you are in the "we don't believe it is a real issue" phase.

I'm not contradicting my self. Do you have problems with understanding?

I did never say (again) that you said it is a user error, I am saying that it's what customer support starts out with and you first have to convince them that the issue is real. 

[sebas5287]

Samsung is using the capability since it is part of the standard itself that Adobe created it (JPEG XL). It was reported in the Adobe thread as well.

They do need logs for many things again read how developers fixes issues in programming bruh.

They can work on their original code and recreate the issue themselves you sure don't know anything about programming and it shows as well how complicated is to recreate an issue that you aren't getting personally(Which is the main reason devs always asks for logs as well steps to reproduce the issue at hand even different kind of logs that can help finding the root cause of the issue).

You did contradicted yourself check your previous comment where you said that it was as designed by samsung but later you changed it to the design is bad.

Convince them has been always the case on any problem since you need to present as much data as possible even with devs.

So not sure what is your point there?

[rawshooter]

If they would use it correctly this would not be an issue, but it is, so they are not using it according to the specifications:

The steps to reproduce it can't be any simpler, enter ProMode, store a DNG, open it in a RAW editor and see that it's **bleep**.

Where is the contradiction in that a design choice by Samsung is bad?

Not sure what yours is as you repeat the same thing again and again that is just not true. If they would use JPG XL correctly the RAW would have a dynamic range advantage over the standard jpg, it does not.

[sebas5287]

Is not about use is about the specification itself which according to the Adobe thread it shows up.

Only the result is not what it should be which is the issue at hand and some reporting that the Adobe software has issues when using the image.

Nothing is as simple in programming again something you will need to read if you want to learn the complexity of it.

You said that before it was as they designed it, but if it was according to the Adobe thread, it is using the DNG specification that I mentioned here.

But later you said that the design is faulty if it was why then in the same Adobe forum was mentioned that the standard is being detected.

[rawshooter]

It is not an issue with Adobe, other RAW developer apps show exactly the same. It is Samsung not putting the data into the file correctly!

You just just don't get it and refer to things that have no relevance to each other, I don't care, I'm tired of repeating the facts.

[sebas5287]

Re read what I said.

Not sure if it's a issue of Adobe and samsung or only samsung but Adobe is looking into it(they said it on their own thread)

Other RAW apps don't show the same if you check threads.

You are the one who isn't reading what I said regarding how developers fixes issues as well not understanding what a specification is.

The specification that I mentioned has relevance to this same regarding reporting to devs.