P: Introducing the Project Indigo camera app

Adobe Employee

Thank you for reaching out. We will actually bring the EIS toggle back in the next release. Our camera settings are growing and we wanted to clean them up a bit, but rushed the job this time around.

IDG_20260429_153904_692.DNG

Known Participant

@BorisTheBlade have Indigo figured out how to fix or lessen the fov difference in night mode as mentioned by me and others before? If you take a pic in frame, somehow the object is aligned to the upper left area vs what’s shown in the viewfinder.

Also have you looked at the photos I tagged you to see what the problems are?

Bohdan 12

Participant

Hello Pi Indigo team!

I really love your app and use it as my main camera app on my iPhone 14 Pro Max. The photos look very natural and realistic, especially in the evening — sometimes even better than the default iPhone camera.

But I would really like to see a few improvements:
- full 48 MP support for the main camera,
- better optimization, because after around 5 photos my iPhone gets hot like a frying pan and starts lagging,
- I also tested this on other iPhones and the same problem happens there too,
- smoother zoom controls like the default iPhone camera instead of pinch-to-zoom,
- more zoom options,
- video recording support,
- and portrait mode.

Also, in complete darkness the app sometimes produces greenish tones, and the default iPhone camera performs better in those situations. I hope this can be improved in future updates.

Thank you for your work — the app has huge potential!

harvasyuk

Participant

Yeah, it would be nice if Apple lifted their restriction of 48 MP RAW for third-party devs. For some reason, for 48 MP mode, we’re only allowed using ProRAW pipeline, which ruins all the details, wipes subtle color variations by aplying their denoiser.

G

Gareth Renowden

Participant

Hi @BorisTheBlade - late last year I posted some sample images taken with my iPhone 17 Pro and the then current PI app. The specific issue was a dark banding on the left of the image when using the 4x camera in portrait orientation. This bandit doesn’t occur when using the Apple app. I can confirm the issue is still present. Here’s a shot taken a couple of days ago.

Any idea what’s going on? Processing in Lightroom on the phone helps a bit, but doesn’t eliminate the issue.

(Latest versions of all software)

Cheers

Adobe Employee

Thank you for sharing the DNG which illustrates the issue. I will flag this with developers: if the issue is not very complex to resolve we’ll prioritize it for the next release.

G

Gareth Renowden

Participant

Thanks very much. I use PI as my daily driver camera app, so sorting this will be very helpful. Thanks to the team for creating such a useful addition to image making on the iPhone.

Participating Frequently

A question about profiles. I have mentioned this in the past but I am still not convinced of the correct answer. Basically, when DNGs are loaded into Lightroom they are give the ‘Indigo’ profile. From the Profile drop-down I can select another profile to try such as ‘Adobe Color’, ‘Adaptive Color’ etc. However, if I change my mind and want to go back to the Indigo profile, I can’t because ‘Indigo’ is not on the list of available profiles. Is there a reason for this?

Adobe Employee

The embedded Indigo profile is supposed to be automatically favorited. I typically use Camera Raw and there it works, so this is a miss on the Lightroom side. I am following up with the team on that - thank you for reporting the issue.

Participating Frequently

Actually, I see that ‘Indigo Embedded Camera Profile’ is included as a favourite but selecting it gives different results to the default one (much flatter contrast) and the slider doesn’t change anything. So, partly there ...

Participating Frequently

If I use the Indigo album to save DNGs, then later on, select the DNGs via the Indigo album filter and then ‘develop’ the DNG, the resulting JPG does not go into the Indigo album. So, at first sight, they seem to ‘disappear’. Could you make any developed JPGs also go to the Indigo album?

Also, are you considering an option to be able to select multiple DNGs and develop them all in batch? This would be really useful if I only want to shoot in raw and create all the JPGs later on.

Adobe Employee

Thank you for sharing this feedback. You are absolutely right - the developed JPEG does not end up in the Indigo album. That is a miss, and I’ll add it to the list of bugs to fix. Regarding the second question (multi-DNG ‘develop’ functionality) we will look into this.

Participating Frequently

Thank you.

D

demo_5934

Participating Frequently

Two suggestions regarding metadata.

Currently, the EXIF “software” tag records iOS version. Maybe more appropriate to record Indigo version?
Stock camera app can write additional GPS metadata, such as GPSHPositioningError and GPSImgDirection. It would be nice if Indigo could include those as well.

J

Jeff Donald

Participating Frequently

I’ve grown weary of reading the posts of nhan_8084 never ending stream of gibberish. I thought my experiences would possibly help in some small way, but this forum/community lacks any kind of meaningful moderation. I’ve found a much better managed community that welcomes participation from all members. I wish everyone the best with the stream of consciousness posts.

Adobe Employee

Hi @Jeff Donald - thank you for your input. The lack of moderation is solely on me, as I am trying my best not to be a “dictator” of any kind and let the users passionate about Indigo have space to voice their opinions. Having said that, I should help everyone be a bit more structured. So let me try to do that. I would find your feedback very valuable, so please, do not quit on the forum and post your thoughts when you see fit! Thank you for trying to help make Indigo better.

Known Participant

@BorisTheBlade found a issue where tele shot gave a odd greenish blue tint! This is day light condition, both shot auto as usual, 4x and 8x.

There’s also a very heavy blue tint from a indoor shot using the tele as well! This shot is 4x of the toddler with censored face for privacy purposes. Lighting is behind me, left of him from a window, window is a dual window so it’s quite wide for bright light. Stock wb and expo is always spot on as mentioned, so I have attached that as well.

I also attached two crops of hairs. You can see that the crop that has fine grains, that’s the style and noise reduction (less) that I like. That shot is the tele crop. The other crop of hair is from the main sensor, much larger sensor than the tele, brighter aperture lens as well, so it SHOULD NOT need to have that much denoising applied! The hair is all smoothed out, the walls and back ground has no luma grains either.

Adobe Employee

Thank you for all your tests. It takes time to evaluate everything and sometimes to even understand what exactly you are trying to point out as a flaw in Indigo, so please bare with us. On a suggestion from Jeff above, I would like to ask you to consider creating one thread where you’ll keep adding more experiments, instead of creating a new main forum message every time? This way the main forum may not be “overwhelmed” by the volume of your inputs, while you’d still get to share all your findings. Plus, it may be easier for me to find what I am looking for if it is always in the same thread. I’d suggest adding one thread per release for image quality-related questions, and one more (if you feel like it) for workflow issues, bugs, miscellaneous, etc. Thank you!

Known Participant

Hello @BorisTheBlade , every single thread I created is of findings that is not related to the other. They al have different issues at time of shooting, and if you read at every single one of them it clearly explains what the issues are. There’s not a post that I made that isn’t clear. If they aren’t let me know, as I am not a fan of using circles or arrows to show the areas of attention because I know you and your team have vast knowledge to pinpoint the issues if a versus is shown.

None of my posts are irrelevant or spams posts as I said because I show issue as they arises, and report them as you said to do, how else would I show them? Maybe the users here do not care on the pixel peeping level like I do, but how can you point that out as my problem or as Jeff said gibberish? When you are “spoiled” by gcam and the output that it does, not on one device, but multiple devices of android and you see iOS with nothing to compare to, it gets weary just seeing how bad iPhone pictures are.

I did not also see anyone posting issues and show detailed analysis like I do so perhaps they really don’t care? I don’t bury people’s posts either so Jeff attacking me is unfair and not tolerated no?

However, if you want me to post as you said one post I can do that and subpost in that sure.

Known Participant

@BorisTheBlade I just realized that Indigo has two different tonemapping going on for jpeg and raw? The SOOC jpeg has its own looks while the raw when imported to lrm and export to jpeg without touching anything has it's own look!

Dng to jpeg nothing touch, just hit export: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/eiwdqa0go2rc01r3jsp01/IMG_4454.JPG?rlkey=8ibdmag4wq38srplt8lh2dw2y&st=o0hc1rw0&dl=0

Shouldn't the raw when imported has the same look as the jpeg bc it is afterall processed and tonemapped, why would raw has a dif look and jpeg has a dif look. If anything, I rather have the SOOC have the look that the raw showed when imported to lrm (but have no sharpening , less denoising, luma and chroma). As you can see from the sample, the potbelly building is brighter, skies are not crushed blacks!

Known Participant

@BorisTheBlade revisiting this

Known Participant

@BorisTheBlade it seems like non-SR shots (ie.. optical range 0.5x, 1x, 4x) has the EXACT same artifacts as SR shot when there’s a slight motion detected in frame while capturing. The samples attached (cropped) showed a moving toddler (not fast motion at all, just normal speed human movements). I cannot show the full image due to privacy concern ofc, but the stock app do not have any artifacts at all and I will show the crops too!

What is even more strange is that the Indigo SOOC jpeg has artifacts in areas of the frame that doesn’t contain movements, like the water bottle. I mentioned before that I encountered this same artifacts in gcam and fixed it by using a custom generated noise model four channels (A through D).

You can obviously know which one is the stock app so I do not need to spell out which pictures belong to which. The exif is also included. By the way, the raw of Indigo also have it of course bc the JPEG is generated from that raw

PLEASE PLEASE test motion on your end using the 17 pro max, normal indoor lighting where ss drops to about 1/60s to 1/80s as shown.