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
    P
    pinkypunk35Author
    Known Participant
    February 7, 2015
    The point is, Steve, one guy has managed to figure out how to get good results yet one of the most wealthy software developers in the world has failed to even match them. That is the issue.
    F
    Francinera
    Participating Frequently
    February 7, 2015
    Hey Steve,

    Isn't this exactly the type of reasoning that validates the lack of interest the company displays?

    I usually don't react to comments but I own a Fuji (unlike you) and spent a lot of money on it, I am also currently spending a fair amount of money on my Adobe subscription every month.

    The least you could do is support us in our quest. Hopefully, when you do buy a new camera, LR will support it adequatly. If you don't get the support you need, will you still be this accomodating?
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    Steve Sprengel are you an Adobe employee?
    If not, we have nothing to discuss.

    I already bought Iridient Developer and I am happy with it. Also I tried free software Dark Table and RawTherapee which works with x-trans files much better than Adobe Camera RAW or LightRoom.
    5-7-9 years ago I could buy Photoshop as standalone program, now I have to subscribe to "photography plan" but I do not need such poor Lightroom. So, many Fuji users should pay for not working properly software. Why?

    We were patient, and the only thing Adobe need to do is to say will this problem be fixed or not. Is it so difficult?
    ssprengel
    ssprengel
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    Having Fuji's algorithms is probably what lead to the current situation, unless Fuji is licensing the algorithms rather than giving them away, and maybe Adobe didn't want to pay the licensing fee. I do know that Fuji failed to give Adobe any help or warning originally and that is why their first set of conversions was so terrible, and I agree that while the current conversions are better, they aren't nearly as detailed as others seem to be able to do, although if you look at the other conversions, sometimes there is a bit of artifacting, for example in fine green grass, so they are not perfect, either.

    The current Adobe demosaicking process for traditional Bayer sensor layout has bits of the noise-reduction and sharpening built into it, so merely swapping out Adobe algorithms for Fuji isn't going to make things work entirely, either.
    ssprengel
    ssprengel
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    I would suggest you form your own company, hire your own engineers and create an algorithm that works better, that is not based on any public domain/free licensing software methods, tout it on the blogs, and either sell or give away your software for free to Fuji users, while keeping the algorithms secret, and get enough attention that Adobe has interest and then sell your company or at least it's intellectual property to them.

    Maybe that's what the Iridient guy is doing and the negotiations are about how much, and the market share of Fuji users that will buy LR because of the better conversion hasn't been large enough for Adobe to bite, or maybe they have and are keeping the information under raps until the LR6 launch. I have no idea.
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    Steve Sprengel, the fuji-fun community in Russia got the letter from Fujifilm Russia where it is rote that Fuji gave to Adobe all necessary data, all algorithms of demozaic, film simulations etc. But the only thing Adobe did - is included only film simulation to its RAW converters. Nothing else.
    And if you are saying that Fuji owners have lack of support, I can guess, that you know nothing about Fuji. Personally I have correspondence with Fuji support and get all answers very fast. Fuji make new firmware updates much often than Canon/Nikon. Fuji confess bugs if they exist and fix it immediately. So I can give more examples how Nikon rejected and reacted to AF issue with D800, light leak in D750 or Canon fix light leak in 5D Mk III with rubber tape :)

    In any case, here is forum of Adobe, here are users of Fuji and Adobe production and we want and have the right to get answers will this problem be fixed or we are free to solve it in another way.
    H
    hillrg
    Known Participant
    February 7, 2015
    All pretty pathetic reasons Steve. It is sad to watch a company like Adobe steadily go downhill.
    ssprengel
    ssprengel
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    I included why it was removed for the benefit of other users.

    I would expect Adobe doesn't comment, either because they are working on it and never talk about things they’re working on, or they’ve given up and don’t want to say that.

    There may also be legal reasons why they can’t use code in the open-source or public domain that works better (dcraw and similar) without someone suing them for making money off of it when the license says it is free, so they have to invent some other conversion that is not the same but also as good, which may be difficult and depend on smart people's creativity.

    It could also easily be that the engineers would love to make it work better, but aren't given the leeway to do so by the project managers and the attendant bureaucracy. Some sort of cost-benefit analysis and thousands of other tasks to work on that have a clearer benefit.

    Personally I won’t buy a Fuji camera because of the lack of support.
    B
    BoomeArt
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    Steve Sprengel, I clearly understood why it was deleted and agreed with it. But it is really funny that Adobe can not give any even brief answer about this problem, like: we are working on it... we will improve rendering x-trans files... or any other bla-bla. So Adobe's clients became angry.
    I can see that Adobe do not care about its customers by keeping silence. So I am free to do anything until can see any improvements. I am free to purchase any other software or find another solution.

    This post can also be deleted by moderator.
    ssprengel
    ssprengel
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2015
    It was removed due to references to illegal activities.
    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