Camera Raw/Lightroom: Fuji X-Trans Support?

  • 190
  • Problem
  • Updated 2 months ago
  • In Progress
  • (Edited)
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 Developer
Photo Ninja
LightZone
Capture One
Aperture
SilkyPix
Raw Therapee

Iridient 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.
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 5 years ago

  • 190
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Let's send our XTrans improvement request to Adobe on their Google+ and Facebook pages. I've done so. Maybe we get heard if there are enough posters.
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Hey! I've done some work this Sunday with the usual suspects of RAW Converters.

Let the Pictures speak for itself...

Here are some comparisons with jpeg files of other RAW converters vs. the RAW File in LR 5.7 (best possible settings: Details 100, Amount 40, Radius 0.5)

EVERY Converter is sharper than LR. Everyone has its own character.

Photo Ninja has some creepy colors, Aperture some fragments.

My favorites are Raw Therapee (free of Charge!!!) and Capture One Pro 8.

See the Screenshots and tell me your thoughts ;)
Photo of ARTHUR ESCOBADO

ARTHUR ESCOBADO

  • 2 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Thank you for sharing that with this community. It prompted me to download RawTherapee and wow, I knew the postings had shown an advantage but when you see your own images that you created realizing these results it made me realize how far off Lightroom needs to progress with the X-trans files. I feel a need to communicate this with other Fuji shooters and wag my finger at Adobe. I didn't know how much was being left on the table by Adobe.
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My favourite converter concerning detail is also C1. But C1 has also some disadvantages: The highlight reconstruction is not as good as LR, Local corrections are very slow on my PC, and the catalogue becomes inconsistent from time to time.
When I compare the results of my Nikon D800 I am able to achieve identical results using C1 and LR. This should also be possible with Fuji cameras. Please, Adobe. Do something!
Photo of t.linn

t.linn

  • 16 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Lightroom need to be improved, no question, but neither C1 nor Photo Ninja are all-that-and-a-bag-of-chips.

Anyone using a Wacom tablet with Photo Ninja already knows that the Wacom mouse won't work with this program. This is a deal killer for me. (It's a weakness of the software used to write the program.) Beyond that, PN has really inferior highlight recovery. My very first image test involved a backlit river. PN created all kinds of artifacts on the specular highlights across the surface of the water. LR handled the issue flawlessly. The developer acknowledged both of these as known issues.

Capture One is a nice bit of software and does many things very well but it isn't perfect either. It has the same (though less severe) issue with highlight recovery as Photo Ninja. And there are a number of features in the software that are not implemented for X-Trans sensors. Edge detection was one that they were still said to be working on when C1Pro 8 was first released. There are other omissions that the developer has said they do not plan to implement for X-Tran ever due to the amount of work it would take. That, to me, sounds like a less-than-complete commitment to Fuji users.

I have read nothing that suggests Adobe has committed to improving X-Trans conversions but I have read an Adobe employee confirm that this issue is at the very top of the list of requests they get for improvements. That leaves me at least somewhat hopeful that LR6 will improve the situation. That said, if it comes in the form of a new develop process, anyone who hasn't succumbed to Adobe's rental scheme and is still using PS CS6 will probably no longer realize any benefit from exporting out of LR6 as a smart object.
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 60 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
+1. Of course Lightroom has great features, but it's a RAW processing product, and image quality is THE PRIME FEATURE. Make other features sub-par, but not this!
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Absolutely right! Image quality is the most important feature.
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
true word, bro!
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Guys, i totally fell in love with Capture One!

The X-Trans Sensor has beautiful colors, we all know that. As you know, i was testing a lot of raw converters last weekend (see my earlier post). i played a lot with all the capture one settings and observed that beautiful natural colors that no other raw converter can produce!

i am falling in love more and more...

beside this, i discovered another raw converter, worth taking a closer look at:

Cyberlink PhotoDirector.

Yeah, i know what you are about to say... but take a look at it. The Image Quality is very, VERY close to Aperture from Apple. I guess, Cyberlink uses the Apple RAW Converter. Images are much the same, just the handling with noise is better at PhotoDirector. That app is under developing, apple stopped developing Aperture a long time ago.

The Latest Version (6) you can buy both for Mac and PC.

Version (4) is even for free, fully working.

http://hukd.mydealz.de/freebies/cyber...

It works very Solid with X-Trans Sensors. The Image Quality is pretty good, eye in eye with Aperture.

I agree with mike-photos. A RAW Converter should do its job. Converting RAW as good as possible. Everything else, is a Bonus.
Photo of Matthew Smith

Matthew Smith

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Solving the X-trans Fuji raw conversion problem....

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.
Photo of Francine Raymond

Francine Raymond

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
How does one do this?
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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.

Photo of Aleksei Isachenko

Aleksei Isachenko

  • 34 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I hope that option 2 is true.
Photo of jordi nunez

jordi nunez

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of Tina Pecht

Tina Pecht

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of James Wade

James Wade

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.

Photo of Kyriacos Souroullas

Kyriacos Souroullas

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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?
Photo of Birsen Sirkeci

Birsen Sirkeci

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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
Photo of Ian Carmody

Ian Carmody

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of Michael Fleck

Michael Fleck

  • 17 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Photo of Francine Raymond

Francine Raymond

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of t.linn

t.linn

  • 16 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
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.
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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...
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Adobe, please fix this problem in LR6
Photo of t.linn

t.linn

  • 16 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
@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.
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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).
Photo of t.linn

t.linn

  • 16 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
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.
Photo of Aleksei Isachenko

Aleksei Isachenko

  • 34 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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?
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2673 Posts
  • 348 Reply Likes
It was removed due to references to illegal activities.
Photo of Aleksei Isachenko

Aleksei Isachenko

  • 34 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of Rory Hill

Rory Hill

  • 244 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
All pretty pathetic reasons Steve. It is sad to watch a company like Adobe steadily go downhill.
Photo of Aleksei Isachenko

Aleksei Isachenko

  • 34 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Steve Sprengel, the fuji-fun community in Russia got the letter from Fujifilm Russia where it is rote that Fuji gave to Adobe all necessary data, all algorithms of demozaic, film simulations etc. But the only thing Adobe did - is included only film simulation to its RAW converters. Nothing else.
And if you are saying that Fuji owners have lack of support, I can guess, that you know nothing about Fuji. Personally I have correspondence with Fuji support and get all answers very fast. Fuji make new firmware updates much often than Canon/Nikon. Fuji confess bugs if they exist and fix it immediately. So I can give more examples how Nikon rejected and reacted to AF issue with D800, light leak in D750 or Canon fix light leak in 5D Mk III with rubber tape :)

In any case, here is forum of Adobe, here are users of Fuji and Adobe production and we want and have the right to get answers will this problem be fixed or we are free to solve it in another way.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2673 Posts
  • 347 Reply Likes
I would suggest you form your own company, hire your own engineers and create an algorithm that works better, that is not based on any public domain/free licensing software methods, tout it on the blogs, and either sell or give away your software for free to Fuji users, while keeping the algorithms secret, and get enough attention that Adobe has interest and then sell your company or at least it's intellectual property to them.

Maybe that's what the Iridient guy is doing and the negotiations are about how much, and the market share of Fuji users that will buy LR because of the better conversion hasn't been large enough for Adobe to bite, or maybe they have and are keeping the information under raps until the LR6 launch. I have no idea.
Photo of Francine Raymond

Francine Raymond

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hey Steve,

Isn't this exactly the type of reasoning that validates the lack of interest the company displays?

I usually don't react to comments but I own a Fuji (unlike you) and spent a lot of money on it, I am also currently spending a fair amount of money on my Adobe subscription every month.

The least you could do is support us in our quest. Hopefully, when you do buy a new camera, LR will support it adequatly. If you don't get the support you need, will you still be this accomodating?
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
The point is, Steve, one guy has managed to figure out how to get good results yet one of the most wealthy software developers in the world has failed to even match them. That is the issue.