Gear Talk > Processing & Publication

Fuji RAW and Lightroom

<< < (5/5)

Anthony:
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.

PeterN:
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.

Anthony:
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.

PeterN:
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.

Anthony:

--- Quote from: 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.

--- End quote ---

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

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page