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 Chris Lipscombe

Chris Lipscombe

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
In Lightroom, I set the default camera profile to Fujifilm STD (LR's version of in camera STD film profile).  I then took some photographs as JPG+RAW with my X-H1.

When comparing the JPG to the RAW in Lightroom (with the Fuji STD Film Profile), straight import, no other adjustments made by me (LR did apply some sharpening), I found really no difference between the in camera film profiles and the imported RAW file.  
Unfortunately, if you shoot with another film profile in camera and have the STD film profile set as default, the in-camera profile will not automatically apply.  I wish it did.  You can however, change file simulation profiles at any time in LR.

As for Lightroom's emulation of the Fujifilm STD film profile, I can't really say the in camera JPG and the imported RAW file in LR look any different.  In fact, the raw file seemed to have a little better distortion control that the JPG did around the edges (16-55 mm lens at 16 mm).

Could I get better sharpening from other raw converters ... perhaps ... haven't tried ... but I am pleased at how well Lightroom matches the in camera film simulations of my X-H1, in color, shading, sharpness, etc.



(Edited)
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1164 Posts
  • 288 Reply Likes
the in-camera profile will not automatically apply.  I wish it did.  You can however, change file simulation profiles at any time in LR
To do it semi-automatically, matching the FS you set in the camera, see my X-LR plugin.
Photo of Chris Lipscombe

Chris Lipscombe

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks.  I checked out your product and am impressed.  Purchased it.  This is a feature that I have emailed Adobe about a few times. Not to take away business from you, but Adobe already did the hard part with all their profiles for the different cameras, Fuji included, and all they have to do is apply them automatically.  Anyway,  not trying to steal this thread, just wanted to say thanks.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1164 Posts
  • 288 Reply Likes
Glad you like it! I have asked Adobe myself many times over the years.
Photo of Tanja- Tiziana

Tanja- Tiziana

  • 5 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Sadly, I've switched over to Capture One for my Fuji processing. It's really too bad, but at this rate of improvement, one can't keep waiting for Adobe.
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 60 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
I've switched over happily after being with Lightroom from day one. I far prefer capture One.
Photo of Matt Angley

Matt Angley

  • 13 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled fujifilm RAF files (watercolor, worming, and oil painting effect).

I've had Adobe Lr for ten years now and I love the workflow and editing tools it offers. I just recently switched to Fujifilm and have discovered the shortcomings around Adobe's Fuji file rendering problems. It's been a known problem for a long time that Adobe does not render Fujifilm files very well. If you zoom in, anything with fine detail ends up looking like an oil painting mess. If you try to sharpen a Fuji file, the image becomes "wormy". I unfortunately will be discontinuing my Adobe software package and will be migrating to another software because I have very little hope that Adobe will be fixing these handful of issues surrounding Fujifilm anytime soon.

One thing I think Adobe needs to understand is that FujiFilm is a major player in the photography industry now and it would benefit them to get on board with reading and displaying Fuji files, especially now that it's so easy for your customers to just walk away from your software with the subscription based service
Photo of DAVID MINTZER

DAVID MINTZER

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thank you.  I'm tired of resisting the lure of LR's competitors like Capture One.  I'm tired of Adobe doing nothing about this HUGE problem for Fuji shooters.
Photo of Matt Angley

Matt Angley

  • 13 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Fujifilm X-Trans handling.

It is no secret that Lightroom does not handle Fujifilm files well at all. It creates very undesirable worming and/or oil painting effect that are frankly downright atrocious. I understand this is because Lr is built to handle files from Bayer type sensors used by Canon, Nikon, etc. but my question is when will Adobe finally take the time to PROPERLY handle X-Trans files? Fujifilm is officially a major player in the photography game and they should be taken a little more seriously. Furthermore, much smaller software companies like Iridiant have managed to render X-Trans files just fine so why can't Adobe figure it out? With it being so easy to just cancel your monthly subscription, I would think Adobe would be doing everything they can to fix these very blatant issues before they start losing customers, myself included. Adobe, just fix this issue that has been plaguing Fuji shooters for literally years. I love the user interface and workflow of Lr but I'm very seriously considering ditching Lr for Capture 1 to gain the image quality I can't get from Adobe
Photo of Patrick Philippot

Patrick Philippot

  • 480 Posts
  • 138 Reply Likes
I'm very seriously considering ditching Lr for Capture 1 to gain the image quality I can't get from Adobe
I would say, refrain from doing this. I purchased a C1 license to handle my X-Trans file. C1 also has a lot of problems and an awkward user interface that should be re-designed. Moreover, updates are becoming extremely expensive.

My current best solution is to use Iridient X-Transformer which gives excellent results and allows me to work from within LR.
Photo of Matt Angley

Matt Angley

  • 13 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Good to know. I've been trying out the free version of Capture 1 (version 11) and I agree withy you. The interface is cumbersome. Way too much clicking around from menu to menu to get to different tools. As much as I hate Adobe right now, Lr still wipes the floor on user interface. Everything is in the right place and easy to get to. Does the worming/oil painting effects go away when you first process in X-transformer? and when I bring it back into Lr, are the film simulations intact? Those are the two things I want most
Photo of Patrick Philippot

Patrick Philippot

  • 480 Posts
  • 138 Reply Likes
Does the worming/oil painting effects go away when you first process in X-transformer?
Yes. And you get much more details than in LR.
and when I bring it back into Lr, are the film simulations intact
Yes, they are still available. Actually, I'm doing nothing in LR before the file has been converted to a DNG by X-Transformer. Then, the DNG can be handled like the original file. You can download a free demo. Just try...
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 90 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
> Way too much clicking around from menu to menu to get to different tools. 

you know that you can customize that and group tools in tabs as you wish ? or make them floating too ?

> As much as I hate Adobe right now

"... Adobe, do you realize with monthly subscriptions, people can just cancel and move to another developer?..." 

that is what I thought... blah-blah-blah
Photo of Matt Angley

Matt Angley

  • 13 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
1:1 zoom on a mossy log taken on my X-T3 + Fujinon 18-55 kit lens. Capture 1 on the left, latest version of Lightroom as of 12/11/18 on the right. Same file, no edits done to them at all. This shot is straight OOC. I did not sign up for oil painting classes then I switched to Fuji. This is atrocious and the fact that Adobe has done next to nothing to fix the problem speaks volumes to their feelings towards their customers opinions. Adobe, do you realize with monthly subscriptions, people can just cancel and move to another developer? Why haven't you guys figured this out yet?
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 5103 Posts
  • 1996 Reply Likes
Technically the other one is just a user to user forum that's hosted by Adobe. There are support staff that post there occasionally, but issues can easily get lost in the volume of content, whereas this site is set up specifically to track bugs and feature requests and specialist staff monitor it for issues. So over there is a bit more potluck, whereas here gets in front of the right people.
(Edited)
Photo of Adam Lewis

Adam Lewis

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for clarifying that. Good to know for the future. Unless somebody else releases something suitable at which point I'll be off in a flash!
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 93 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
> That's a really stupid argument from DP Home

I read these whinings about Fuji demosaick for ages... Adobe Camera Raw team knows about demosaicking quality for X-Trans very well... so at this moment you need to vote with your wallet or suck it and wait, that's it... I personally simply use X-Transformer with ACR and CaptureOne based on what I want... I certainly keep Adobe products because I use other cameras
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 93 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
> IF you don't understand that what are you doing here?

unlike your useless musings what drives the progress I simply move the progress with my wallet ($$$ -> C1) - feedback was provided to Adobe a lot... if they can't do it after all that time there is reason for that... it might be the issue of how their code is written (see stupid suggestions about using DCP profiles in C1 form people who have no clue how C1 works) or for example something similar to the reason related to Foveon & DNG (see ex Adobe's employee Zalman Stern public comment as to why - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/22605268 ) or why Fuji film emulations are hardcoded inside the ACR/LR code and not publicly available as new .XMP profile-presets... 
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
So, once again, why are you even here? If you've moved away from Lightroom and feel forums are "useless" it begs the question why you're actively visiting and even posting around forums dedicated to the thing you find "useless"

Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
4 years now, still top of the list, still a problem, and still no word or reply from Adobe reps....
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 158 Posts
  • 32 Reply Likes
Are you going to celebrate this anniversary somehow? :D
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
I sit naked in my studio and burn my old copies of Lightroom; one for each year that passes by without a reply from Adobe. I am currently up to Lightroom 4 so still a few more to go until I burn my current copy rendering Lightroom completely gone from this place.
Photo of DAVID MINTZER

DAVID MINTZER

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
From the sad but true category--when Adobe reported quarterly earnings at the end of August, their profits skyrocketed.  Which probably partially explains their lack of action on Fuji raw files.  In other words, the base of Fuji shooters, and those who use Adobe Lightroom to develop their images is probably not worth the effort.   Anyhow, it appears as if there are several other players trying to take that very small portion of the LR community and thats a good thing!  
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Innovation down, support down and yet profits up. They have a monopoly right now and that speaks volumes for the way customers are treated. There's room in the market for smaller developers but it's hard with such a force the size of Adobe.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
This might be a tricky one. Imagine they will implement better Fuji RAW processing. Great, right?But what should happen really? Should it be applied only to newly added photos? Or should it be applied to the all pictures in the cloud you already edited and tuned (including noise, sharpening...) and mess them a little maybe?

I am all in for improvements, but this aspect of implementation should be part of this discussion.
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 16 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
I guess a change like that would have to be part of a new process version, so you would actively have to update old images.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
That would require an GUI changes like adding button or additional option to the right click menu just for Fuji .RAF files. 
And only for that one-time operation. Imagine you decide to apply that to all of your pictures. You probably go to All photos, filter just Fuji cameras, select all, right click, click something like "Process with new Fuji engine" and that would be pretty much it. And you will have this option inactive and greyed out and sitting there for the rest of the days :D
(Edited)
Photo of Carissa Massongill

Carissa Massongill, Employee

  • 4 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Official Response
Hi Everyone,

We are happy to announce the release of Lightroom Classic CC 8.2. With this release, we’ve introduced a new feature called Enhanced Details.

Photographers using cameras featuring X-Trans sensors should see an improved rendering of their Fuji raw files.

To learn more about how this new feature works check out the blog post:  https://theblog.adobe.com/enhance-details/

Cheers,
Carissa
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 45 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
OMG! They did it, they actually did it! 
Photo of Tanja- Tiziana

Tanja- Tiziana

  • 5 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Details at 100% still look pretty watercolour awful.
Photo of Roberto Ornelas Orozco

Roberto Ornelas Orozco

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
OMG, I switch to Capture One already... But let give it a try.
Photo of Aleksei Isachenko

Aleksei Isachenko

  • 34 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
Sorry,  the camera model is Fuji X-T20, I forgot
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 5851 Posts
  • 1282 Reply Likes
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?
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
Rikk, I just gave up, killed Lightroom, restarted machine and works like a charm now. 
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 5851 Posts
  • 1282 Reply Likes
Good news!  Glad a restart helped.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)
Photo of Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
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
Photo of ke77eth

ke77eth

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)
Photo of Lesley Burdett

Lesley Burdett

  • 4 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
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?





Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1194 Posts
  • 302 Reply Likes
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!
Photo of Lesley Burdett

Lesley Burdett

  • 4 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
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? 
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1194 Posts
  • 302 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 16 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 151 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
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.