Menu
What's new
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!

Raw conversion for X-Pro1

ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
Raw conversion for the X-Pro1 is still a major issue:

1. Lightroom does not get enough detail
2. Fuji Raw Converter has better details but can produce nasty halos (e.g. edge between golden hills and blue sky)
3. DPP: workflow hassle but maybe so far the best detail and nice colors.

What is your take?
 
Ario Arioldi

Ario Arioldi

Member
I have tested (almost) everything and for me the best route start with RPP which I use just for the very basic editing, WB and exposure correction if and when it is needed. The ICC profiles are self made and usually I choose K64 as starting point.
Everything else is done in LR 4 and or CS6.
Obviously the easiest way would be to use LR only but since this is not at this point good enough for my taste (for this camera), I found that RPP adds the same amount of complication as any other raw converter and gives for me better results.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>I have tested (almost) everything and for me the best route start with RPP which I use just for the very basic editing, WB and exposure correction if and when it is needed. The ICC profiles are self made and usually I choose K64 as starting point.
Everything else is done in LR 4 and or CS6.

Do the same. Can you share your profile ([email protected]).
 
S

Sapphie

Member
Ditto. I am amused and annoyed by threads in other forums where people that don't see the issue deny it exists or I am talking BS!

Any links to extra profiles would be appreciated Ario! Though I find the default RPP pretty accurate - I usually start at K64 too, always with WB 'As Shot'.

Surely, though, this issue will get fixed in time?

Lee
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
Too bad that RPP creates some artifacts like this (shown at 200%):



The Fuji sensor is a real PITA for raw.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>print viewing sizes?

Likely depends on the size of the print. Just don't want to limit the size just due these artifacts.
 
Ario Arioldi

Ario Arioldi

Member
Sapphie said:
Ditto. I am amused and annoyed by threads in other forums where people that don't see the issue deny it exists or I am talking BS!

Any links to extra profiles would be appreciated Ario! Though I find the default RPP pretty accurate - I usually start at K64 too, always with WB 'As Shot'.

Surely, though, this issue will get fixed in time?

Lee
Click to expand...
Lee, it seems to me that sometime certain forums are occupied "manu miltari" by fanboys and this prevents any useful exchange of experiences and opinions.
The artifacts you have observed I have seen in some of my pictures as well and they tend to show up, to some extent, no matter which raw developer is being used (including the one which produces the OOC jpegs).
The demosaicing algorithm which can do the magic with this "oddy"raw file seems not to be available yet, but in most cases we can get very good results anyhow.
If you wish to try my profile you can get it herebelow, I do not think it is better than the one provided by RPP, but it works pretty well with my own camera.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11389216/FUJIFILM X-Pro1 ISO200 _cloudy.icc
 
P

Pelao

New member
ustein said:
Too bad that RPP creates some artifacts like this (shown at 200%):



The Fuji sensor is a real PITA for raw.
Click to expand...
Uwe,

Do you have any idea at what print size this sort of artefact would be visible, or would influence the quality in any way?

I certainly see issues with foliage, but then I import some files into LR and can see nothing wrong at all. It is a PITA.

Otherwise I love the camera and hope it gets sorted. Capture One have confirmed they are working to deliver for the Fuji, but who knows when that will happen.
 
P

Pelao

New member
Sapphie said:
Another technique:

Frontal Lobbings: Squeezing the maximum out of the FujiFilm X-Pro1.

I haven't tried this yet ...

Lee
Click to expand...
I was just reading through that one: found it via X-Pro 1 Scoop. I will try to give it a run through tonight.

One of the things I find difficult is the inconsistency. I have RAW shots processed through LR that are stunning in their detail and overall quality. Clearly there are differences in subject matter, and maybe some settings too.

Overall though, I am loving this camera.
 
Ario Arioldi

Ario Arioldi

Member
Pelao said:
I was just reading through that one: found it via X-Pro 1 Scoop. I will try to give it a run through tonight.

One of the things I find difficult is the inconsistency. I have RAW shots processed through LR that are stunning in their detail and overall quality. Clearly there are differences in subject matter, and maybe some settings too.

Overall though, I am loving this camera.
Click to expand...
The demosaicing errors, this is what we are talking about, are definitely depending on the subject, I do not think that settings may have any effect other than hiding some of the artifacts together with details.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
I am sometimes asking why Fuji did not use the X100 sensor (I think it was Sony). The X100 images looked good and did not have this massive de-bayering problem.

I experiment a bit with different Lightroom 4 sharpening settings and in the end the results look quite ok.
 
Ario Arioldi

Ario Arioldi

Member
ustein said:
I am sometimes asking why Fuji did not use the X100 sensor (I think it was Sony). The X100 images looked good and did not have this massive de-bayering problem.
Click to expand...
I suspect that was a marketing driven decision, "new" is better and more appealing.
 
P

Pelao

New member
Ario Arioldi said:
I suspect that was a marketing driven decision, "new" is better and more appealing.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but my money is on it being more than that. This is an innovative approach to sensor design. Innovation can cause pain for early adopters. If the RAW processing works over time, we can likely assume Fuji will continue to evolve the sensor. The differentiation was, and remains, a major investment of cash and brainpower.

Fuji would remain masters of their own sensor destiny, and if they won't have to pay a fee to Sony, or depend on Sony's development timeline.

I hope it all works out.
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
The raw processing issue with the Fuji sensor is one of the reasons I have no interest whatever in this line of cameras. I saw the same issues with the X10 model too.

I don't buy equipment based on future hopes. I buy equipment based on what it does now.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>This is an innovative approach to sensor design. Innovation can cause pain for early adopters.

All interpolation like the bayer sensor is a challenge. This pattern requires even more complex interpolation.

> I buy equipment based on what it does now.

It is actually quite nice as is. But I agree hoping for the future does not help now.
 
P

Pelao

New member
I don't buy equipment based on future hopes. I buy equipment based on what it does now.
Click to expand...
Me too. The various issues have not yet impacted what and how I shoot enough to make me move on. Of course everyone will have their own take.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top