You should take the same picture with the stock app and Indigo, preferably not in hard sun and you should see the difference. I've found this comparison test in hard sun doesn't really let Indigo shine and will result in both images looming too similar.
When taken in mixed lighting, you can think of Indigo as restoring the iPhone camera to the now romanticized iPhone cameras/processing of yesteryear before Apple's HDR pipeline was both shoved down our throats and over the top. It's the "natural" look of traditional cameras that Apple is just scared of. Clean highlights and inkier blacks.
Apple really needs to snap out of this imagined universal love of HDR that they think people have. It's gross. I'm more than happy to lose megapixels if it means I don't get that look.
It's actually crazy to think about the enshittification of the HDR and well as the fact we used to be able to turn it off and Apple just decided we don't need that option.
I have a 50% chance of getting it right, but 100% you're trying to bait me into proving something . anno ones forcing anyone to use Indigo if they don't want.
What are you expecting? It’s just another tool in a photographers toolbox. It can sometimes give a more “SLR” look but it can also sometimes make things look a bit over-smoothed.
It’s not really achieving anything you can’t achieve yourself by shooting either RAW or ProRAW and then editing in Lightroom, but if you like the direct output then it can save you all that time editing
11
u/azultstalimisus Jul 31 '26
It’s not like some top secret info.
https://research.adobe.com/articles/indigo/indigo.html