The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fuji X-T1 - Greens and jpg files - help please?

douglasf13

New member
Hi there
Tragically , Apple don't support the more recent DNG standards. It's inexcusable, but files with lens corrections simply won't work in Aperture. Changing the camera model to the X100s, however , means that Aperture will read the RAF files directly, so the issue can be resolved (Thank you Ario)
I struggled with the X100s' IQ last year, Jono, and it becomes an endless loop of trying converter X,Y,Z with settings 1,2,3. Ultimately, what we've got is a sliding scale from painterly smoothness (like from the jpegs and LR) to more details with artifacts (like Iridient) to some combination of both (like Aperture and C1.) Accuraw may be the overall best option, at least in terms of IQ, because you can adjust where on the scale you'd like to be, depending on the image. That's the real key. It is all highly dependent on the scene/image, which is why one person may say they don't see any issues, while another may be frustrated with what they're seeing (my situation.)

I thought switching from LR to Aperture would be a good enough compromise, but I started seeing all of these green/purple dots and artifacts showing up in some instances, and we're talking about web sized images, not 100% pixel peeping.

I've finally given up on the X-trans headache, and I actually re-bought a couple of the "old" X100 cameras, now that the firmware updates have made the camera so much faster, and I'm enjoying being able to use my old Lightroom workflow without all of the hassle and frustration. I wish Fuji would offer more Bayer options in the X-mount line. The slight low light improvement from X-trans just isn't worth all of the sacrifice, IMO.
 

Nathan W. Lediard

New member
At home with the flu and time on my hands.. so I just opened the raw file with all the green leaves in Silkypix 5... the green channel is clipped or very close to clipped... so no wonder you dont have any detail in the ivy leaves in the middle of the frame... :) I cant see the typical smearing problems though... I opened it up in adobe as well.. -- again no smearing but by pulling back the highlights I got some more detail in the leaves... BUT I do have to say that those leaves dont look that sharp.... Something a wee bit odd, but not what I would call th etypical watercolour effect/smearing... I can load up the silkypix tif if you like? Gonna have a look at the second file now :)
 

bradhusick

Active member
Here's Jono's original "problem" file as processed by Lightroom 5.4 using just a little sharpening and clarity. Click for larger.
 
Last edited:

Nathan W. Lediard

New member
Just noticed there's some weird green artifacts in the blue sky, near the top, center of the image (in the first tif).
Good catch :) As said the greens in the leaves are clipped some so I used the highlight controller to pull them back but I had it biassed towards saturation and not hue.. (was lookin intently at the mushy ivy leaves inthe middle) :) I just changed the settings to bias hue and some other small tweeks and the artifacts went away.. that blue area is showing as clipped in both adobe and silkypix, but they both control highlights in different ways it seems and I havnt learnt silkypix fully yet.. but I find it is definitely better at small details than lightroom/acr :) I have loaded up a new version now...

It seems to me taht part of the "problem" with this file is high detail content together with clipping in the blue and green channels...

http://www.lediardfoto.com/_DSF1259-2.tif
 

GlenC

Member
Good catch :) As said the greens in the leaves are clipped some so I used the highlight controller to pull them back but I had it biassed towards saturation and not hue.. (was lookin intently at the mushy ivy leaves inthe middle) :) I just changed the settings to bias hue and some other small tweeks and the artifacts went away.. that blue area is showing as clipped in both adobe and silkypix, but they both control highlights in different ways it seems and I havnt learnt silkypix fully yet.. but I find it is definitely better at small details than lightroom/acr :) I have loaded up a new version now...

It seems to me taht part of the "problem" with this file is high detail content together with clipping in the blue and green channels...

http://www.lediardfoto.com/_DSF1259-2.tif
I downloaded the new tif and I see the difference - much better. I wonder if the SOOC jpg shows any problems? but I guess it's not really a fair analysis of the sensor if any channel is clipped, let alone 2 channels. I'm this close to buying the x-t1 (I already bought 3 lenses during the sale). Some of your portrait photos with the 23mm and the one of the father and son with the 10-24mm are inspiring that I'm probably going to go ahead with the purchase in the next month. I really enjoy seeing your work Nathan!
 

Nathan W. Lediard

New member
Thanks Glen :) I am really pleased with the Fuji X-system so far, it still has some maturing to do, but it is a much more mature system than it was only a year ago... I love the 23 and the 56, great lenses that hold their own against the big guns from canon :) (I had them and dont miss them)
Is it perfect? No. But show me a "perfect" camera :) The X-T1 is a good camera capable of delivering quality files. But yes it takes some time to learn the idiosyncrasies of the sensor. Most of my work is portrait orientated and smearing is 99% of the time a non issue :)
 
Top