Skip to main content
P
pinkypunk35
Known Participant
July 2, 2014
Answered

P: Improved Fuji X-Trans Support?

  • July 2, 2014
  • 378 replies
  • 10573 views

Is Fuji X-Trans support being worked on?I appreciate that the support is better now than it was, but the reality is that Lightroom is still a long way behind other RAW developers, all of which are less well funded and with smaller teams working on the software.Lightroom has been the leader in RAW processing an image cataloging as far back as I can recall; but with the Fuji X-Trans files many people I know are leaving Adobe Lightroom for one of the many other developers, all of which are producing far better results than Adobe Lightroom.Ones I have personally tested are as follows: Iridient DeveloperPhoto NinjaLightZoneCapture OneApertureSilkyPixRaw TherapeeIridient is very good, and this is a piece of software made by a single man.My question is, if he can get it right, why can't Adobe? They have been leaders in innovation for many years but it seems in some areas now they are falling behind - I have never seen so many people leave a major developer for smaller independent ones, but to Fuji users (both enthusiasts and professionals) it's a pretty simple decision when you compare results.So all I'd like to know is if my patience sticking with Lightroom is justified, and whether a solution is being worked on - or will always be worked on. Or is it a case that the users wanting such a change are not enough to support such work.

    Correct answer MassC
    Hi Everyone,

    We are happy to announce the release of Lightroom Classic CC 8.2. With this release, we’ve introduced a new feature called Enhanced Details.

    Photographers using cameras featuring X-Trans sensors should see an improved rendering of their Fuji raw files.

    To learn more about how this new feature works check out the blog post:  https://theblog.adobe.com/enhance-details/

    Cheers,
    Carissa

    378 replies

    Show previous replies
    3
    3dit0r1
    Known Participant
    May 12, 2015
    I sold my X-T1 because of this, such a shame as it was a lovely camera, but I bought it primarily for landscape use and the awful 'plasticky' demosaicing in LR killed it for that. I tried other developers on trial, some were nice, but ultimately my whole workflow and catalog is based around Lightroom, and I'm used to it, and I already own it.

    So, I'm NOT going to say I'll move to another raw converter, when the one I already own should do this fundamental task perfectly well. I'm going to add another request Adobe  actually do something about it. I'd love to move back to a Fuji body and glass. If others, including solo bedroom developers can do it perfectly well, there is clearly no excuse.

    Come on Adobe, you have the resources, what's the sense in making a lot of people very unhappy, and very vocal, when you could make them very contented by simply fixing this? At least make an official announcement of progress, especially now that LR6 has shown no improvement in this area, as many had hoped.
    T
    t.linn
    Known Participant
    May 11, 2015
    A good strategy. Just say "no" to their rental scheme.
    Lodimup
    Lodimup
    Participating Frequently
    May 11, 2015
    I used to do that. With addition of converting to lossy dng.

    My latest workaround before selling my XT1 was using Proneg low with low hilight and shadow jpg. It is enough for most wedding cases. Only small hilight is lost. Saved me a lot of time.
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    May 11, 2015
    With hundreds of wedding photos, for example, I open RAFs in Iridient, do sharpening and export as 16 bit tifs. Than these tifs send to LR and work there.
    Lodimup
    Lodimup
    Participating Frequently
    May 11, 2015
    I bet when Iridient 4 is out Adobe will lose a lot of customers. Iridient only needs faster process time and catalog capability.
    Lodimup
    Lodimup
    Participating Frequently
    May 11, 2015
    It's not 10 months. It's been 3 years! I wish Adobe would just hire that guy. Iridient worked great indeed. Too bad I have to process hundreds of images per job.
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    May 11, 2015
    You are right I'm not shooting landscapes. But I'm shooting fashion defile and also I'm shooting reportage. And jpegs were accepted by chief editors. And I want to say, that Iridient works great, and it was created by ONE person! Adobe has a lot of employees and for more than 10 month did nothing.
    Lodimup
    Lodimup
    Participating Frequently
    May 11, 2015
    @Jimkit Well, I invested heavily in glass when Canon was still better than Nikon. In controlled lighting, any camera's fine.

    @Aleksei Isachenko Good for you but not everybody shoots 'legs' in controlled lighting. Try landscape with jpg.
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    May 11, 2015
    I can recover Highlights in Iridient better than in Lightroom. But I'm sure it depends on way/style of shooting. Moreover Iridient has 2 tools: Extreme highlight recovery, which has 7 sub-menus and Highlights (neighbourhood adaptive).
    P
    pinkypunk35Author
    Known Participant
    May 11, 2015
    A Canon? They are the worst at recycling sensors.

    Got to use what works for you ultimately
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices