+1 ACR support for the latest Fuji Cams! They are loaded with features and should be popular camera. And in my opinion, there nothing in the market currently can match ACR's overall image quality!
Kim, I'm like you, I have little interest in an unintegrated workflow. I FULLY agree with you re the best way is to just open raw files into Photoshop and go. There's a lot of value to the integration that provides.
These people make software - that's all. It is by their good graces alone that they continue to add camera support for new cameras and give you free updates after they release a major version of Photoshop.
Traditionally, since a piece of software doesn't know about hardware invented after it's released, you might assume you have to wait for the next major release. But not in the case of Adobe. Usually you have to wait only a few months for an update.
Adobe no doubt employs some hard-working individuals whose only job is to reverse-engineer all these disparate raw formats so that they can deliver to you an updated Camera Raw as quickly as possible. But, as with any company, the budget for this is necessarily limited. Also, perhaps the Fuji raw format is technically giving them a lot of trouble, and they're unwilling to release until it is fully understood.
And finally, lets not forget that Adobe has put a GREAT deal of effort into developing an open raw format standard - Digital Negative (DNG) - to fix the root cause of this problem (all the different proprietary formats) - and that the camera manufacturers are simply AVOIDING adopting it. DNG has been standardized for YEARS now.
Emphasis in one's requests for support is fine - and I'm sure they know very well that you and a bunch of others would love to have Fuji camera support ASAP. But don't browbeat Adobe about their limitations keeping you from buying some other company's camera!
Have you written a letter to Fuji demanding that they start having their cameras put out the DNG format, or providing their raw format specifications to Adobe?
Well, I suppose I asked for it ... I knew that I should add mitigating phrases to avoid the appearance of browbeating Adobe, but I figured that my unwavering commitment to an all-Adobe workflow would have provided sufficient evidence that I am not criticizing the Adobe engineers. In fact, Adobe technology is amazing, and the major features we get each release in the the bridge / CS / ACR workflow are usually stunning. For example, the noise handling in ACR6 is breathtakingly good. So I have no complaints whatsoever with their engineering.
Regrading the RAF format: It is already supported for 16 cameras, including the SR Sensor series of cameras that have the same Dynamic Range extension blending issues as in the EXR sensors. Binning with the EXR sensor is a trivial algorithm, so one is hard pressed to see this as a major technical challenge, although a deep integration would actually change DR mode blending curves depending on the position of several of the sliders in the main panel. Still, I do not believe that I am wrong that the hegemony enjoyed by Adobe, at least on Windows, does carry some obligation regardless of the fact that they have clearly earned it.
Regarding DNG format: I doubt that this is a format issue ... RAF is already supported as mentioned above. If it is a technical issue at all, it should lie with the split-nature of the sensor and the algorithms required to correctly demosaic the data and blend the dual sensor modes. Also, perhaps, to detect the appropriate mode in the first place, although there are tools like EXIFtool that correctly decode Fuji's various modes, so again this is not a barrier of any significance.
But I agree Fuji could certainly support DNG, and even improve compatibility by performing the demosaic step themselves. That frees all the converters from the need to detect and integrate the DR extension blending, although this would leave some image quality on the table because the curves used to blend the two sensor halves should ideally change according to the position of the sliders, as already mentioned. Thus, the mosaic format would still be the better alternative, and we are right back where we started.
• Interpolation: DNG enables ﬁle storage either in mosaic (CFA) form or in demosaiced form.
Generally, a mosaiced ﬁle is preferred because it represents the original data the sensor
captured and enables maximum conversion ﬂexibility. It is also smaller than a demosaiced ﬁle.
In some instances, however, saving a demosaiced ﬁle can improve compatibility, particularly if
the camera sensor contains an unusual mosaic pattern that all converters do not support.
And yes, I will write a letter to Fuji suggesting that they consider DNG format. With lossless jpeg compression they can also rid themselves of the RAW format bloat issue that has always plagued them. If they choose to demosaic before storing the file, then this level of compatibility with ACR is certainly much better than nothing.
However, it is too late for these new cameras anyway as they are completed. So my request to Adobe still stands.
By the way .... I am still using some parts of your dSLR Tools action set. Specifically the Clarify and Local Contrast actions, which I find superior to the one slider in ACR. The use of layers makes their effect extremely tunable and subtle. Thanks for creating those ...
I think these latest cameras show that the EXR sensors are not going away. Adobe need to start supporting these sensors with these new camera. I currently use lightroom for my workflow with Canon, Panasonic and Fujifilm cameras. I am interested in the HS20 and would like to avoid using Fuji's RAW software but if Adobe doesn't support these again then I will look at other alternatives as RAW support is critical for my work.
Hi Kim, I'm sorry my post seemed a bit defensive... Clearly you and I think a lot alike.
The one thing you mentioned:
Regarding DNG format: I doubt that this is a format issue
I guess we can't know what's holding them up, though I still say a good guess would be rooted in economics and priorities.
And the fact that a file has .RAF at the end doesn't mean it's consistent with other models - that's been proven with Canon .CRW and .CR2. But if Fuji HAD implemented the .DNG format instead of another .RAF variant, this would be a non-issue already - you'd be able to open the very first raw file with the Adobe software you already have. That's why I encourage people to make their desires known to their camera makers.
I do hope you get the support you need for the Fuji models from the Adobe team soon, and thanks for using my products.
I guess we can't know what's holding them up, though I still say a good guess would be rooted in economics and priorities.
Agreed. By definition.
But if Fuji HAD implemented the .DNG format instead of another .RAF variant, this would be a non-issue already - you'd be able to open the very first raw file with the Adobe software you already have.
There are two possibilities if Fuji implement DNG:
1) Fuji demosaic the RAW data prior to writing DNG. In this case, Adobe has nothing to do. But that holds true for the RAF file as well. It is likely a trivial matter to support a RAF file if this is the format Fuji uses.
2) Fuji write pure RAW data in the original mosaic. In this case, the file is not compatible with ACR no matter which format provides the envelope. Either way, Adobe must write appropriate algorithms to handle the multi-mode split sensor data.
DNG is a great common format for the majority of sensors, but does not provide a generic solution for complex sensors such as EXR.
Thanks for the clarification. It's clear I've been thinking about DNG a bit too simplistically.
I've sent a request to Tokyo headquarters for Fuji to consider DNG as an alternate output format with demosaiced data, thus providing immediate compatibility with all converters that support DNG. I also suggested that they take advantage of the option to use lossless jpeg compression in order to cure their bloat issue, although I did not use that word :-)
Thanks for crystallizing my thoughts and spurring me on to contact Fuji ...
Greetings, I`m more one waitting the "bus" that take the Fuji customers to, ultimately, can use the full quality of workflow in CS5.
Unfortunately I don`t using the CS5 softs because they doesn't supporting the .RAF yet.
Kim, could you tell us what Fuji answered to your request?
I wasn't really expecting a response from Tokyo. I hope they consider it and that they make the RAF files simpler by interpreting the DR information in cam and then writing a very much standard RAW matrix that is as simple to support as, say, the HS10's non SCCD sensor. That would make all the difference and would not eliminate (in my opinion) much if any flexibility in the RAW converter, since ACR probably won't support the current complex RAF anyway.
The problem with DNG is the NIH syndrome: "Not Invented Here." It's a notorious political/emotional barrier to progress in all of technology.
There might be more to it than that.
A camera maker assumes, once you've bought into their line, that you will have to set up all their software to deal with the images from their camera. For the sake of argument, assume we're talking about Canon and you've got their various apps, e.g., DPP, installed. Time passes and you get used to using their software and develop a workflow around it.
Now: What camera are you likely to buy next? One that requires a whole new setup and learning process, or another one from their stable where you can continue to use their software just as you have been?
The last thing they want is for you to be using some integrating piece of software (e.g., Photoshop) that allows you to spread your money around to various other camera vendors freely.
It is to their advantage to try to lock you in to their brand only in every way they can.
There are lots of other areas where they do this - just try finding lenses and accessories that are compatible across camera vendors, for example.
As far as I know, some of the camera vendors have never published a specification describing what's in their raw files, and the fact that the files can be opened by Adobe software is a testament to the prowess of those who have reverse-engineered the formats!
It's a simple case of capitalism vs. what would make consumers' lives better.
The concept of locking the consumer into proprietary technology is rather obvious.Everybody does it as much as they can.
And it makes perfect sense if you have a software team that has the chops. Canon has such a team and Fuji does not. DPP is a decent converter and Fuji's converter is a bit of a joke. Which is no doubt why they now partner with Silkypix to ship their custom converter in the box. That has already been announced for the new cameras and has worked for the S200EXR.
Silkypix is not half bad. It's just not integrated with the Adobe workflow. Of course, Adobe could make it easy to snap in an ACR replacement, but they too are not willing to give up their proprietary "edge" ...
So we sit between these two companies with Adobe showing no interest so far in handling the rather kinky EXR mosaic (with the split sensor and multiple blend modes) and with Fuji showing no sign of writing out a pseudo-RAW file in a standard single Bayer mosaic after transformation from the EXR mosaic.
Which means that died-in-the-wool Adobe users (which includes a whole lot of serious enthusiasts and professionals) will look at other brands because they *do* work with an Adobe work flow. Which further means that Fuji is ignoring a pretty good marketing opportunity, since enthusiasts and professionals make up the majority of testers and bloggers out there. At least the ones that are listened to by the rest ...
I still think it should be Fuji who bends here, but I would be very happy if Adobe decided that the EXR technology was unlikely to die in the near future and supported it just to be a leader ...
Kim Letkeman wrote:
Of course, Adobe could make it easy to snap in an ACR replacement, but they too are not willing to give up their proprietary "edge" ...
"Snap in" is the wrong term. "Plug-in" is what you want.
I haven't yet made a Format plug-in myself, but it's pretty clear Adobe facilitates 3rd parties to create and install a plug-in to open/save specific file formats. They publish the Photoshop SDK for savvy developers to use to do this.
Snap-In, Plug-In, Tomato, Tomahto ... the point being that ACR is the only RAW converter that can participate in an all-Adobe workflow. You cannot replace ACR with another converter and have it launched in the same way as ACR when you load a NEF, RAF or other RAW file ...
For Fuji to do all the work to write a serializer and deserializer to perform the work of creating a *plug*-in for translation from and to EXR RAF with the ACR side seeing only a standard BAYER mosaic makes little sense ... that would tie them to ACR only for the investment. Instead, those same algorithms could be placed inside the camera and written to a DNG envelope, thus ensuring compatibility with most converters on the planet ...
The Fujifilm S200EXR is a great camera and Adobe needs to support the RAW file format it produces.
Yes, I own other cameras that are supported by ACR, but Adobe should support the S200EXR as well. It's a great camera and Adobe Photoshop could make those images even better if it supported the S200EXR RAW file.
Pay attention, Adobe! Don't ignore loyal customers who want to use your software. I'm tired of being forced to open and edit my S200EXR files in another image editor and then only open JPEGs in Photoshop. I should be able to open the RAW files from the S200EXR in CS5 just like I do with my Canon and Olympus cameras.
I too would like to see the Fujifilm f550exr format suported by Adobe. I've been using Photoshop since it was first released back in the day. I just bought the f550 because it's one of the few megazoom super compacts that saves to RAW. I think by doing a little hand processing I can overcome some of the awful detail loss that happens in-machine. So Adobe please support the RAW format of the Fujifilm F550. The most popular Fujifilm camera in memory. The entire first shipment was sold out in pre-orders. This camera will certainly have the numbers you need to justify supporting it.
The F550EXR has exceeded even *my* high expectations. This new CMOS-EXR sensor is simply amazing. What is not amazing is the level of effort needed to use Silkypix in an Adobe work flow ... frankly it's a PITA.
Adobe ... this sensor is stunning ... we need your support in ACR.
Thanks for posting your request. The Photoshop team is experimenting with a new feedback mechanism that should provide more visibility for each request through a publicly searchable solution with community voting. Just visit the following link and submit the request. http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/new
Going forward this should be more efficient than a U2U thread and others can provide their support for your request without needing to add a new post.
Lightroom & Camera Raw Product Manager
Yes. Yes. Adobe: Pleaes prioritize ACR for the lastest great Fujifilm cameras, e.g. the HS 20.