ACR/Lightroom: Fuji XT1 files seem to be lacking in detail

  • 3
  • Problem
  • Updated 4 years ago
  • (Edited)
I noticed when I processed some Fuji X-T1 files from RAW that the amount of detail seemed significantly lower than I was expecting. As a new user I thought this might just be how the sensor is.

However, DPReview comments on the same issue here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujif...

They note that the in camera JPEG is sharper and Capture One Pro is even sharper still.

Is this something you guys are still working on? I'm slowly switching to Fuji and obviously always want to give my clients the sharpest files possible. I'm a LR user and really don't want to switch...

Thank you for your attention :)
Photo of Phil Drinkwater

Phil Drinkwater

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
  • sad

Posted 4 years ago

  • 3
Photo of Phil Drinkwater

Phil Drinkwater

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Hi,

There's been no reply to this yet... I know you guys are busy but it would be good to know a) you know about it and b) you're going to do something about it. I'm about to switch to Fuji and I really don't want rendering which is such poor quality at 100%.

I've written about it on my blog and you can see an example. I can make the JPEG and RAW file available to you if that would help:

http://www.phildweddingphotography.co...
Photo of David Franzen

David Franzen, Employee

  • 96 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Hi Phil,

If you could post the original JPEG and RAF files, as well as the XMP sidecar file capturing the settings you used for the screenshot from ACR, that might be helpful.

Thank you,
David
Photo of Phil Drinkwater

Phil Drinkwater

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Hi :)

Thanks very much for the reply. You can find two files with RAWs, JPEGs and XMPs in this dropbox ZIP file:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hui8uw6tdgn...

I tried a number of different settings in terms of sharpness and detail, but couldn't find a reasonable balance between sharpness / detail and softness - at least not compared to what I'd expect from my 5d3 and others seem to be reporting as available from other RAW converters.. This is a problem which is being talked about on various forums and people are pushing others' to different RAW converters which obviously isn't good for Adobe :(

If you manage to achieve something I've not managed to achieve, I'd love to know how :)

Thank you!

Regards,
Phil
Photo of David Franzen

David Franzen, Employee

  • 96 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Phil,

I've received the files. Thanks for posting them. Just to verify, the JPEGs are straight from your camera, correct? (Looks like they are.)
Photo of Phil Drinkwater

Phil Drinkwater

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thanks for your confirmation!

That's correct - I've done nothing to them :)

I would say there is A LOT of excitement about Fuji in the pro world at the moment but I am seeing comments around the place about LR not being the best convertor. I would hate to see Adobe lose out on what will definitely be a fantastic system :)
Photo of David Franzen

David Franzen, Employee

  • 96 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Hi Phil,

After looking at the images, I want to make sure I understand the detail problems you see with these shots. To my eye, the first thing that stands out is the lack of definition to the blades of grass in the foreground, and sometimes almost artificial looking "smudginess" (for lack of a better term) in the grass. Are we on the same page so far? Playing with the sharpening sliders on the Detail panel tend to emphasize these unwanted sorts of details instead of brining out more, desirable, details in the scene.

Looking at the camera-produced JPEGs, by comparison, I don't think I see that the grassy details really rendered a whole lot better, however there does appear to be a little better definition of other fine details overall, for example the on the animal's backs.

Thanks,
David
Photo of David Franzen

David Franzen, Employee

  • 96 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
One more follow-up Phil. What lens did you actually use? The image metadata indicates the XF10-24mmF4 R OIS for image DSCF1446.RAF and the XF35mmF1.4 R for image DSCF1466.RAF, yet in your settings you've selected the lens correction profile for the Canon 35mm f/1/4 USM lens. Was that on purpose?
Photo of Phil Drinkwater

Phil Drinkwater

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Hi,

Thanks for the reply. I've not idea how that got set to a Canon lens, but I've switched it back and it's not made any difference in itself...

I think we're on the same kind of page, yes. What I found was that the Fuji files lacked sharpness. In order to recover some sharpness I tried what was mentioned in the original article by DPReview - add some sharpness and "detail". Currently it seems that the lack of sharpness is probably the overall issue, but in trying to add sharpness, the result is very "watercolour" like.

I thought I'd draw your attention to this article:
http://fstoplounge.com/2014/05/fuji-x...

While not specifically showing the same issue which I am displaying, it's more comments about how ACR/LR handles Fuji X files in terms of sharpness. It's been talked about on a several forums too now, that I've seen.

Thanks for your continued attention.

I don't suppose you could help me with my other issue at the moment, as you've been so helpful, which is a colour issue under tungsten lighting?

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

Regards,
Phil
Photo of Andreas März

Andreas März

  • 22 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Adobe please support R-L convolution sharpening and handle X trans files properly.
Just take a look at Capture One. There is so much detail when using their sparpening algorithms.
You really need to improve this in LR 6.