Fuji X-trans raw conversion

I have both the Fuji X-E1 and the X100s. The conversions of the raw files in ligtroom, while much better than they were, still have a way to go to match raw conversion from programs like Photo ninja and Iridient. I'm wondering if Adobe is working on improving the raw conversion of X-Trans files in lightroom. Love lightroom, but the raw conversion of fuji files is still problematic in areas of fine detail, like tree branches and leaves. The effect is something like an halo around these features, and is worse once the files is sharpened.

I'm very interested in this topic, too. Actually, I'm sure there are tenth of thousands of photographers interested, including professionals. I just purchased Lightroom, but this is a great chance for Adobe's competitors to get clients. Let's see if Adobe answers to this thread, and if they will do something to fix the poor X-Trans (but also micro 4/3 like Olympus OM-D E-M1) support. They have the experience to do something in very short times, let's see...

Similar Messages

Fuji x-trans raw files import extremely slow

WIn 7 pro 3.6 AMD quad core 16 gb ram 1.2 tb raid 0 WD Velociraptor drives. Lightroom 5.6
I have a fairly quick system and my 24mp Sony raw files import and render full sized previews reasonably quickly -but it takes about 5x longer for my Fuji X-T1 raw files to import and render full size previews. If I import into Capture One Pro 7 or 8 or into Photo Ninja both the Sony and the Fuji files import and render previews quickly. It is only Lightroom that is so incredibly slow with the Fuji raw files.
I have used LR since version one and my files have always imported reasonably fast , however, the Fuji raw files have been slow to import from the very first import. Ex - yesterday I imported 312 raf files (Fuji raw files) and it took 31 minutes to complete. I also imported 257 Sony raw files and the import plus full sized preview rendering was completed in just under 5 minutes.
Am I missing something in the preferences or import workflow?
Thanks for any help
BOb

Thanks for the quick reply! :-)
The setup is identical as when I work with my Nikon-files; I always start by "manually" copy the files from the memorycard to correct location/disk.
In LR I use the "Add" option when I import to my catalog, so the file transfer is not part of the equation....
Even the large files from Nikon D810 is faster to "add" than the files from the X-T1.
But, as you write, it might come down to X-Trans-files (RAF) is not as optimal for Adobe processing as the Nikon raw files (NEF)...
M.

Fuji x-trans RAW in LR and ACR

Will LR and ACR be updating support for the Fuji x-trans sensor anytime soon?
I wouldn't want to change my raw processor...

No one from Adobe will say anything, and no one else knows.

Management of Fuji X-Trans RAW Files

It would be really helpful if Adobe staff who monitor this forum could make a comment on work proceeding to improve the handling of RAW files coming from X-trans sensor cameras. I've recently started shooting a Fuji X-E1 along with my Nikon D3s and, while the jpgs are quite good, the RAW handling by ACR results in significant artifacts which limit the usefulness of Lightroom and Photoshop. While I understand that product development timing is uncertain, it would help the entire Fujifilm user community to know that Adobe was at least "working on it".
Thanks!
Jeff

See an Adobe employee’s response, today, at the end of a long thread about the subject started back at the end of May:
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/camera_raw_7_1_with_xpro_1_raw_detai l_area_change_to_oil_painting_effect#reply_10842854
Jeffrey Tranberry (Chief Customer Advocate):
The team is aware of the issue and investigating what can be done but cannot offer an ETA at this time.

Lightroom quality on x-trans raw files.

I see a lot of complains on Lightroom's ability to decode fuji x-trans raw file. Is it now getting better?

LR adjusted for the foliage
I am not sure we are providing good guidance to typewritter99. Developing a raw file is an interpretation by itself and it is the operator's choice to bring the emphasis on what the focus should be on the picture. You are focusing on a part of the picture that would represent less than half an inch by a quarter should we printed this on an 11x17 sheet of paper. Moreover, the area you are looking at is out of focus to start with. Frequently we would throw parts of the photo out of focus to drive attention into the subject. Why are we trying to rescue it in the first place? What is it bringing to the overall picture? (and as you can see top left, it is not that LR does a worse job than Iridient).
I mean.... this is the detail we are looking at in the context of full picture posted in the article (http://www.thevisualexperience.org/web/processing-x100s-raw-with-iridient-developer-part-2 /):
The capture above was processed with Lightroom from the RAW file shared in the article... can you highlight any quality issues? Color bleeding, artifacts? I guess that was the point of the original question.
I would certainly recommend typewritter99 to download the free trials of all available converters and test them to see which one fits his needs best from a holistic point of view. But in honesty I cannot personally say I find any quality issues on Lightroom when processing my X-E1 files.

Fuji Raw Conversion Software as External Editor in Lightroom

Anyone know whether Fuji's Hyper Utility RAW conversion software (if I remember the name correctly) will work as an External Editor in Lightroom. (Just read an article by a Nikon photographer who uses Capture NX this way in Lightroom and wonder whether the same is possible for Fuji.)

Thanks; I guess my question (which I did not state clearly) is whether if, at the end of processing in HV-S3 and "Save" the saved file (likely a TIFF) will automatically appear in the Lightroom Library associated with the original RAW file; this would be the chief advantage over just opening the folder with the file in HV-S3 to begin with, but it occurs to me that this may be a dumb question (as I've just downloaded and begun to use Lightroom and can't experiment with HV-S3 yet as it has not yet been released, but will be shortly). Thanks again.

Lightroom 3 raw conversion and fuji xpro 1

have just bought a fuji xpro 1 and found that lightroom 3 doesnt support raw conversion. i realize that lightroom4 has, but i dont want to spend x amount of dollars when lightroom 3 meets most of mr requirements. does anyone know if or when lightroom will provide the raw conversion

platen wrote:
have just bought a fuji xpro 1 and found that lightroom 3 doesnt support raw conversion. i realize that lightroom4 has, but i dont want to spend x amount of dollars when lightroom 3 meets most of mr requirements. does anyone know if or when lightroom will provide the raw conversion
Perhaps never. The last version in series 3 was: 3.6 and if you have got it then it will be the last one. If it is just one off thing then you can use the trial version of LR 4.1 otherwise you will have to buy an upgrade.
I take it you have done the upgrade by going to:
Help >> check for updates
Good luck and let us hope you can do something about this.

Upgrading Raw Conversion X-Trans Censors

Good Morning,
I a thinking of upgrading my LR to the new 5. I was able to try Irdient new upgrade for X-Trans and my file are so much more crisp and detailed then they are in LR with your support for the X-Trans. Are you going to upgrade you support to match those of Irdient. I am sure you have read the reviews and have used the product for your own edificaiton. If you are not, I may have to switch, my business depends on my best product.

I am running 4.4. Adobe may want to see for themselves the difference in the raw conversion. Please let me know if an upgrade is in the works.
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 06:32:12 -0700
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Upgrading Raw Conversion X-Trans Censors
Re: Upgrading Raw Conversion X-Trans Censors created by DdeGannes in Photoshop Lightroom - View the full discussion
What version of LR have you tested with the X-Trans sensor? I believe it was upgraded in LR 4.4. Have you tried LR5 a thirty day trial is available for free.
Please note that the Adobe Forums do not accept email attachments. If you want to embed a screen image in your message please visit the thread in the forum to embed the image at http://forums.adobe.com/message/5509723#5509723
Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/5509723#5509723
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/5509723#5509723. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
Start a new discussion in Photoshop Lightroom by email or at Adobe Community
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

Nikon D3 Raw Conversion difference between ACR4.4 and CaptureNX

Digital Photography Review has just published an in depth review of the D3. In it they compare raw conversions by ACR 4.4, ViewNX 1.0.3 (Capture NX), and Capture One 4.0.1. The ViewNX conversion mirrors the camera's jpg standard; but there are significant differences - to my eye at least - between that and the colours in the GretagMacbeth chart of the ACR result.
Is this sort of thing common knowledge among the LR community?
I would have thought this a rather fundamental issue; but would welcome any thoughts from those more familiar with this level of colour expertise.
Anyone interested can see the dpr result on page 17 of the review at
www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD3/page17.asp

It's not unique to a D3. Check out http://www.damianharty.com/Purple.html for my take on it all - including a step-by-step guide to the calibration process Michael mentions.
Others get very uptight about the fact that this isn't a "proper" calibration and I'm sure that technically they're right, but life is short and this route works well for me. It also ends up as an LR preset and is super-fast to apply.
If "accuracy" was the only consideration, the camera wouldn't have "vivid" and "portrait" and all those other settings in it. We also wouldn't have had, in days gone by, the choice between Fuji Velvia and Kodak Portra - see http://www.damianharty.com/Film.html for my take on all that, too.
Both my articles are typically short-attention span things that appear on the net. Try "Real World Color Management" for a genuine guide through it all.
Or else don't worry about it.
Damian
PS I'm sure I used to be able to format links more nicely than that. Where did that go?

Lightroom 4 and Fujis X-Trans filter, when will there be a solution?

I tried to search the topic before, but I did not find a result, so I started my own question.
Converting a RAF Raw from Fujis X-E1 or X-Pro1 cameras will result in a harsh blurry JPG. The inCamera-Raw-Conversation or the RAW-Converting from Fujis delivered software results are much much better.
I know, even with Canons or Nikons LR4 does sometimes a better or a worse job than the dedicated converters, but with the new Fujifilm Cameras it is unusable.
Adobe may know the problem, because well known camera reviewer like dpreview stated there point on this topic already in their reviews. Also Fujifilm itself told me they reported the issues to Adobe.
My question here is, what is the current status?
The new 7.3 or rather LR 4.3 do not give any improvements on this problem. Which is very disappointing, especially for early X-Pro1 owners.
Thank you! :-)

Just clicked Forum (german adobe-website) in the Lightroom section. Sorry if I chose the wrong board :/
The camera only can shoot RAW. I think even my Canons can't shoot DNG if I'm remembering right.

Fujifilm x pro 1 raw conversion

Dear Apple Aperture,
In the Fujifilm X Pro 1, you have one of the most exciting and in-demand cameras of 2012, and in my view, since the Nikon D90. But still we have no plugin for working with it's disruptive raw format within Aperture 3.x. While this capablity delays, I am forced to edit raws outside of Aperture making for a clumsy workflow, as I first have to edit and convert images in Silkypix. I know you are busy, but is this because of Fuji, or are iPxxx's the only important products these days...
I love you Apple, but please get us x pro 1 raw conversion soon!
g2

Apple is officially not here. We are a user-to-user forum, hosted on Apple's servers.
The Apple-approved method for making suggestions and feature requests for Aperture is via the feedback form: "Aperture→Provide Aperture Feedback".

I have an A77 and see that DxO RAW conversions look different

Several RAW conversion comparisons on the web amongst A77 users are pointing to markedly better conversions and noise handling currently within new DxO 7 eg. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&thread=39970661
I know that Sony's RAW have historically taken a while to arrive at optimal conversions from previous experinece with my A350. When Lightroom 3 came along it was like getting new cameras for most Sony Alpha users with from RAW performance at last matching Nikon from effectively the same sensors.
Can you let me know the likely time lag till ACR and Lightroom will have an update to this initial default to really match the DxO performance. Otherwise, to be honest, despite being a Lightroom user since the original Beta stages and a passionate supporter and advocate, I may have to consider jumping ship. Working exclusively in RAW I do need to be using the very best conversions possible to make the best out of my investment in my camera equipment.
I don't know if this lag with ARW conversions is because Sony don't co-operate with Adobe early enough or whether because Sony is only number three in DSLR share it gets less priority within Adobe than Canon and Nikon, but some timeline on a revised version of Lightroom to address this for the new Sony Alphas would be great.
Many thanks from a long time advocate who really hopes I can stick with Lightroom,
Cheers,
Paul

Hi Hal,
Many thanks...I’ll give it a try. Not trying to cause trouble as I genuinely am a fan of LR, but if they always lag on getting to grips with Sony RAWs it’s a major drawback for Sony users.
Cheers,
Paul

Lightroom vs. Photoshop Raw conversion

I have noticed that the Lightroom RAW conversion looks about 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter compared to Photoshop on the same image with the same settings (I'm using LR 2.4 and Photoshop CS4). Anybody else notice this or have any thoughts? I'm assuming they use the same RAW conversion engine.

Thanks for the response. Well, when I export from LR to a JPEG and do the same from Photoshop (viewing them in photoshop), I get two slightly different toned images (I mistakenly said the LR images are brighter...they're actually darker). Viewing them this way should remove any monitor discrepencies (I'm working on a calibrated Lacie 724 monitor with 120% Adobe 1998 gamut so that should not be an issue).

Panasonic Lumex DMC-LX1 raw conversion for Aperture doesn't work.

I've seen many people having raw conversion problems. Direct import of Lumex raw files to Aperture does not work.
Adobe DNG conversion of raw to dng does not work.
I'm running on Photoshop CS.
Perhaps my DNG conversion settings aren't right? Tell me what they should be.
Do I have to go as far as changing the raw.plist or whatever it's called.
Would CS2 with the Raw conversion Plug-in work instead?
Remember that..."If all the woman lived across the sea, what a great swimmer Yellowman would be"!
2.0 Duelly G5 4gigs ram. 23" Flat Cinema Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Joe,
good to see that you are reading these posts. I am sure that many users whose cameras' raw files are currently not supported by Aperture would love to help out in any way they can.
However, as we are living in a converging world, why doesn't Apple talk with Adobe and share some of the information used for RAW conversion? I'm thinking dcraw which (according to a note in its source code*) is using data provided by Adobe... and that same data is also contained in the Raw.plist.
Thus, if Adobe knows something and shares it with dcraw, and Apple uses some of the dcraw code (at least the m2 matrices found in Raw.plist are equal to the dcraw ones), why can't you guys all share the same information, and thus speed up RAW support for all cameras?
Just a thought.
Kindest regards,
Karl
* This is the bit:
Thanks to Adobe for providing these excellent CAM -> XYZ matrices!
void CLASS adobe_coeff (char *make, char *model)
powerbook G4 17 1.33 GHz Mac OS X (10.4.6)

"Unable to save the raw conversion settings. There was a write permission error."

I just built a new workstation for processing photos using PS CS5. I use external drives to store my images as I find it easier for backing up as well as for when I want use my laptop for sorting, etc.. I copied over all my old "Collection" files, and of course, had to "fix" them once on the new machine. Once pointed in the right direction, the collections all fill out correctly.
When I go to process a collection though, I encounter an odd problem I can't seem to sort out. I can delete files, rename files, copy/paste to the external drives, etc.. What I can't seem to do is add Labels, Ratings, or modify RAW settings. I mean, I can use ACR to make adjustments, I just can't seem to save them.
The system just ignores label, rating commands completely. When I try to save an ACR adjustment I get this error. "Unable to save the raw conversion settings. There was a write permission error."
The files are NOT write protected. I'm set up as the owner of my workstation, with complete control of the system. I can't seem to find any useful information about this error because the "write permission error" seems to only be happening on installs, so that's all I can find help for.
My system:
Intel Core i7 970@ 3.20GHZ
24.0 GB RAM
64-bit OS - Windows 7 Pro
DX58S02 Motherboard
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580

Thanks for replying. I've been going crazy trying to fix this.
To answer your first question; I use sidecar XMP files. If everything from my archive was shot in RAW I'd try converting to DNG and see if embedding the changes directly in a file worked. Unfortunately, a lot of my old stuff was shot in JPG, so sidecars seems to be the best choice.
When I add labels, ratings, as well as change RAW settings on files I place on my workstations HD everything works. It's only when I try to do these things with the same files on removable drives that I run into trouble. The drives I use are Transcend 640GB StoreJet 25ms connected via USB.
I don't think it's a UAC problem. At least, to my understanding, doesn't that control how your machine alerts you to program changes? I looked into how to change ownership, and did so, but that didn't work. Here's a link to what I mean: http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/windows-7-access-denied-permission-ownership/
I'm stumped. I also hate the idea that I'll have to go through various folders to find images from already created collections, copy them to a new folder on my HD and then work on them. Then I'll have to put them all back... ugghhhh

Fuji X-trans raw conversion

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for