Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Fuji-XPro1

May 31, 2012 2:23 AM

I have just sent this email to Fuji and would ask Lightroom to liaise with Fuji to get this right ASAP.

 

"I so want to buy an X-Pro1 but have been waiting for Lightroom to include the camera as that is my preferred software. I am therefore very disappointed by the reports of the results of converting raw images from the camera using Lightroom 4.1. Given the quality of the in camera processing of jpeg images will you PLEASE liaise with and co-operate with Lightroom as I won't be buying the camera until this is resolved (and I won't wait forever)!"

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 4:13 AM   in reply to JohnLoomes

    John, this is a User to User forum where users try to help each other. Yes Adobe employees do drop in but if you have a complaint about functionality you are best o post it here along with example images.

    Or you can post examples here showing your results and how you obtained them and we can try and assist you to use Lightroom to get what you want.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 6:43 AM   in reply to JohnLoomes

    So, what reports where?

     

    I hope you aren't referring to the ISHOOTSHOWS.com blog...the author's conclusions are likely flawed and he did not provide a raw file for peer testing and offered zero information on how he processed the raws and at what settngs. The odds are they were at detail Detail settings compared to the in-camera JPEGs that likely had built-in sharpening. But we don't know because he didn't say...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 8:08 AM   in reply to JohnLoomes

    Again, these two "articles" only show web JPEGs without supplying process settings nor a sample raw file. So we don't know wghat the truth is...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 8:20 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Jeff,

     

    Hi.

     

    The Chromasoft post is mine - it's part of a series on the X-Pro1's sensor. The raw is the lowest ISO test image from DPReview, and all settings in LR are at default.

     

    Happy to provide more info if it's useful, but I'm sure Eric, Thomas & co are aware of the issue.

     

    Regards,

     

    Sandy

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 10:00 AM   in reply to sandy_mc

    sandy_mc wrote:

     

    The Chromasoft post is mine - it's part of a series on the X-Pro1's sensor. The raw is the lowest ISO test image from DPReview, and all settings in LR are at default.

     

    Sandy, so, can you adjust the Detail settings to come close to the camera JPEG? Default isn't really the final IQ to judge...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 10:17 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Jeff,

     

    Originally, I just looked at all the converters at default settings. But I just tried the detail setting in LR4.1 now, and, no, no joy - the chroma smearing remains whatever I do.

     

    Regards,

     

    Sandy

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 10:48 AM   in reply to sandy_mc

    sandy_mc wrote:

     

    But I just tried the detail setting in LR4.1 now, and, no, no joy - the chroma smearing remains whatever I do.

     

    You're talking about the red smearing in the letters? Yeah, I see that too...it seems to be mainly a red smear as most other colors aren't. I'm sure Eric and Thomas will address this...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 31, 2012 10:56 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Jeff,

     

    Yes, the red smearing is the issue I identified. And agreed, I'm sure Eric and Thomas will be looking at it.

     

    Regards,

     

    Sandy

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 2, 2012 5:22 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    "Again, these two "articles" only show web JPEGs without supplying process settings nor a sample raw file. So we don't know wghat the truth is..."

     

    I wrote one of those articles too and I can tell you that I would be happy to supply a RAW file, but give us some credit. Do you think that we're just out to make Lightroom look bad or we just don't know what we're doing? We aren't - everyone want's this to work. The smearing is there like it or not. It's not an issue with sharpness settings. All those of us who have written about it are experienced photogrpahers and photoshoppers. I've been using Photoshop since version 2.5, so how about giving us some benifit of the doubt and not just assuming we've somehow entered a buch of settings just to make it look bad. I've tried every combination of settings and spent hours trying to find a way to make this go away, but there is a fundamental problem with the de-mosiacing on the X-Pro1. If you don't want to believe us fine, but give people a bit of credit.

     

    I'd be happy to work with Adobe and supply Raw files to Adobe

     

    Message was edited by: fxgeek

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 20, 2012 10:18 AM   in reply to fxgeek

    There have been several threads about the XP1 issue in the Fuji forum.  I don't know if chroma smearing is the source of the so called "watercolor" effect that makes landscape vegetation look plastic, but that is my major issue with LR4.1 for XP1 raw processing.  I provided a link to a raw file that demonstrates this issue in the following thread, post #5.

    http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php?/topic/4920-x-pro1-and-lightroom- 41psacr-optimal-image-quality/

     

    You don't need to do any processing to see the problem.  Just open the file in LR4.1 and look at the vegetation in the background at 100 or 200%. The same file does not exhibit this problem when opened in RPP(1559beta).

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points