Lightroom/Camera Raw: Proper handling of Fuji RAF files for sharpening

  • 18
  • Question
  • Updated 4 months ago
  • (Edited)
It is widely known that trying to sharpen Fuji RAF files from their X-Trans II sensor is not done properly, as adobe hasn't built in proper handling for the file.  

There are several products on the market now that DO handle RAF files properly when sharpening. 
When is Adobe going to get on board with this?
Photo of David Speck

David Speck

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 18
Photo of Roger Styles

Roger Styles

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
LR's default sharpening is set up for Bayer type sensors used by Nikon, Canon etc so I am not sure how Adobe could handle that type of sensor and the Fuji X-trans...but surely they are clever enough?  Anyhow with the Fuji XT2 which is an X-trans III sensor Fuji jpegs are very sharp and by comparing RAF and jpeg Fine versions of the same image I have found that applying a sharpening preset on import to the RAF gives an acceptable result.  I use Amount 40, Radius 1.0 (the default), Detail 40, Masking 30. I then may alter the masking on individual images depending on the subject.  I never had a camera with an X-trans II sensor but I have read that the Detail needs to be higher, perhaps 60?  Hope that helps.
Photo of Jaroslav

Jaroslav

  • 68 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
This is issue for me too. I am getting a way better pictures when shooting directly to jpegs than from Lightroom processed RAWs. What a shame...
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 93 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
use x-transformer from Iridient = $30... a little hassle but so much to gain (including switching off undesired optics corrections parameters_
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 167 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
Works terrible on Android tablet (not at all). Already tried on Windows but was not so satisfied with results.
Photo of DP HOME

DP HOME

  • 93 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
our mileage is certainly different (but I naturally don't use any tablets for raw conversion because of their poor CPU/GPU performance)
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 167 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
Totally agree. I like Lightroom CC for importing on the go on the long trips on foot and sorting them on my long way home. Tablets are no comparison for a PC in performance but in portability.
(Edited)
Photo of bitonio

bitonio

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Amount 40 is a bit too much, you should be good with 25.
I try to not change any sharpening setting, just toss the 40 value which is the new default.
Iridient X Transformer helps a little bit, but not much. It is relatively inexpensive and you can try it out.
The best RAW transformer for RAF is Capture One. The latest v11 is just amazing for this. I wish Adobe team would be able to get something as good -- NO WORM EFFECT.
Photo of bitonio

bitonio

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
For those interested in a real life example of the evil 40, have a look at this PNG.

On the right, LR with default setting, on the left Unsharp Mask 100/1/1 with the RAF opened with 0 amount of details.

Click on the image for fullsize.
Lightroom 7 vs Photoshop RAF sharpening
(Edited)
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 25 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
I'm on the verge of leaving for Capture 1 because of this. I can get it looking almost acceptable with A LOT of tweaking. Capture 1, or even SOOC jpeg can get it right first time.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 166 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
Can you please show us some jpeg export from Lightroom CC and Capture One for comparison? I am specifically looking for better noise handling . I do want to lose all possibilities of RAW shooting but .RAF processed in Lightroom looks just horrible.
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 25 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
I would do if Creative Cloud hadn't just lost all of my files...
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 25 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes

This is after a lot (30 mins) of tweaking in Lightroom, I'll do a similar for at import and with no sharpening etc. Capture 1 was with no extra work. Shot was at 200iso too.

Full photo for reference:
(Edited)
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 166 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
Wait... what? How come you lost all your files?
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 25 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
No idea - I went to attach the files and my Creative Cloud folder was gone. I looked in Finder and it was gone. It came back after a restart though.
Photo of Lewis Craik

Lewis Craik

  • 25 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes

This was before tweaking the sharpening.
Photo of Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Same here . Three issues really : 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 . 2.Second is that it applies high detail levels by default on import . 3rd 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 3 things make adoption of .RAF files a real PAIN
Photo of Retrofokus

Retrofokus

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Same here! Even Luminar does a stellar job with RAF in terms of rendering and sharpening. Adobe on the other hand, not so much. Foliage is a nightmare! Looks like someone went ballistic with a paintbrush and green watercolors. Adobe should win a prize for having the worst rendering of RAF files ever.
Photo of Elia Mazzaro

Elia Mazzaro

  • 21 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Have you tried to put deait slider at 0-10 (default was 50) and leave sharpenign arround 35-60 depending from the image?
Photo of Retrofokus

Retrofokus

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have tried numerous different settings. Nothing can mitigate the watercolor effect, though.
Photo of David Speck

David Speck

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I fixed the problem.

I went back to Nikon with the Z7. Resolution and sharpening are no longer an issue, among other things.
Photo of Pierre Gérard

Pierre Gérard

  • 11 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
A comon workaround is to set sharpening differently, like with a small amount and a large detail value. But even with careful setting (and no oversherpening), LR still lage behind Capture One Pro and Darktable, for instance. There are well know demosaicing algorithms for X-Trans ; just take one off the shelp and code it into LR.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 34 Reply Likes
Yeah that is much better but it also is not a thing you should do manually on hundreds of pictures, right?
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1223 Posts
  • 316 Reply Likes
Correct, you don't do it manually on hundreds of pictures. Lightroom is very efficient adjusting hundreds of pictures at once - use AutoSync, apply your own preset, set the default, for example.

(Edited)
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 34 Reply Likes
That is suitable for Lightroom Classic only. There is not sync in Lightroom CC, nor adjustable default values. Just copy/paste settings that applies  to ALL values, not just those edited, doing a mess.
And yes, you can create preset for just sharpening/noise reduction, but Lightroom does not allow you to apply profile for more than one photo at the time. So... more ideas?
(Edited)
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1223 Posts
  • 316 Reply Likes
Sure, use Classic.
Photo of dwbmb

dwbmb

  • 162 Posts
  • 34 Reply Likes
Classic is not part of the subscription.
Photo of Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

Paulo Sergio De Iudicibus

  • 3 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Same here . Three issues really : 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 . 2.Second is that it applies high detail levels by default on import . 3rd 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 3 things make adoption of .RAF files a real PAIN