NikonGear'23

Gear Talk => Processing & Publication => Topic started by: ianwatson on July 09, 2020, 21:31:01

Title: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: ianwatson on July 09, 2020, 21:31:01
Good afternoon all,

I am circling the idea of a Fuji X100V. The word is that Lightroom used to struggle with Fuji's RAW files. However, time has passed and Lightroom has been updated. I played with a couple of images that I downloaded from the internet. There doesn't seem to be any difference worthy of angst between Lightroom and Iridient Developer, which often received the nod as the best choice.

Would those more familiar with Fuji files please tell me what they think?
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: pluton on July 10, 2020, 21:51:42
Lightroom user since 2007.  Fuji (16MP) user since 2013.
Color, contrast, and all the normal raw conversion parameters and adjustments work fine in Lightroom.
Lightroom (and presumably ACR) does just fine with Fuji X files with one exception: 
Certain files that depend for their impact on the accurate rendering of tiny, random, fractal-like details, such as thousands of small tree leaves on the ground, millions of sharply defined blades of grass in a wideangle shot, or sharply-rendered jagged rock surfaces will show the peculiar deficiency of the Adobe raw conversion, but only upon extreme enlargement
Repeat:  Only under extreme enlargement.  As in greater than an A2 size inkjet print.
For normal prints and web use, the odd detail rendering is not visible, period.
For the very few shots that may require it, the app Iridient Transformer X can be had for not much money.  In ITX, the Fuji raw file is converted to a DNG, then Lightroom can do the rest in the normal fashion. 
In general, the tiny detail issue is either not an issue, or less of an issue, in Iridient Developer, Photo Ninja, Capture One, and the built-in MacOS raw conversion, among others.
I have all of these, but use Lightroom for 99.9% of Fuji shots.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Akira on July 11, 2020, 03:38:31
I won't argue with Keith, but Capture One Express Fujifilm can be had for free and decodes RAF fantastically with no hint of anything like "wormy artefacts".  I used X-E3 and X-T3 with the software and unsubscribed AdobeCC during that time.  X100V uses the same 26MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Akira on July 11, 2020, 03:42:04
I noticed that X100V shows some overheating issue.  That seems to occur only in a relatively extreme conditions and to be well manageable, though:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/global-news/2020/0511_3469872/
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: MFloyd on July 11, 2020, 09:11:59
About a year ago I followed an official Fuji workshop around the GFX50s. All post production was treated with Lr, and I must say, no particular problem arose. The course was given by a sort of Fuji ambassador. So, I guess, from Fuji’s side, doing PP with Adobe should be OK.

Just my two cents.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Luc on July 11, 2020, 10:38:20
The GFX50s had a Bayer sensor, not a X-Trans. The "problem" if any is processing X-Trans images with Adobe.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: MFloyd on July 11, 2020, 11:57:41
The GFX50s had a Bayer sensor, not a X-Trans. The "problem" if any is processing X-Trans images with Adobe.

I didn’t know about the Bayer sensor. I thought all Fuji were X-Trans.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Luc on July 11, 2020, 13:14:47
I didn’t know about the Bayer sensor. I thought all Fuji were X-Trans.
That is a fully understandable misconception as Fuji promoted X-Trans a lot. Some of the cheaper XA/XT models and all medium format GFX models have Bayer sensors though.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: ianwatson on July 11, 2020, 16:32:36
Keith, thank you very much. That is just the insight I needed. A3 is plenty big enough for me and so there is no need to worry.

Akira, thank you for the suggestion. Capture One Express could be handy for the rare files that Keith mentioned. At that price, it is at least worth a look. (I already have Iridient Developer and Photo Ninja but why not?)
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Anthony on July 11, 2020, 17:33:11
 I find that LR is definitely inferior to Capture One, Iridient and Photo Ninja for Fuji X-Trans files. It is rare to hear of someone who has moved from LR to one of those programs move back.

As you have various convertors, plus access to the free C1 Fuji program, I suggest you try various Raf files and see which convertor you prefer.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: pluton on July 11, 2020, 20:32:54
I won't argue with Keith, but Capture One Express Fujifilm can be had for free and decodes RAF fantastically with no hint of anything like "wormy artefacts".  I used X-E3 and X-T3 with the software and unsubscribed AdobeCC during that time.  X100V uses the same 26MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor.
Oops...I forgot about C-1 11/Fuji.  Yes, works fine and free.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: ianwatson on July 12, 2020, 04:02:02
If I buy the Fuji then there is homework to be done  8)

Nevertheless, it is comforting to know that Lightroom, while perhaps not optimal, is not the disaster that some would have us believe.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 13, 2020, 19:45:36
My 2 cents...

I just (quickly) compared the processing of Fuji X100V RAF files in LR Classic 10.0 and Capture One 20 and I could not see much difference. That was quite different a few years ago. Especially the colors in LR did not look good. So apparently Adobe has catched up. I can't say I prefer one over the other.

Each package has its pros and cons. Generally speaking, C1 renders Nikon files warmer and brighter compared to LR. The difference is less visible with Fuji X-trans files (well, on my screen).  If you have not invested yet in a specific solution, as suggested, trying what you like might be the way to go. If you already use LR/PS for other files, I would not bother switching. On the other hand, the free C1 solution might be tempting. It takes some time to get used to how C1 works but after a while, I am sure you will appreciate its power. One of the big advantages of C1 has always been its color editor but the latest version of LR has one too. Healing and cloning in C1 still has a way to go. Don't me wrong, I like C1 for its "out of the box" rendering of Nikon and Fuji files but it is not "better". Just different IMHO.

A program I really begin to like is DxO Photolab4 for Nikon files. Unfortunately it is not available for RAF processing.

BTW: If I recall correctly, the trick with sharpening Fuji files in LR is to use a different setting for the Detail slider to prevent weird artefacts. However, I can't recall the specifics. Perhaps the info is still available on the web.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Anthony on November 14, 2020, 00:20:31
IMHO LR demosaicing of rafs is still inferior to C1 and Iridient.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: pluton on November 14, 2020, 02:35:39

BTW: If I recall correctly, the trick with sharpening Fuji files in LR is to use a different setting for the Detail slider to prevent weird artefacts. However, I can't recall the specifics. Perhaps the info is still available on the web.
Suggested starting Lightroom sharpening settings for X-Trans 16MP:
Amount: 17
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 74
Masking: 0
The basic idea is to be low on the 'Amount' and high on the 'Detail'. If you have the feeling to increase sharpening, increase the 'Amount' slider, but only a bit.  Going from 17 to 30 is a big dose of added sharpening. Don't know if this applies to the newer 26MP X-Trans sensor.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: pluton on November 14, 2020, 02:42:18
IMHO LR demosaicing of rafs is still inferior to C1 and Iridient.
I agree, and if I have a shot where I need to extract maximum sharp edges from tiny details I will use one of those or Photo Ninja.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 14, 2020, 08:26:04
IMHO LR demosaicing of rafs is still inferior to C1 and Iridient.

I am really curious to your findings. Would it be possible to share examples procesed with the recent versions of the software? You use Fuji a lot more than I do. I only use the x100v during biking trips and street photography. In addition, my eyes are probably not as good anymore to see all subtleties.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 14, 2020, 19:18:28
Suggested starting Lightroom sharpening settings for X-Trans 16MP:
Amount: 17
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 74
Masking: 0
The basic idea is to be low on the 'Amount' and high on the 'Detail'. If you have the feeling to increase sharpening, increase the 'Amount' slider, but only a bit.  Going from 17 to 30 is a big dose of added sharpening. Don't know if this applies to the newer 26MP X-Trans sensor.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Eddie Draaisma on November 14, 2020, 21:24:30
Especially interesting for Fuji X-trans is the "Enhance details..." found under the Photo menu of Lightroom Classic.

It is basically a much more elaborate demosaicing process (trained with machine learning), creating a linear .DNG file next to the raw file.

IMHO it does a very good job on X-Trans files.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 15, 2020, 14:37:39
Thought to share 2 full-size jpegs generated from Lightroom 10 and Capture One 20. Photo taken with Fuji x100V. ISO 160 - 1/30sec - f8. Both processed with Fuji Velvia, HL/S correction. I used Topaz Sharpen AI on "auto" settings for sharpening to get an equal baseline in that area.  Unfortunately file size is limited. I can send full-size jpegs, if someone wants to study the details.  I tried to spot differences but failed to do so (details in the sky are comparable when highlights are dampened a bit more in Lightroom.
BTW: I took this photo to explore the possibilities of Luminar and Photoshop for sky replacement.

Lightroom 10.0 example:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50604994252_5f84d68237_h.jpg)

Capture One 20:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50604870776_2c20b584c6_h.jpg)


I haven't checked for other types of photos, especially portraits (which is one of C1's key strengths IMHO)
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Anthony on November 15, 2020, 16:36:42
Try comparing the two in Photoshop by layering and selecting Difference as the Blend mode. This does show differences, which I can post if you are willing for me to do so. I also noticed that you posted them in Adobe RGB, which some monitors may not represent properly.

There has been much discussion amongst Fuji users about Adobe's processing of X-Trans files. Many have switched to Capture One or Iridient. For example, here is a discussion on an official Photoshop website. https://feedback.photoshop.com/conversations/lightroom-classic/camera-rawlightroom-classic-fuji-xtrans-support/5f5f45684b561a3d424a11b0

Adobe itself recognises that there are issues with its X-Trans processing, and when releasing Enhance Details stated it could "resolve issues that some customers reported with their Fujifilm X-Trans based cameras".

A problem with Enhance Details is that it creates a large additional dng file, in the case of a Fuji file I tested this was 100MB greater than the original raf (which was, of course, retained). So it is not something one would want to use for every image; and I don't want to have to think about whether an image would benefit from it before deciding on the processing workflow.

Photo Ninja and Iridient Developer do a good job on X-Trans files. Iridient also created X-Transformer specifically for the purpose of demosaicing X-Trans files and creating dngs for further processing in LR.

Having said all that, I prefer to leave scientific comparisons to the experts.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 15, 2020, 18:36:26
An interesting method, Anthony. I am curious to your findings. I could see differences in colors and aberration handling but no artefacts. Was I wrong? Feel free to post your findings since I may misinterpret what I see. I am curious what yours are.

BTW, I switched to Capture One anyway and do not miss LR at all. I only use Photoshop for specific corrections that are hard to o in C1 and stacking (focus, exposure, panos). It takes some time to get used to C1 but after "getting it" I like it better than LR. I still have to check if Affinity Photo can replace PS in my workflow.
I am also considering a workflow for NEF conversion that starts with PhotoLab4. I am impressed by its capabilities for processing NEF files.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Anthony on November 16, 2020, 12:52:20
Thanks, Peter, this is the result of layering one image on the other and selecting Difference as the Blend Mode. I also made a Levels adjustment to brighten the image.

I am not really sure what this indicates as to artefacts as colour differences are picked up. However, on closer inspection I think that in the C1 version I see more detail in the grass below the bush by the river on the lower right; but it is not easy to tell and could relate to specific processing settings.

I agree with you generally about C1, and I like that it has layers with luminosity masking, which I use quite a lot.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: PeterN on November 16, 2020, 14:58:33
Thanks for sharing and analysing, Anthony. Much appreciated! Your blending looks a bit different than mine. Don't know why.
I turned sharpening off in C1 and LR but just noticed that I used a different clarity setting in C1. Sharpening for both images set to auto in Topaz Sharpen.
Title: Re: Fuji RAW and Lightroom
Post by: Anthony on November 16, 2020, 17:02:07
Thanks for sharing and analysing, Anthony. Much appreciated! Your blending looks a bit different than mine. Don't know why.
I turned sharpening off in C1 and LR but just noticed that I used a different clarity setting in C1. Sharpening for both images set to auto in Topaz Sharpen.

Actually, I think I may have discovered a new art form!