P: Improved Fuji X-Trans Support?

[pinkypunk35]

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.

[mbkinsman]

Plus one on Adobe needing to address the x-trans issue. Great cameras, irridient does do a noticeably better job of processing. I've incorporated it into my workflow now. Watching other companies software offerings and will abandon LR if one comes along that offers some of the module features. Just listened to a podcast about Corel's offering for images that sounds great for an interface, but I don't know if they support the x-trans.

[Ascccc]

Do you mean Corel AfterShot Pro?
Its image quality is awful - I used it several months for my Nikon Cameras.
Lightroom is lightyears ahead. Noise reduction and highlight reconstruction are just a joke.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I would like Adobe to make a statement on fixing the Fuji X RAW files. Adobe, can you please address this problem.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Please Adobe, let's improve Lightroom's (and Bridge's) X-Trans processing.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I would appreciate a statement as well.

[Larry J. Clark]

I'm of the opinion that Adobe is fully aware of the problems, knows how to solve them, and has decided that this is as far as they go. My guess is that the problem is the time it takes to process X-Trans files to the level that some ask for. Adobe's worry is that if they go to that level (and which Adobe already has built an equivalent -- somewhere) the complaints will start streaming in from LR users about how long it takes to process each image file. The users that are "really serious" have integrated other RAW processors into their workflow -- so problem solved there.

I've been using Photo Ninja since the Beta that included X-Trans support and it is linked to PhotoShop (I rarely use LR and use my own filing/cataloging approach). I know that you get a better file using Photo Ninja, but the files do take longer to process.

[Ascccc]

Okay, then they could let the user choose if he wants the fast or the high quality algorithm. A single option field would solve that problem.

[Larry J. Clark]

Yes. That makes sense. But it also requires a bit of corporate courage. Can you see them giving you two choices?

(a) Good
(b) Good Enough for Facebook

[Ascccc]

Let's send our XTrans improvement request to Adobe on their Google+ and Facebook pages. I've done so. Maybe we get heard if there are enough posters.

[fleckintosh]

[fleckintosh]

[fleckintosh]

Hey! I've done some work this Sunday with the usual suspects of RAW Converters.

Let the Pictures speak for itself...

Here are some comparisons with jpeg files of other RAW converters vs. the RAW File in LR 5.7 (best possible settings: Details 100, Amount 40, Radius 0.5)

EVERY Converter is sharper than LR. Everyone has its own character.

Photo Ninja has some creepy colors, Aperture some fragments.

My favorites are Raw Therapee (free of Charge!!!) and Capture One Pro 8.

See the Screenshots and tell me your thoughts 😉

[Ascccc]

My favourite converter concerning detail is also C1. But C1 has also some disadvantages: The highlight reconstruction is not as good as LR, Local corrections are very slow on my PC, and the catalogue becomes inconsistent from time to time.
When I compare the results of my Nikon D800 I am able to achieve identical results using C1 and LR. This should also be possible with Fuji cameras. Please, Adobe. Do something!

[pinkypunk35]

Best suggestion is to keep badgering Adobe to improve support to at least match their competitors.

[pinkypunk35]

Color Noise reduction was on very low, but I have revisited it just to be safe and turning it off made no difference.

[pinkypunk35]

A simple acknowledgement would go a long way - but I started this thread 5 months ago and nothing. However it's building all the time so I still hope Adobe will reward our loyalty and patience with an acknowledgement.

[pinkypunk35]

You have things backwards. Those that are really serious have invested many years and hours in the Adobe eco system of tools and they are the ones who have stayed with Lightroom hoping and waiting for improvements.

It;s the enthusiast with just a few thousand photos who is able to jump ship to pastures new; not the professionals who have large catalogues.

[Larry J. Clark]

I have over 220,000 image files on my main photo drive. The only thing I had to change for X-Trans files was the association for the RAW processor. When Photo Ninja is done, the image is instantly available in Photoshop. I understand that you can also do that with LR.

[t.linn]

LR offers an advantage no other product does in terms of its integration with PS. You can maintain a complete end-to-end non-destructive editing workflow by exporting from LR to PS as a smart object. That is aside from the issues of catalog management created by using different processors—not that it can't be done but what a hassle.

Now if one didn't use a managed catalog, didn't employ smart objects, and maintained master files as "developed" TIF files (for example), then switching between processors would be a trivial thing. There is nothing wrong with this workflow if it works for you but it is less sophisticated and less flexible than the former.

[t.linn]

Lightroom need to be improved, no question, but neither C1 nor Photo Ninja are all-that-and-a-bag-of-chips.

Anyone using a Wacom tablet with Photo Ninja already knows that the Wacom mouse won't work with this program. This is a deal killer for me. (It's a weakness of the software used to write the program.) Beyond that, PN has really inferior highlight recovery. My very first image test involved a backlit river. PN created all kinds of artifacts on the specular highlights across the surface of the water. LR handled the issue flawlessly. The developer acknowledged both of these as known issues.

Capture One is a nice bit of software and does many things very well but it isn't perfect either. It has the same (though less severe) issue with highlight recovery as Photo Ninja. And there are a number of features in the software that are not implemented for X-Trans sensors. Edge detection was one that they were still said to be working on when C1Pro 8 was first released. There are other omissions that the developer has said they do not plan to implement for X-Tran ever due to the amount of work it would take. That, to me, sounds like a less-than-complete commitment to Fuji users.

I have read nothing that suggests Adobe has committed to improving X-Trans conversions but I have read an Adobe employee confirm that this issue is at the very top of the list of requests they get for improvements. That leaves me at least somewhat hopeful that LR6 will improve the situation. That said, if it comes in the form of a new develop process, anyone who hasn't succumbed to Adobe's rental scheme and is still using PS CS6 will probably no longer realize any benefit from exporting out of LR6 as a smart object.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Thank you for sharing that with this community. It prompted me to download RawTherapee and wow, I knew the postings had shown an advantage but when you see your own images that you created realizing these results it made me realize how far off Lightroom needs to progress with the X-trans files. I feel a need to communicate this with other Fuji shooters and wag my finger at Adobe. I didn't know how much was being left on the table by Adobe.

[Mike_Katz]

+1. Of course Lightroom has great features, but it's a RAW processing product, and image quality is THE PRIME FEATURE. Make other features sub-par, but not this!

[Ascccc]

Absolutely right! Image quality is the most important feature.

[fleckintosh]

true word, bro!

[fleckintosh]

Guys, i totally fell in love with Capture One!

The X-Trans Sensor has beautiful colors, we all know that. As you know, i was testing a lot of raw converters last weekend (see my earlier post). i played a lot with all the capture one settings and observed that beautiful natural colors that no other raw converter can produce!

i am falling in love more and more...

beside this, i discovered another raw converter, worth taking a closer look at:

Cyberlink PhotoDirector.

Yeah, i know what you are about to say... but take a look at it. The Image Quality is very, VERY close to Aperture from Apple. I guess, Cyberlink uses the Apple RAW Converter. Images are much the same, just the handling with noise is better at PhotoDirector. That app is under developing, apple stopped developing Aperture a long time ago.

The Latest Version (6) you can buy both for Mac and PC.

Version (4) is even for free, fully working.

http://hukd.mydealz.de/freebies/cyber...

It works very Solid with X-Trans Sensors. The Image Quality is pretty good, eye in eye with Aperture.

I agree with mike-photos. A RAW Converter should do its job. Converting RAW as good as possible. Everything else, is a Bonus.