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 · Jun 16, 2015

Well, now we know that Adobe is working under improvement of rendering x-trans RAWs. And also we know, that in todays update of LR 6.1 is nothing improved yet.

Report · Jun 16, 2015

Finally the hard work paid off, Adobe have today confirmed they are working on improving Fuji X Trans RAW files.

From the Lightroom June update release notes.

In collaboration with Fujifilm, we are still investigating methods to improve fine detail rendering and overall edge definition.

https://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjour...

Report · Jun 16, 2015

Good news. fujirumors.com posted, that Adobe will improve X-Trans support.

http://www.fujirumors.com/adobe-says-...

Report · Jun 16, 2015

I bought an X-T1 again, and tried running the same files through LR and Iridient. The difference is unbelievable, frankly. I will post some images later on, but I will say my own, subjective, conclusion is that it is more than just a sharpening problem - there appears to be more detail de-mosaiced in the Iridient file to begin with, detail which doesn't appear to be there for LR to sharpen in it's own rendering.

I don't actually like having another RAW developer in the workflow, though, and would prefer to work with just LR. At the moment, for landscape work at least on x-trans, I find this is simply not an acceptable option. How long have Adobe had to get on top of this now? Three years? Four? Whereas a standalone developer who designed Iridient has nailed it. Couldn't you just employ the guy and have done with it?

Report · May 15, 2015

Consumers just want 2 things.

1) For Lightroom to match (or better) competing RAW processors
2) For Adobe to comment on the issue

Report · May 14, 2015

@ Marat: If you like to buy Iridient Developer, i guess you own a Mac.

Watch out for the upcoming Affinity Photo!

https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/

Still in beta, but an awesome app, will kick adobes butt and will compete photoshop!

When it is ready, it will cost around 50€ - as a standalone app via the mac app store. buy it instead of rent it!

Booom :D

I am finished with adobe. I was thinking about leaving this group, but i decided to stay to promote every good photo app for fuji and take away customers from adobe 😛

Report · May 14, 2015

Oddly, having commented here the other day, I ended up inadvertently discussing this yesterday with a pro photographer who uses Fuji system - in fact I was cheating to him about something else but we got onto the subject. I won't mention names, because I didn't ask his approval to post what he said here.

Now, he apparently used to work for Fuji, and said they are notoriously, almost ridiculously, tight lipped about their Intellectual Property. He claimed to have got them and Adobe 'round the same table' a while back, which is why there was a small step up in processing quality.

My point (or rather, his point) is that we may need to be putting pressure on Fuji to be more forthcoming with Adobe about how to de mosaic x-teams files properly, and not only on Fuji themselves. He told me that recently another friend of his (another pro) had a photo which was processed by a top lab here, then, for some reason, by Fuji themselves in Japan. The difference in the final prints was quite substantial, to the extent they asked what on earth Fuji were able to do to the file that they couldn't. Essentially, he said that the Fuji print was 'everything we're all wanting', which I took to mean it didn't have the artefacts we're all concerned with.

I have no reason to suspect the guy is making it up, as I say, we only wandered on to the subject in the middle of another conversation, but it may be worth everyone pressuring Fuji more. If they really are being so protective of their x-trams IP it's damaging the output quality of the files it claims to improve, their users' experience, and even, in cases like myself, losing customers, that really is crazy. That said, I still think Adobe could at least respond to our concerns - how hard would it be, if the above is indeed true, for them to simply say that it's out of their hands, and to approach Fuji for a fix, for example?

Report · May 13, 2015

+1
In general, the trend is that a lot of non professionals, hobbyists and semi-pro photographers (pros also, but not so many) understood, that DSLR is big and heavy and do not have the "magic" button "masterpiece". And this people switch to mirrorless, and mostly to Fuji. So in one or two years this 7-8% will increase, but Adobe will not get them as customers. Iridient, Capture One will get new customers.

I payed for Iridient $99 and this is not a small amount of money, but I vote for client-oriented developer.

Report · May 13, 2015

+1 to t.linn and Francine.

Fuji needs to help and/or put pressure on Adobe to fix their raw support if they want to help grow their customer base.

AND...Adobe needs to respond on this thread to this issue, or it will continue to lose support, and give a boost to their competitors.

7-8% market share is not insignificant. And, what should be more troubling for Adobe, it is growing.

Report · May 12, 2015

Yes, I believe your assessment is exactly correct. And to be clear, I wasn't suggesting unsubscribing from Adobe in my last comment—though that is my advice to anyone who doesn't want to willingly put themselves in a position of having to pay Adobe a monthly fee for the rest of their life to have editing access to their images. My advice is CS6 and a perpetual license of LR until this is no longer a viable option. At that point I am hopeful that some other company will have stepped in to offer some competition. It's not like Adobe is actually advancing the state of the art with their relatively infrequent CC releases. PS is a relatively stationary target.

Report · May 12, 2015

I agree with you t.linn. I am not willing to give up my X-T1. And I don't think I should have to.

On the other hand, I fail to see what unsubscribing to Adobe will accomplish. If Fuji's market share is less than 7%, I seriously doubt that our defection will make much of a difference. How many of these 7% actually care that much about it. Lots of JPG shooters in the group, I am sure.

It is Fuji that will suffer I believe. Already, a number of my colleagues have decided NOT to purchase an X-T1 because of the problem.

And although I am more than frustrated with Adobe about this, I wonder what, if anything Fuji is doing about it. I am sure they have more clout than any of us.

Report · May 11, 2015

People, I use Iridient Developer for five month already. I can say that this software is perfect and since that time I don't need Adobe anymore.

Report · May 06, 2015

So what's the message of adobe to their customers? If you don't use a nikon or canon system, then LR is the wrong raw converter for you? We don't want your money? You are not important enough? We are unable to render files like most of our competitors? We rather implement usles features, then improve the most important core feature?

If I (and I think most of customers like me too) switch to Capture One, Iridient Developer, Photo Ninja or every other raw converter, that renders the files much better, I will never switch back. Why? A switch is complex and much work. I have to learn to use the software and I have to organize my files again.
And most important: I learnd, that adobe don't care. Pay and shut up, or leave.
So I leave.

Report · May 06, 2015

7-8% is better than I would have guessed. I think companies care about 7-8%. That isn't much different than the Mac's market share—a little low.

Adobe has put just enough effort into X-Trans demosaicing to make it good enough that they retain the majority of Fuji customers. None of them may be happy but Adobe gets their money anyway. It's a crappy way to treat customers but until there is more than fringe competition there is no market pressure to do anything differently. If Capture One were more reasonably priced that might make a difference.

Report · May 06, 2015

Fuji has a market share of what? 7-8%? So any more questions why nobody cares?

Oli
(Fuji User)

Report · May 05, 2015

Bought LR6 with eager fingers crossed... Adobe didn't fail to disappoint.

Incredibly frustrated.

Report · Apr 30, 2015

I waited for LR 6, because I hoped, that the fuji X support will imporve. I tried to communicate with Adobe, but they ignored me.
And LR6 isn't faster, it's even slower, then LR5.

So I'm not willing to spend money for LR6, I will use this money to switch to a raw converter, which works good with fujis raw files.

So long and thanks for all the fish

Report · Apr 28, 2015

Just take a look at screenshots:
LR 5.7.1 - upper pic with sharpening, lower pic sharpening is OFF

LR CC (6) - upper pic sharpening is OFF, lower pic with sharpening

Iridient Developer 3.0.1 - - upper pic sharpening is OFF, lower pic with sharpening BY DEFAULT

So new LightRoom is the same piece of ............ [censored] and Adobe does not care about its customers at all.

Report · Apr 25, 2015

Huge claim you are making about Fuji!
If Iridient does a great job with these files, then how could it possibly be fuji- raw that are the culprit?

You really to back-up such claimes with proof.

Report · Apr 25, 2015

I found this workaround for mac owners who doesn't have iridient: https://tjfelicianophoto.wordpress.co...

Report · Apr 25, 2015

I'm a stock image contributor and I can confirm Adobe's FujiX raw conversion is broken.

90% of my images shot with XT1 XE2 are rejected due to low sharpness in small detailed areas such as foliage. Also there's noticeable halo as demonstrated in this post.

I know iridient does a very good job but I work on Lightroom from a PC. Now, I'm forced to shoot jpg with XT1.

Report · Apr 10, 2015

The answer for me was simple. I migrated to C1 Pro. And not just because of how fuji photos rendered. I went back and found so much more detail (tonal and color) in photos taken with my old Canon Rebel XT (comparing the most recent ACR to C1 Pro), that it was a no-brainer. I only use PS for touchups now, and final sharpening passes, and avoid ACR and LR like the plague.

They really dropped the ball. Now some of us have moved on and are playing in a different court.

Report · Apr 09, 2015

Not much to say that hasn't already been said. The problem for the most part, is that Adobe doesn't HAVE TO acknowledge anything. As far as user bases go, that of Fuji's, is minuscule when compared to that of other camera manufacturers whose sensors are of the Bayer type.

This means that they have a cash cow, regardless of whether or not Fuji users use LR/PS. They also know that they have us by the balls, since all the other options leave us feeling like we are using an UI made by Fisher Price on crack.

We basically have to deal with these crap results, until we basically no longer can.... And that time frame will be different for everyone, I suppose. Or, we use another application for the RAW processing, and then to right back into PS for further tweaking etc.. Long winded workflow of course, but I fail to see a better alternative, if we're being realistic.

Doug

Report · Mar 27, 2015

We could all move to the upcoming Apple Photos app

It's doing a much better job in beta than Adobe Lightroom, in fact it's liek going from a camera phone to a DSLR in terms of quality.

See below, Lightroom is obviously the one on the left that looks like a low res shot; Apple Photos version on the right - MASSIVE difference!

Please read about the difference here

Report · Feb 18, 2015

I have just bought an X-T1, foolishly assuming that Lightroom would support the camera well. Oh dear :(

Adobe, please improve your support, or at least answer!