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.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Please buy Iridient Digital (Iridient Digital - http://iridientdigital.com) and integrate their raw conversion for Fuji x-trans into lightroom. That will solve most of our (fuji users) problems with your software. Thanks.

[pinkypunk35]

I am testing the new release of Iridient Developer against Lightroom's latest release.

Here is a good example that shows how natural the Iridient version appears when compared to the Lighroom output. The same level of diference is present when comparing to Capture 1 etc.

In all fairness to Adobe, the RAW does match the Fuji JPEG quite well, but comparing the two it's easy to see why Lightroom is labeled as the worst software for Fuji X-Trans RAW files. Adobe customers are clearly losing details and getting an unnatural look.

Note these are default settings - with increased sharpening the difference is more pronounced, it simply exaggerates the issue.

[pinkypunk35]

Wonder why they didn't ask me, the topic creator? Or why they didn't publicly ask everyone else participating in this forum? Or even the general X-Trans community. God knows there are enough forum posts, blog posts and examples on the web.

Contacting you secretly doesn't do much for customer confidence.

Surely it would be more beneficial if they asked the wider community for examples / files / feedback and made a statement as to whether it was an issue they were willing to work on or not.

[BoomeArt]

My opinion is:
- Adobe do not care about x-trans users.
- Adobe keep silence because they know that in version #6 there will be improvements.
In any case it is bad and wrong, because more and more professional photographers and enthusiasts switching from huge and heavy DSLR stuff to compact mirrorless Fuji system, which gives in most cases the same result.

Personally I bought a license for Iridient.

[Ascccc]

Did you already get a feedback from Adobe in the meantime?

[Ascccc]

I hope that option 2 is true.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I bought a Fuji Camera too. I've been using Lightroom and PS for some time and I wanna still using those products because I feel very confortable with them and my current workflow depend on them. However I still feeling that the last version of lightroom does not perform very well with X-trans sensor and I have to use Raw Therapee to get the best results and work with the TIFF version in 16bits. I don't like that.
Please, improve Lightroom usage of Fuji RAW files.

[Francinera]

How does one do this?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Wow! This thread is quite enlightening! I am a newbie photographer, having just purchased my first 'real' camera (Fuji X-T1) in March 2014. So I have had lots to learn about photography as well as Lightroom and processing raw images. I have been trying to make my LR processed images look as good as or better than the SOOC jpegs and often fall short regarding sharpness, clarity, and detail. As you might guess, i have overused the obvious LR tools in order to try to compensate. Granted, some of my issues are operator error, ignorance, or an untrained eye, but learning that others have had difficulty rendering clear, sharp results in LA makes me curious to try some of the aforementioned softwares.

[WadeMedia]

Fuji X-E2 23mm f/1.4 lens - Capture One on the left Lightroom on the right both at default settings - note the the pink bloom around the Lightroom branches. Click the image for 100% @Adobe if you have not seen this problem before.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Lightroom 6 is due to be out soon. So at least i hope it gets fixed in that version. We are all heavily invested in Adobe products, or just Lightroom. Don't really want to change over to another product but rest assure i will as it seems Adobe is not taking it seriously enough.

Any Adobe employee want to chime in please?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

My favorite raw converter is Lightroom. It does a great job with Canon raws, but I'm deeply disappointed by how LR renders x-trans files. The output is very subpar compared to other developers & compared to what one would expect from a antialiasing-filter free 16mp sensor. LR images with x-trans aren't useable for professional use.

Best,
Fujifilm & Canon ILC user

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Been using LR since it was a beta program. Over the last few years I've bought heavily into the Fuji X line and love the cameras as I know many people in this area do too (NYC). The main pain I experience is what others have said here - that the RAW conversion in LR simply isn't as good as others.
Just wanted to let the Adobe developers know (currently developing LR 6) there are many more of us who never write on these forums who would LOVE a fix to this.

[fleckintosh]

https://www.apple.com/osx/photos-prev...

[Francinera]

I am disapointed in LR and Adobe as well.

I spent a great deal of money on Fuji products. I've tried different suggestions as to how to treat X-files in LR. They don't work all that great. But event if they did, I don't feel that I should have to go through all that to get results. It should not be any harder than it was with my Canon to get good results.

Being a subscriber may not be such a good thing after all. It seems Adobe is taking us for granted. We are stuck with our subscription.

[t.linn]

Being a subscriber is a fool's game. You've granted Adobe a lifetime annuity for the privilege of using their products. Of course, you don't have to subscribe to get Lightroom but PS is another matter.

[pinkypunk35]

As of Feb 6th 2015

91 replies
4th most common problem on the photoshop feedback forum
76 stars
7 months of posts

still no feedback from Adobe. Good connection they have with their customers...

[Ascccc]

Adobe, please fix this problem in LR6

[t.linn]

@jimkit Adobe has replied elsewhere that they are very aware of this issue from many users. He did not commit to doing anything about it.

[pinkypunk35]

This is the only Adobe feedback forum where they "officially" comment on known issues either through an acknowledgement, and explanation or a solution.

This, after 7 months, has been ignored completely even though we know it has been seen (the 4th most popular problem as of today).

[BoomeArt]

I bought Iridient Developer and process my RAWs in it. If in LighRoom v.6 nothing is going to be changed I stop my subscription and new version of photoshop will download from torrents. If Adobe doesn't care of its users, so why shall we care about Adobe's profit.

[t.linn]

Yes, it wasn't an official comment. I don't even remember exactly who made the comment. It was part of a broader conversation where he made it clear that if nothing is done it isn't because they are not aware of the issue.

[BoomeArt]

My reply was removed by moderator, so I will tell my thoughts in another way:
I bought Iridient Developer and process my RAWs in it. If in LighRoom v.6 nothing is going to be changed I stop my subscription. If Adobe doesn't care of its users, so why shall we care about Adobe's profit?

[ssprengel]

It was removed due to references to illegal activities.

[BoomeArt]

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.