P: Improved Fuji X-Trans Support?

Report · Jul 02, 2014

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.

Report · Sep 24, 2014

Same here.

After some testing I've switched to Capture One Pro.
I didn't align the rendering but you can see an example on one of my own pictures below :
LR 5.5

C1 Pro 7.2.3

LR/C1 comparison 100% crop
http://reho.st/view/self/72a5ea4ab70e...

Report · Aug 18, 2014

I'm out. $2500 worth of Fuji X-T1 and lens and I can't process the RAW files. Time to move to Capture One Pro.

Report · Aug 13, 2014

I think about to leave LR

Report · Mar 05, 2021

@jimkit

I totally agree! I've been complaining about the X-Trans sensor for a while now. A little further up on this page I have examples of how a normal sensor compares to X-Trans. I intended that to show how Lightroom is failing, but it also shows how Fujifilm is failing.

Edit: I dont know how to tag someone. I thought @ + name was enough...

Report · Mar 05, 2021

@Eirik Honestly Fuji are just as culpable. Adobe are not up to scratch to other RAW editors, they are 100% at fault for that, but Fuji are the ones who used a dodgy new sensor for no good reason. I wish they stuck to bayer...

Report · Mar 04, 2021

There have been significant improvements over the years. The only difference between Lightroom/AdobeRAW and others comes down to personal preference. So either build yourself a profile on switch to some other tool. X-Trans (like Foveon) should have never left the research lab, interesting but useless concepts.

Report · Feb 26, 2021

Ohh, try messing around with the option of color noise reduction in X-transformer. I would leave it as low or not at all.

Report · Feb 26, 2021

Yeah I agree, LR should just recognize and prosess x-trans files correctly from the start without using enhance detail.

The reason I like enhance detail more than the transformer is that (from my limited "testing") it brings back color definition in small details. The transformer did not do that.

Report · Feb 25, 2021

I find X Transformer is good, and runs better on my machine than "enhance details".

Of course these sort of workarounds should not be needed.

Report · Feb 25, 2021

Cool, thanks for the suggestion.

Adobe REALLY should get it together though. This is ridicules. The thread says "in progress" and Adobe support on Twitter sends people here when they ask.

I get the feeling that Adobe is straight up lying. I dont believe them when they say they are working on it. How could I at this point=

Report · Feb 25, 2021

My workflow for stitching is:

1.- C1 for developing to ROMM TIFF 16-Bits

2.- Hugin for stitching.

3.-Back to C1 and/or Phoshop/Affinity for final retouch.

More steps but better results for detail developing from X-Trans sensors.

Report · Feb 25, 2021

Its very hard for me to switch away from LR because the way it lets me stitch raw files and edit them is so good. I do a lot of stitching.

I have tried the Iridient X-Transformer, and I did not like it. I did not really understand all the options and leaving them at the defaults did not give me very good results.

I like the Enhance Detail feature much more. But the files you get from that are very big and it takes extra time. It takes more time if you then delete those files later.

Report · Feb 25, 2021

I gave up this topic about 2 years ago and change to C1. But you could try the plugin of X-transformer for Ligthroom if you don't want to change the Adobe plataform.

Report · Feb 22, 2021

That tells me that none of the RAW editors knows what to do with X-Trans files.

I have compared X-Trans to a normal sensor (as if I needed to compare to see the artifacts and washed out colors) and X-Trans DOES look worse than normal.

Report · Feb 22, 2021

fujirumors.com within the past year published a comparison of several photo editors for X-trans files. The conclusion was that the differences were all up to personal preferences. None of them were clearly superior.

Report · Aug 29, 2020

Different, yes. Better, in the eye of the beholder.

Report · Aug 29, 2020

> Adobe really needs to address the native rendering of Fuji files with Camera Raw.

Agreed. However, Adobe seem to consider that the problem is fixed on their side. Do not expect any solution from Adobe in the near future. So, Fuji X-Trans users have to find a solution. There are not much :

- DxO Photolab still doesn't support X-Trans RAW files
- Capture One gives good results but the UI is far from being user friendly and the pricing is excessive.
- Silkypix Developer Studio Pro is also able to handle these files correctly but the UI is archaic.
- ... (not aware of any other good RAW processors that are able to handle these files correctly or that are stable enough to be used safely).

Report · Aug 29, 2020

Samoreen I’ve used it. But why? Think of how awful this would be if all users of Lightroom (Sony, Canon, Nikon etc) had to first make a duplicate copy of their raw files in another program in order to properly edit them. And then manage 2-3 different files of the same image (RAF, DNG, JPEG)

Adobe really needs to address the native rendering of Fuji files with Camera Raw.

As a stop gap they could provide an option to use the Enhance Details engine to render/preview/export without generating new DNG files.

Report · Aug 29, 2020

You could use Iridient X-Transformer. It gives better results and is faster than Enhance Details. It is also well integrated with Lightroom.

Report · Jul 09, 2019

Honestly, I'm also not fan of all that worms in .RAF images, BUT... notice that Adobe RAF processing completely removes color noise. Absolutely, no action needed, never. And looking at your screenshots, I see massive loss of sharpness in Capture One. You can set strong noise reduction in Lightroom and then you're probably gonna get similar output.

Report · Jul 08, 2019

Whilst the careful use of settings can mitigate how badly Lightroom renders X trans files, you simply do not get this problem with Capture 1 etc.

Report · Jul 08, 2019

Because one is inherently saying that they don't know what they are doing, and people don't like that 😉
I use settings that are specific to the characteristics of the image. Maybe what will help you is to break away from the mentality of the "Base preset is Classic Chrome as recommended by someone" and "I figured out from another group". Sure, choose Classic Chrome if you like its look, but try other looks too. For what it is worth, I prefer the Previa film simulation as it gives a neutral but attractive look from where I can add saturation or not, as I see fit. As for the Detail panel settings, I don't feel high Detail settings do much for Fuji, but higher Masking is often beneficial as it allows one to use more aggressive sharpening and target it only on those areas that need it. Make sure you hold down the Alt/Opt key when you drag these sliders. Hope that helps.

Report · Jul 08, 2019

Why would they do that?! I figured out from another group I had a couple of sliders on i.e. Color 25, Detail 50, Smoothness 50 but amended these to: Sharpening 15, Radius 1.0, Detail 10, Masking 10, and have Noise Reduction sliders to 0. Base preset is Classic Chrome as recommended by someone. But still rubbish! What do you use?

Report · Jul 08, 2019

I can't see from your screenshots what you mean, and it's meaningless without seeing your Detail panel settings. The trouble is that as soon as one questions someone's crude use of these sliders, they go into defensive mode!

Report · Jul 08, 2019

Yeah the link at the top of this post is for Windows 10 which I don't have so that isn't going to help. Surely they must know this is ongoing?