Camera Raw/Lightroom: Fuji X-Trans Support?

  • 179
  • Problem
  • Updated 2 weeks ago
  • (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

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 4 years ago

  • 179
Photo of Pol Syrett

Pol Syrett

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I've just spent over an hour on line (after a half hour wait from someone to speak to) with an Adobe rep trying to sort out why my trial version of Lightroom 6 won't download raw files from Fuji Xt10.  Do these folks want us to use their software or not?  I used Adobe's raw converter to covert RAF to DNG, but it took ages.  Should I be changing to another software provider?  I've liked using Lightroom 5 with Olympus and Nikon files, but it is disappointing that Fuji appears not to be supported in the same way.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2651 Posts
  • 339 Reply Likes
You're replying to a 2-year-old thread about general X-Trans processing.  You're issue seems more about LR version vs camera model.

The X-T10 was first supported by LR 6.1.  LR 6.6.1 is the current version.

What precise version of LR do you have?  Use Help / System Info..., top few lines, to find out.
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
As Steven has said - this is a 2 year old thread with NO REPLY from Adobe. They don't care, Fuji users have all jumped to better alternatives like Capture 1 and Iridient.

Adobe support sucks.
Photo of Pol Syrett

Pol Syrett

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks very much for replying... I didn't want to spend hours sifting through fora threads when I believe that Adobe should provide more direct assistance!  I downloaded a trial version of Lightroom CC (as part of the photographer package), and there doesn't seem to be any facility to update it.
Photo of Steve Sprengel

Steve Sprengel, Champion

  • 2651 Posts
  • 339 Reply Likes
The CC Desktop app--the infinity symbol in the system notifications area, is what looks for an update and downloads and installs that update. 

Updates are released every few months so it can take a few days for the CC app to notice a new update has been released. 

So if you've just installed LR CC then it is probably the 6.0 version, still. 

You can manually initiate an update check from the CC App by opening it, clicking the gear at the top right, and choose Check for App Updates or some such phrase.

If that doesn't work you can manually download and run the update patcher.  The 6.6.1 patch and all the earlier ones, which you don't have to install, first, can be found, here:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-downloads.html


Here's where to initiate an update check in the CC desktop app:
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
2 Years - the 5th most "me too'ed" problem on Adobe's forums, and still no word from Adobe.

If you are here for help, don't bother. Just use Iridient or Capture 1, far better RAW processing for most cameras. They also listen and respond to their customers which is pretty invaluable to be honest.
(Edited)
Photo of Pol Syrett

Pol Syrett

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks, really appreciate your advice!
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
No problem, moving to Capture 1 is like a  free bump up to another 8 megapixels! Really enjoy processing my old Fuji X Trans images and seeing the new detail.
(Edited)
Photo of JackAmp

JackAmp

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I had an online chat yesterday with an Adobe Technical Support person that relates to this forum topic (in fact he even directed me to it!).  I thought I'd add a couple of screenshots incase it is of interest to anyone. I trialled LR for a month and love the ease of use and workflow...but feel frustrated with the RAW image quality. I contacted Adobe to ask 1. if they acknowledged the issue, and 2. if they were working on a solution.  It appears they do - but only have a non-disclosed timeline.  Fingers crossed the timeline is soon - because then I will happily buy into the product. 

Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
They confirmed in some update notes some months & years back that it was aknowledged to be an issue and they were working on it. That gave Fuji suers hope but I think it's long enough that we can deduce this is BS. 

Iridient and Capture 1 work just fine and they are run by far smaller teams, it's basically not something Adobe want to do for Fuji users.

Probably too busy working out how to avoid paying fair taxes
Photo of bo helm

bo helm

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Better RAW support for Fuji X E1 and the other X Sensor cameras from Fuji.

Please support Fuji X E1 RAW better than it is implemented at the moment in LR 4.3. The IQ is far from acceptable. Till you have improved I have to work with jpg! See attached differences. Thanks for updating the RAW support
Photo of Björn Wunderlich

Björn Wunderlich

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Better Sharpening for FUJI X-TRANS.

Dear Adobe-Team,
it's a bad joke. I'm using PS since PS6 now, and i always used LR/ACR/Bridge or my Photowork (Nikon/Canon). Now i'm using Fuji to and we all know, that Adobe can not handle the RAF-Files well! The Details are smooth painted with mushy details.
And we all know, irident or Capture1 are making the job really well. I cannont accept, that Adobe knows this problems since the xpro1 came out and nothing changed till now!
Now i switched to Capture1. What a shame!
Photo of Björn Wunderlich

Björn Wunderlich

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Better Sharpening for FUJI X-TRANS.

Dear Adobe-Team,
it's a bad joke. I'm using PS since PS6 now, and i always used LR/ACR/Bridge or my Photowork (Nikon/Canon). Now i'm using Fuji to and we all know, that Adobe can not handle the RAF-Files well! The Details are smooth painted with mushy details.
And we all know, irident or Capture1 are making the job really well. I cannont accept, that Adobe knows this problems since the xpro1 came out and nothing changed till now!
Now i switched to Capture1. What a shame!
Photo of Pieter Delleman

Pieter Delleman

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom/ACR and the Fuji X sensors.

Would you please be so kind to make Lightroom work with the Fuji X-sensor RAW files (eg Fuji X10, X-pro1 )?
Photo of Filip Georgiev

Filip Georgiev

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Fujifilm X-Trans support progress.

Does Adobe thinks to improve the demosaicing method for Fujifilm X-Trans sensor in future? I'm sure they notice the thousands and thousands complains and I understand that the current demosaicing save the image from a different artifacts so I'm just asking is Adobe Staff working on this problem?

I found out that the last version of the raw support resolve the issue with the maze pattern due the green channels equilibration on Olympus which I'm grateful, but I hope it would not take that long to fix (if ever do) the problems with the Fujifilm X-Trans sensor.
Photo of moxford

moxford

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom: 4.4+ Xtrans is (still) lagging behind Irident Developer and CaptureOne....

See attached. Yuck.

Photo of moxford

moxford

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom/ACR Fuji Xtrans support in 4.4+ continues to have issues..

Coloration and rendering (gamma?) do not appear to be working correctly in all cases.

re: http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/...
Photo of Andy Charnas

Andy Charnas

  • 28 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled ACR/Lightroom: Bad Fuji X-E2 raw processing.

Very unhappy with the Fuji X-E2 raw processing. White balance is very bad, and changing it is on a hair trigger between too blue and too yellow. I made a custom profile with colorchecker and everything gets way too magenta. Unusable. JPEGS out of the camera are much, much better.
Photo of Antonio

Antonio

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Fuji X-T2 RAF Wormy noise.

Unbelievable that Adobe is still not able to process or convert RAF Files properly. When will the X Trans Sensor finally be supported properly? I Can't use Lightroom anymore because of wormy artifacts/ noise being created when the image gets loaded. How is this even possible!?
Photo of Mark

Mark

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm also very disappointed with the rendering of RAFD files in Lightroom (esp. green foilage). 
If you use Iridient Transformer and process the resulting DNG in Lightroom the difference is day and night. 
Also the latest release of Capture One (10.1) is nearly as good as Iridient. So this shows us the the problem is solvable...

I'm really pissed of by Adobes silence and poor performance on this problem and the slowness of Lightroom in general. Looks to me that Lightroom Desktop isn't a strategic product for them anymore...
Photo of James Whitehouse

James Whitehouse

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I was approaching the end of my subscription year for LR and tried C1 again before renewing. The C1 subscription is a little more expensive but boy have they improved it in just a year since I last tried it! And not just for Fuji files, everything is improved it seems. If you dial NR right down (off) there is just no smearing or plastic effect like on LR RAF, which is a huge difference. The colour is significantly better with much less work. I could go on, but the point is in that year, C1 has developed into a tool I don't mind paying more for. In that same year LR has... well, it's basically stood still. Apart from getting increasingly buggy and unreliable. And they still haven't got basic exposure correct when using Auto ISO on a Fuji X-Pro 2. It's a joke. Bottom line, I cancelled my subscription and moved to C1. If Adobe ever take LR, and Fuji, seriously again, I'll consider coming back. Oh, and by the way, the Adobe promise that if you cancel your subscription your catalog will still work (just develop will be disabled) is a lie. It simply gives you a 7-day trial. I hate dishonest companies. That alone is reason for me to jump ship.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
You should withdraw your "dishonest" statement, not least because it undermines whatever credibility the rest of your post may have.

After cancelling a subscription, your catalogue does continue to work but you can't go into Develop or Map or use Mobile. The 7 day limit (IIRC I can't be bothered checking for you) applies to getting access to anything you have on Mobile that hasn't yet synced down into your catalogue.

These things go in turns, and C1 itself stood still for over a year. Did you ever try importing compressed XPro2 or XT2 raw files into C1 until recently?
Photo of Mark

Mark

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
John: Capture One reads Fuji compressed RAWs since 10.1
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
Yes, which is why I said "until recently", Mark. Was that a month ago, or two? 6-8 months behind LR for the XT2 compressed files, and almost a year behind LR for the XPro2's.
Photo of Mark

Mark

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
That's true, but reading compressed RAWs isn't a priority for me personally anyway.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm a Lightroom user since Version 2 and I'm very happy with the overall product. But when testing C1 10.1 I discovered that I can get much better image quality (esp. fine green details) out of it compared to Lightroom.
If I use Iridient Transformer and import the resulting DNG into Lightroom it seems I get better detail then using the RAF file directly.
And in my opinion  Adobe is a little bit slow in improving their X-Trans demosaicing to a level that C1 or Iridient is delivering.

Or maybe I'm doing something completely wrong:

LR Version (Sharpening Amount 30, Radius 0,8):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yia3zqkcdju28f9/lr.jpg?dl=0

C1 Version:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/voe5f53xpadqtvm/c1.jpg?dl=0

RAF File:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7yd6ud67zocwuro/20170420_London_XT2_0010.RAF?dl=0

Maybe you can check yourself with my RAF file if you've some time, because I would be more then happy to continue using LR/PS as my main image management and editing solution.


/Mark.
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 59 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
LOL. The image quality issue with Xtrans was acknowledged as an issue a long time ago, and someone is complaining that Capture One took a year? This thread is three years old!!!

I'm cancelling too, for the exact image quality reasons mentioned above. Love Capture One and I've been with Lightroom from the beginning.

Adobe is the largest, wealthiest, and highest earning RAW software company by far, and they haven't done anything for three years?? There are so many new start-up companies that outperform Lightroom with Xtrans files, it's just downright embarrassing at this stage, not to mention disrespectful to Fuji shooters. It's unfortunately time to say goodbye, at least until they fix this mess.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
Well, Mark, it's a priority for anyone who seriously uses a program if it can't import the files, and it was one of a series of gaps in C1's claims of XTrans support which were fixed in 10.1 and yet marketed as "Improved X-Trans Processing". C1 has finally taken a step forward again, as Adobe did before, but the point is these things go in turns.

I am very surprised that I haven't yet arrived at Detail panel settings that can be be my  starting point for all  XT2 images. I always feel I can match whatever comes out of XTransformer or C1, if I put anything through them, but I do seem to have to review each set of pictures more carefully in LR than seems reasonable, tweaking the Detail panel settings dependent on content. One thing I do avoid is the Pete Bridgwood recipe which you  may have encountered - I have no view about whether his Detail +100 worked with earlier cameras, but I don't think it's relevant with the newer 24mp. I'd also question whether people review the final print.
(Edited)
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
My complaint was that it took almost a year for C1 to support the raw file compressed format at all, Mike-Photo.... During the 3 years of this thread, Adobe has greatly improved handling of Fuji raw files but you can never please everyone.
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 59 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
John

1) Image quality issues in X-trans is STILL an open ticket that Adobe says it is working on. Phase One has caught up and now overtaken Adobe, to the extent that I have to leave the Adobe platform.

2) Capture One are far slower than Adobe to support cameras, I've made that point elsewhere in Lightroom forums. So yes it took them time to support compressed format, and to support some tools in their system for X-trans. But now, they HAVE done so, and the results are, to my eye and many others, far superior.

3) I really don't want to move off Adobe, I'll lose the ability to work with my edits to existing photos for the last however many years Lightroom has existed. Do you think I'm happy with that? I don't want to move, but Adobe is really not making an effort to keep me. No real updates, older and worse processing of RAW files, painfully slow (and I've had to switch off GPU processing because of another bug). Capture One just works right now, for me!
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
Overtaken? Maybe with the default, but more than that, it's only subjective. C1 is definitely quicker with XTrans files though, and outside that area its tethering and its focus mask are superior, but its cataloguing features are primitive, and its UI overcrowded and fiddly. I've owned it for 10 years too.

No real updates? Apart from Reference View, Guided Upright, Dehaze, more local adjustments, the whole Mobile area... "what have the Romans ever done for us?"
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 59 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
John, I said clearly "for me". I'm not telling everyone to leave Lightroom.

I don't use reference view, guided upright, or mobile. I never used  the catalog in Lightroom. In Capture One I use sessions, and that works much better for me.

There are other tools like the masking and layers, colour editor, that work better for me in Capture One. YMMV.

And I didn't just looking around at other software because I was bored. I was frustrated! Image quality is my primary interest, and FOR ME, how I shoot, what I shoot, and how I process, Capture One is streaks ahead of Lightroom.

Finally, if Adobe addresses the issues that I am experiencing, I would probably come back. My issue that would remain is now the licensing. Having experienced what I have, I would now prefer to not license, so as to retain my older edits, and it's not an option with Adobe.
Photo of jimkit

jimkit

  • 38 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Truth is for most photographers, image quality rules all and for that crucial variable Adobe sucks balls compared to nearly every other raw convertor, and let's be honest, it's pretty inexcusable and just another example of distain Adobe have for their customers.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
Ever heard the expression echo chamber? Sorry for putting a contrary view.
Photo of James Whitehouse

James Whitehouse

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
John - I stated Adobe has placed me on a 7-day trial now I've ended my subscription, because that's exactly what has happened. A quick search shows I'm not the only user who has experienced this, regardless of what Adobe once promised -

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2174621

Refer to post No. 6 in that thread.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
That refers to getting access to photos that are only on Adobe's mobile servers and haven't synced down, as I said. Assuming your 7 days is over, try opening your catalogue and you should find it will open and only has the limitations I mentioned.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 956 Posts
  • 196 Reply Likes
BTW If you are in the same situation as that poster, I think you'd be on firmer ground complaining about competence rather than dishonesty!
Photo of James Whitehouse

James Whitehouse

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My 7-days isn't up, so I only have your word for it, as there was no mention anywhere when I finished the subscription that I would be placed on a 7-day trial. The only reference at all I could find to what happens when a CC subscription ends, re: Lightroom, was an old Adobe blog post from around 2013 which said something along the lines that the catalogue would remain active, but the develop module wouldn't. Nothing about a trial version was mentioned. At present, as an end user, I've cancelled a subscription and have been placed on a 7-day countdown to... what? Usually trial versions expire after the countdown, so I assumed I would lose all access (again, there's nothing in the email I was sent after cancelling, or during the sign-in process giving me 7-days on LR which detailed any of this). So, I'm not yet sure 'dishonest' doesn't apply.

However, let's be charitable, let's say you're right (it's Sunday evening, I'm relaxing after a nice walk, and I really can't be bothered to argue about something I don't honestly care about, because it's not the reason I cancelled my sub, it's something which annoyed me after the fact). So, let's say you're right and after the trial LR remains partly functional and allows me catalogue access after the 7-days. Let's say it's just incompetence, as you say. Fantastic, we've gone from dishonest to just confusing and incompetent. Well that's about the level of where X-Trans support has started and ended for me since getting a Fuji camera three years ago - from utterly rubbish to merely mediocre. Not exactly glowing praise for a product I'm paying good money for every month.

I now feel I've personally given Adobe more than enough time, far more than is reasonable, to finally solve the detail issue and others, and they're still outstanding. I disagree this is cyclical - C1 and others have always handled X-Trans files better, Adobe has never been ahead in any of the tests I've carried out over the last three years of Fuji ownership. I've persevered with LR as I'm heavily invested skills and workflow-wise, and money-wise (plugins, etc.) in the hope, no, expectation, that Adobe would provide a real fix. Well, three years is enough.
Photo of Tanja- Tiziana

Tanja- Tiziana

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It is wildly frustrating that this is still a completely unresolved issue.  I've begun using other software for files destined for print and editorial use and inevitably will have to go to Capture One it seems. 2 years and not even an improvement.  Why am I paying a monthly fee for outdated software that can't keep up? Frustrating.
(Edited)
Photo of t.linn

t.linn

  • 16 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Go C1, Tanja. Their X-Trans support was good in v9 and is even better in v10. The limitations present in v9 are gone. Plus you can purchase a perpetual license that will make it less expensive in the long run then relying on Adobe's rental scheme.
Photo of Patrick Philippot

Patrick Philippot

  • 261 Posts
  • 37 Reply Likes
Tanja,
I'd rather recommend Iridient X-Transformer (for Windows) which gives  even better results than C1 on X-Trans RAW files and integrates well with LR. A cheaper solution than C1. For the Mac, there's the full Iridient Developer.
(Edited)
Photo of Howard Dickson

Howard Dickson

  • 12 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Just out of interest, how do you integrate x-transformer without LR applying its own rendering?
Photo of Patrick Philippot

Patrick Philippot

  • 261 Posts
  • 37 Reply Likes
Howard,

The product comes with a plugin allowing you to send the RAF file directly to X-Transformer, bypassing the Edit in... procedure.

Before this plugin was available, I used a LUA script doing (almost) the same :

    local LrApplication = import 'LrApplication'
    local LrTasks = import 'LrTasks'
    local catalog = LrApplication.activeCatalog()
    local LrShell = import 'LrShell'

    local function openWithExternalProgram()
       local programPath = "C:\\Program Files\\Iridient Digital\\Iridient X-Transformer\\Iridient X-Transformer.exe"
       local photo = catalog:getTargetPhoto()
       if photo ~= nil then
          local photoPath = photo:getRawMetadata('path')
          LrShell.openFilesInApp({photoPath}, programPath)
       end
    end

    LrTasks.startAsyncTask(openWithExternalProgram, "openWithExternalProgram")

Copy this text in a file named "Edit in IXT.lua", store that file in  C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom\Scripts, relaunch LR and you should have a Script menu beside the Help menu. Launching the script should load the selected RAF file in X-Transformer directly.

You can use this script for other external programs to which you'd like to send the currently selected file directly. Just edit the program path.
(Edited)
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 59 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Four months down the line,  don't have any Adobe products on my computer, and Capture One is phenomenal for me. It gives me all the processing I need, and the workflow with Sessions is a dream.

The processing tools are very powerful once you learn the product. I can honestly say there's not one feature I miss in Lightroom. And, the new luma etc. masks are already in Capture One.

It's a once-off investment as opposed to a license, although I could move onto a license basis as well. I really don't think cost is an issue, even if you purchase it outright it's way less expensive than a good lens.

Really, instead of having to fiddle faddle and go through multiple hoops to get reasonable quality, just try Capture One and see if it works for you.

Mike
(Edited)
Photo of Tanja- Tiziana

Tanja- Tiziana

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Yeah, this seems like it makes the most sense.  I've had the Capture 1 shop window open in my browser all month, but really don't want another huge piece of software on my system. I have a 13 year career cataloged entirely in Lightroom and can still use it for my Canon shoots (studio work), so I am really hoping for a proper solution from Adobe as I'd probably have to hang on to both pieces of software right now and that's a a lot.
Photo of Mike-Photos

Mike-Photos

  • 59 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Hi Tanja
From what I see on the Capture One forums, your Canon files will also process far better in Capture One. Have you tried them?
Photo of Tanja- Tiziana

Tanja- Tiziana

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
No, never - like I said, I've been thinking about it purchasing it, but having to run both pieces of software is not an happy prospect . I can't trash the LR catalog as it's fully keyworded and searchable so I've just been waiting in disbelief. One can't help but feel like the moment they take the plunge, this will finally be addressed.  At this point, it's just been too long though, so one more update, perhaps, and then I'll just have to prep the system to run Capture One as well.  I'm sure it will be excellent. I have no about what you're saying there.
(Edited)
Photo of Howard Dickson

Howard Dickson

  • 13 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Patrick, thanks for that useful info! So, what you're saying is that LR doesn't apply any of the nasty rendering during the import phase... only when you come to 'develop' it (probably from the Detail panel)? I was worried that not externally converting 'before' importing would mean LR's initial import would in some way create a corrupt initial preview build, and thus leave me with a flawed original in the catalog?
Photo of Patrick Philippot

Patrick Philippot

  • 356 Posts
  • 65 Reply Likes
Howard,

Importing an image in LR, even if you apply a preset during import, doesn't affect the RAW file in any way. Your corrections (+ the default corrections) are stored in the catalog and optionally in the XMP file. When you use the Edit in... command or the Export command, the current corrections are applied to the exported JPEG or TIFF transmitted to the external program. The Edit in... command cannot directly send a RAW file to an external program.

In order to have X-Transformer be the first player in the demosaicing process, we have to send it the RAW file directly, either by using the plugin provided with the product or by using the script I mentioned above. Upon return, X-Transformer will produce a DNG beside the original RAW file. You'll be able to further apply corrections to this DNG file as if it were an original RAW.

Also, you can  handle your RAF files in X-Transformer directly , before importing them in Lightroom. Just, you'll import the DNG files produced by X-Transformer instead of the RAF files.

So, in any case, the basic processing can be done in X-Transformer in order to avoid the problems generated by LR on the images produced by an X-Trans processor and then use the LR tools to further process the DNG file.

This is the best solution I have found to handle this long lasting issue in LR. C1 gives good result but not as good as those produced by X-Transformer, especially when the well known artifacts that LR is generating when processing X-Trans RAF files have more chances to appear.
Photo of Jorge Pinto Monteiro

Jorge Pinto Monteiro

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I mean... Used to get better images with a X-A1 and vintage lenses... This thread is 4 years old, can't figure out what's wrong with Fuji and Adobe! I'm learning Capture One at the moment. Still not happy, I might get back to  the X-A1 before selling the Fuji equipment and got for another brand.
Photo of Jorge Pinto Monteiro

Jorge Pinto Monteiro

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
And keep the Capture One software too!
Photo of Stefan Smuts

Stefan Smuts

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I just downloaded and started using Iridient developer - I didn't realise how bad lightroom's sharpening actually was until now. I cant believe they still have not mananged to fix this problem. 

Adobe? Anything? What are you guys doing? Just buy Iridient developer already - seriously. 
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 67 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
Yes, hire that guy, guve him fortune.
Photo of David Nogol

David Nogol

  • 8 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Capture One released cheaper version for Fuji users (or express version for free). And rendering of details is much better than Lightroom :( I really want to stick with Lightroom, but as a Fuji user I don't see any reasons to use LR :(
Photo of Howard Dickson

Howard Dickson

  • 13 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
After a long disappointing wait for Adobe to man up and address the rendering and sharpening of Fuji RAW images, I've eventually settled on using Photoshop's Unsharp Mask, rather than using third party solutions. At the very least, this keeps all processing within the CC software, returning images to the LR catalog.

Process image as normal in LR Develop module.
Zero amount slider in Detail panel
Right-click, Edit in... to Photoshop
From top menu... Filter, Sharpen, Unsharp Mask...
Amount 100-150, Radius 1-2, Threshold 1-2
Adjust to your personal taste

I find this gives far better results than LR sharpening, although it does involving LR/PS toggling.

Rgds,
Howard