jimkit's profile

46 Messages

 • 

2K Points

Wed, Jul 2, 2014 10:28 AM

Camera Raw/Lightroom Classic: Fuji X-Trans Support?

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.

Responses

8 Messages

 • 

138 Points

2 y ago

OMG, I switch to Capture One already... But let give it a try.

39 Messages

 • 

590 Points

2 y ago

Well, finally they did it and I must admit, they did it very good. But...... what's wrong with color? How to shoot product photography if Camera RAW shows wrong colors.
Here are an example of the same RAF file opened in ACR and Iridient Developer 
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/MdQw/qAkGVpHYM
In Camera Raw everything is oversaturated and the color of the dress is wrong, while in Iridient it is correct.

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

2 y ago

I just tried that. Applied Enhanced Details on the single x-trans picture on Core i7/GTX1070 machine. CPU utilization 3%, GPU 2%, RAM 84% (Only Lightroom CC takes 11 GB of RAM during processing Enhanced Details). It is 15 minutes now and still not done. This does not seems to be solution, I can not imagine processing more the one image like this.

Adobe Administrator

 • 

10K Messages

 • 

135.7K Points

I am seeing around 30 seconds on a Fuji test file. What camera's file are you trying?  It sounds like something else is going on with your system.
Adobe Photography Products

Quality Engineering - Customer Advocacy

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

Running just Lightroom after fresh restart, processing of that single photo still not done, it is gonna be around 30 minutes now :-o

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

Sorry,  the camera model is Fuji X-T20, I forgot

Adobe Administrator

 • 

10K Messages

 • 

135.7K Points

Thanks for responding. I just ran 3 files back to back. The shortest was 20 seconds the longest was 25 seconds.  Do you see this magnitude of slowness on all files or just this one?
Adobe Photography Products

Quality Engineering - Customer Advocacy

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

This is the first one I tried, processing is still running and the option Enhanced Details is greyed-out now for all other .RAF photos.

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

Rikk, I just gave up, killed Lightroom, restarted machine and works like a charm now. 

Adobe Administrator

 • 

10K Messages

 • 

135.7K Points

Good news!  Glad a restart helped.
Adobe Photography Products

Quality Engineering - Customer Advocacy

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

2 y ago

Well, seems to work pretty good, making stack of an old and enhanced picture. BUT - since the stacks are not being synced (this topic ), all photos with Enhanced Details are now duplicated on mobile devices  >:-(

Also, enhanced picture is 5 (five) times bigger then original on the cloud. Yes, the image is just a slightly sharper, but not 5 times bigger.

3 Messages

 • 

146 Points

2 y ago

Same here . Four issues that should be resolved : 1.the main one is that Lightroom does not handle .RAF files properly creating the “worm” artifact when details begin to be above 30 or so (>4 years without a solution). 2. Enhance details is a very poor fix to the problem, it takes long and creates big duplicates making it unusable. 3. Third is that LR CC Mobile applies high detail levels by default on import for .RAFs creating worms by default . 4th is that on Lightroom CC Cloud there is no way to apply just a detail fix in batch for many photos. You can copy and paste all edits but not just the detail fix. Profiles only work one by one . These 4 things make adoption of .RAF files a real PAIN in Lightroom CC/Cloud Mobile . I either need to change my gear or find alternates for LR CC Cloud

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

2 y ago

When using RAF and LR, just apply an insane amount of cognitive dissonance. Slide the cognitive dissonance slider to +100 and you’re good to go.

4 Messages

 • 

164 Points

2 y ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Fujifilm Files - Worming and Teeth.

Hey all,

So I know that you know that we know there are issues with Fuji's X-Trans processors but when are you going to tackle this please?

I've just downloaded Capture One and there are zero issues with worming and red teeth. I'm astonished Adobe haven't rectified this yet and everyone seems content to just wait.

I'm actually loathed to move everything across to C1 as my entire back catalogue is in LR (and I use PS too) but I'm seriously thinking about it as the quality of my LR files are appalling.


Can I ask if resolving this is a priority for Adobe please?





13 Messages

 • 

356 Points

I was not content with waiting. I waited long enough snd eventually got tired Adobe’s half baked “fixes” like the groundbreaking enhanced detail, which was an absolute joke, so I defected to Alien Skin’s Exposure X4. I didn’t care for the interface and controls of C1. I found it very clunky and not very intuitive. Too much clicking in and out of menus to access basic tools. It rendered XTrans files beautifully but falls short on interface and clogged up my workflow. Exposure X4 is almost identical to LR so there is virtually no learning curve and unlike LR, it actually displays RAF files correctly. I only use LR for my infrared work now. If I didn’t do that, I would just be done with Adobe all together. If I were you, I wouldn’t wait any longer. This has been a problem for years and years and they still haven’t figured it out. It iiterally one man (creator of Iridient) has figured it out, surely Adobe with their assloads of money and thousands of people can. But they won’t. So stop waiting. Try all the softwares available and go with one you like. Adobe has made it painfully apparent that they just don’t care about Fuji shooters

4 Messages

 • 

164 Points

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? 

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

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!

4 Messages

 • 

164 Points

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? 

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

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.

33 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

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.

268 Messages

 • 

4.7K Points

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.

4 Messages

 • 

142 Points

8 m ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Fujifilm RAW files and worms.

I'm curious if this is being investigated and worked on? There is a well known issue that Lightroom Classic renders Fujifilm X-trans sensor raw files poorly and shows worming and other strange artifacts compared to other raw processors.

This is actually becoming a major issue, and Fujifilm users are not an insignificant portion of users who are tempted by other products that do render their files properly.

Enhance Details does seem to render the files better, but then we are left with a large DNG file to manage, not to mention the processing time.

604 Messages

 • 

11.3K Points

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

 

--
Patrick
www.ppphoto.fr
Hamburg ist der wahre Grund warum
Kompassnadeln nach Norden zeigen.

4 Messages

 • 

142 Points

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.

604 Messages

 • 

11.3K Points

> 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).

 

--
Patrick
www.ppphoto.fr
Hamburg ist der wahre Grund warum
Kompassnadeln nach Norden zeigen.

1K Messages

 • 

11.5K Points

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

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

2 m ago

I really hope this is still being worked on. Lightroom still does not render X-Trans files correctly.

And Enhance Detail is not a good solution. It works, but it also requires a lot of extra time and disk space when you have to do it for thousands of photos. And if you want to get the extra disk space back, you have to spend even more time to delete the files. Its not a good solution.

Can Adobe confirm that this is still being worked on? Or should we all just cancel our subscriptions and switch to another program?

1K Messages

 • 

11.5K Points

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. 

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

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.

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

2 m ago

@Adobe @Lightroom @anyone?
Can anyone confirm if this ACTUALLY is being worked on? This thread is basically dead, but when you contact Adobe support on twitter about the X-Trans issue they send people to this thread. They do say that they are working on it, but its very hard to believe.

Its hard to believe because its been YEARS and its still not fixed. 

Its hard to believe because Adobe has so much money and resources, so it SHOULD have been fixed years ago. 

It's hard to believe because this thread is dead and no one from Adobe is responding.

But still, I will share some comparisons from a Fujifilm camera that has a normal sensor to one that has an X-Trans sensor. Just to show how photos should look. I'll include the RAW files too. Who knows, maybe they could be useful in some way.

The raw files:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TaouEUmnoIOwshGcO9ZXgb8aTrHeP_7y/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zye5uuCE3vfLnIgOumCTyoN-DBgz8l_D/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ux5G_TyRVPJ565F_oqX6eU6LwOTjXMbn/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19cL3h7T_Vk5a26OgoQCuk4oIroemEPvi/view?usp=sharing

8 Messages

 • 

138 Points

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.

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

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.

8 Messages

 • 

138 Points

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. 

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

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=

(edited)

33 Messages

 • 

1.1K Points

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.

7 Messages

 • 

152 Points

2 m ago

I agree. I am no pixel peeper but the worms are quite clear and make the overall picture look "mushy". I have stayed with lightroom though because of the many many hours learning it and try to put up with these artefacts. I do use irident x transformer but it's workaround and adds time when having to decide whether to use it etc. Enhance detail doesn't seem to make much difference to me and is also a pain as described. Enhance detail feels like an acceptance of the problem but an attempt to sort it out after the problem has occured. So surely the solution would be to have lightroom recognise its a fuji file (or you tell it) on import and process it correctly then.  In conclusion, lightroom is a fantastic program but occasionally i do think about leaving lightroom. 

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

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.

8 Messages

 • 

138 Points

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

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

2 m ago

In progress (profanity deleted) 6 years not enough for Adobe? I think they keep this thread here just to pacify us so that we don't keep asking about it. Adobe treats us like dirt because they have more than enough users. The few of us who are bothered by this and leaves won't make a dent in their income. They are ignoring us cause its easy. 

(edited)

1K Messages

 • 

11.5K Points

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. 

46 Messages

 • 

2K Points

@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...

16 Messages

 • 

228 Points

@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...


(edited)