Fujifilm profile organisation is a mess now - v1, v2, and no 'v'!

[owen-b]

I have a big problem with Fujifilm profiles within Lightroom Classic now. I have two X-T3s and one X-Pro3 that I use on shoots. I used to just have the X-T3s and life was easy: everything set to Astia on import. Well - thing is I used to have X-T2s and when the X-T3 came out a big change was required in the Adobe colour profiles for Fuji cameras to match properly. The same Astia that worked on X-T2 doesn't work on X-T3. Adobe got around this by releasing new versions of them all for the X-T3 and calling them v2. So, whenever I look for the camera profiles for shots taken on my X-T3 they are all listed as v2 versions. It had to do that because for WAY too long we had to make do with the X-T2 profiles which were hideous, and we all got around that by dialling in colour tint changes to make them work. But if Adobe just updated those profiles then they'd work going forward, but for the several months we were working around it, THOSE images would now look wrong. So thanks to Adobe's slowness in updating, we have a muddled range of profiles for X-T3 - v1 original, and v2 updated.

The X-Pro3 uses the same sensor, so presumably uses the same profiles, right? Apparently not, it has a bunch of profiles that all have no 'version'. So, Astia v2 applied to everything on import no longer works, because half those files require 'Astia', not 'v1' or 'v2', just 'Astia'.

So now I need to double up ALL my presets with a version for the X-T3 and a version for the X-Pro3. Even though they have the same sensor.

Is this the way it has to be? 

[JP Hess]

This is primarily a user to user forum. Your question should be directed at the developers, and I will provide you with a link to the forum where the developers monitor and respond more actively than they do here. That is where you should express your concern.

https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/categories/photoshop_family_photoshop_lightroom 

[owen-b]

Actually it was primarily aimed at the community to see if I'm missing something or just have to suck it up - and have had a really useful reply from John below. But thanks - have cross-posted to the forum you linked to as well!

[john beardsworth]

Yes, it is inconsistent and messy, and I had to add what seems like a kludge to my X-LR plugin which automatically assigns profiles corresponding to the film simulation set in the camera. But maybe your solution is not to include the profile in your presets? If you always choose Astia on whatever camera, can't you set it as the camera's default in Develop's right hand panel?

[owen-b]

Thanks for reassuring me I'm not going mad. Such a mess! Going to check out that plugin, and consider your thoughts on a revised workflow now I have to camera models to match up. 

It's a real pain for my presets though. I have some that use Acros, some that use Astia, now I need to have two of each.

If it wasn't for that annoying 'v2' thing they did, should the same profiles have worked across both X-T3 and X-Pro3, do you think?

[john beardsworth]

I think the key problem is that the preset records the profile's name as simple text, not as a logical reference to the latest version of the camera's Astia etc.

I don't recall the exact sequence of events, but I suspect the X-T3 was initially supported with non-v2 profiles and Adobe then decided to redo them. They would not have wanted to overwrite those initial profiles with the updated versions because that would have changed the appearance of images that people had already processed. So for the X-T3 you get these v2 names. X-Pro3 seems the same, but the X-E3 doesn't have them. One has to work it out camera by camera.

[kimballisms]

Adobe was forced to re-release their profiles for the x-t3 as "v2" revisions because their original x-t3 profiles had significant white balance problems.   It actually has nothing to do with x-t2 profiles vs. x-t3 profiles.  Anytime you're looking at a list of profiles for a raw file you are only seeing profiles built for that specific camera model and no others.   So when fuji releases the x-t4 and adobe adds support for it, the names of adobe's profiles will lose the "v2" revision... unless adobe screws up again. 🙂

[owen-b]

Ah I get you. So even if they were all just named without any version number, because it's a different model camera it needs its own base profile, they're not shared by sensors. So I'd have this issue of needing two versions of a preset that used a particular profile, either way.

[kimballisms]

Yup.  Because of Adobe's error you will need presets based on camera model if you want "Astia v2" applied to X-T3 shots and "Astia" applied to X-Pro3 & other Fuji camera shots.

But that's only if you need the correct Astia profile embedded in your preset.  Do you need that?

For example if you always use Astia on every Fuji camera you own, just save it as the default develop profile for each camera (of course using v2 for the X-T3):

https://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2018/12/changing-lightroom-classics-default-develop-settings.html

That will avoid the problem entirely.  Then just make sure your presets don't include a profile.

[john beardsworth]

Thanks for filling in the detail. With the X-E3, they've already dropped the v2.