Lightroom support for Fuji X-Trans???

From DP review:
Just came back from D-Clic photo show in Montreal and had the chance to talk with Billy from Fuji Guys. He asked me if I was happy with my X-Pro1 and I said yes, very happy BUT would like Adobe and others to better support it (or at all in the case of Aperture...). I expected him to play it safe but he actually acknowledged the problem right away and told me that they recently signed a non-disclosure agreement with both Adobe and Apple and provided them with specs for supporting the X-Trans sensor !
He said he is also pushing strong with Fuji to add support for TIFF in the camera so that could be another good thing for some.
Lets hope this leads to progress...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3286994
Hope this is the real deal…

I had contact with Adobe support on Friday. They are aware of the problem, but could not confirm me that it will be fixed in LR 4.4. We need more pressure!!!

Similar Messages

  • Lightroom Support for Fuji Finepix x100

    This seems to be one of the few photo forums in which people aren't yet banging on about the Fuji X100. Time to fix that. Can anyone give advice about when Lightroom will be able to import its raw files?

    vegan hillbill wrote:
    Sure, appreciate that Adobe are unlikely to want to dig around here. You can rate jpgs aswell though, presumably this creates a sidecar? (Need to look). Can't see why this wouldn't get pulled over.....
    If they are using the EXIF maker notes section in the JPEG metadata, we have exactly the same problem. It can get quite messy to muck about in the custom metadata. Lr only mucks about in the proprietary metadata when it absolutely has to because the camera has unwisely hidden some info it actually needs (e.g., I think it does this for some camera and lens info). It doesn't really need the rating to do what it does.
    Perhaps an argument can be made if the EXIF Rating field is used by Fuji. But if it is yet more encoded camera cruft...
    You can easily make this determination by cracking an example image file open with EXIFTool and see where the rating is stored.

  • Proper support for Fuji EXR Raw Files

    There is still no proper support for Fuji  EXR Raw files.  On any Fuji X-series camera, the in-camera raw processing, including specifying options always outputs a far superior image that Adobe Camera Raw 6.  I've been using an X100 for some time now, and have really gathered some great images with it. But Adobe Camera Raw fails miserably to understand how to process these files.
    This is more of a complaint and feature request than a question, because I already know the answer. Adobe has not worked close enough, or at all, with Fuji to develop a Raw processor for the EXR pixel layout.
    The EXR pixel arrangement offers new possibilities, especially the ability to take an HDR image of a moving subject, and without a tripod. The elimination of the low-pass filter allows for more sharpness, and finally the noise pattern is much more "film-like".
    I've been using Adobe Photoshop for processing images for years, but have no compelling reason to upgrade without a proper conversion for Fuji RAW files.
    Adobe: Please work with Fuji to bring world-class support for EXR Raw images.
    Thank you,
    William

    Good day!
    Adobe has not worked close enough, or at all, with Fuji to develop a Raw processor for the EXR pixel layout.
    There seems to be a reason why Adobe has to reverse engineer RAW formats – the camera manufacturers don’t want their customers to use Adobe (and other) software to process their RAW files. (If their proprietary software gets better results then that’s understandable, but for how long are they going to support their own software?)
    Now maybe Fuji is more cooperative than others, but do you know that for certain?
    I've been using Adobe Photoshop for processing images for years, but have no compelling reason to upgrade without a proper conversion for Fuji RAW files.
    If the new/improved features of Photoshop CS6 have no significance for the way you process, manage, edit and touch-up photographs feel free to stick with whatever version of Photoshop you use currently, but be aware that hardware/OS changes on your side may some day make that version inoperable on your set-up.
    Also the upgrade path has been cut down to one version, if I understand correctly.
    Anyway, this is a beginners Forum, feature requests might be better posted over at
    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family
    Regards,
    Pfaffenbichler

  • Aperture 1.1......still no support for Fuji S2 and S3 Pro!!!!

    I just got the 1.1 update but i was devastated to see that Aperture is still not opening the Raw files of two of the most used camera among professional:Fujifilm S2 and S3 Pro!!!
    Even if i convert the files in DNG it doesn't support them
    I would like to know how can Apple describe Aperture as "Designed for Professional Photographer"..............
    Just look around, all pro application like Capture One or Camera Raw support those cameras,even the beta version Adobe Lightroom does it
    There are not excuse for this..... not anymore
    Thanks
    Ettore

    Ettore, It is clear that 2 things shape the Apple
    product pholosophy with "pro apps"; A total
    disregard of anything that does not guarantee a
    corner on the market and support of any system that
    does not lead directly to a hardware sale. The very
    poor handling of the bugs/deficiencies of Aperture,
    the poor (read nonexistent) communication with end
    users
    You mean like the mesages from Joe Schor on this forum? Or the whole web page announcing 1.1 features? Those non-existant communications?
    and the total disregard of what real
    professionals tell them
    You mean like focusing the 1.1 update on better RAW conversion quality, performance, and the addition of DPI features everyone was asking for?
    Given that Apple cannot fix every single problem I'd say they worked on exactly the problems bedeviling the most users.
    The disregard for Fuji RAF files is
    not surprising in that context.
    No, it's not surprising because (a) it's not Canon or Nikon, which most professionals are using, and (b) because the Fuji sensor is unlike other sensors and is therefore not quite as easy for Apple to use similar conversion techniques.
    The same can be said
    of Bibble and others, and their lame protestations to
    the contrary will fall on deaf ears. Like you said,
    Lightroom, which is still in beta supported fuji raw
    right from the start.
    Which is because (for better or worse) Lightroom sits on top of the ACR conversion engine that has been in development for something like three or four years! Give Apple a little time to add other cameras, in the meantime bug Fuji to push Apple to add support!
    <...>
    The geniuses at Apple will find
    that working pros pick the tools that help deliver
    the goods to the client
    <...>
    Yes they will, which is why Aperture has been so popular and will be even more so with RAW conversion quality addressed.
    <...>
    Thank goodness their are other software products
    available that come from companies that DO listen to
    their customers.
    <...>
    Yes, like Apple. All indication are that they do indeed listen to user feedback (indeed Apple reps themselves have said so) and the end results of updates also indcate they are listing. At PMA every single half hour presentation ended with "Send us feedback because we are listening".
    I don't think it's fair to tag Apple with being hopelessly out of touch with users just because they will not fix the only problem you care about.
    My camera is not supported by Aperture either, but I realize the reality of owning a camera that is not Nikon or Canon in today's market. Until then I simply import 16-bit TIFF images into Aperture and use it from there. Not having your camera supported directly is not really that great a limitation.

  • Support for Fuji X-T1 Lens profiles

    Why doesn't Lightroom 6 CC have the profile corrections/support for the Fuji X-T1 lenses?

    Are you seeing uncorrected distortions or just wondering why your lens isn't listed in the lens profile area?  For mirrorless cameras, like I believe the Fuji is, the lens profiles are built-in (perhaps even in the raw file, itself) and always on and there is nothing to select in the lens profile list dropdown because the profile is being gotten a different way.

  • Why no RAW support for Fuji X10?

    The Fuji X10 has been on the market for almost a year now and there still is no RAW support for it in Aperture. Why?

    Only Apple can asnwer the "Why?" questions, I'm afriad.
    Aperture menu -> Provide Aperture Feedback and let them know you want it.

  • Lightroom support for Olympus OMD E5 Mark II

    When will Lightroom provide support for Olympus OMD E5 Mark II  Hight Res RAW files?

    Whole thread on the issue here: Support for Olympus E-M5 Mark II

  • When will camera raw support for Fuji Xpro 1 will be available?

    Today Apple has just updated camera raw for new camera models but I can't find update for Xpro 1 ? Why does it take so long to have such update? Appple please makes update for Fuji Xpro 1. Thank you.

    You're not addressing Apple here, and no one knows any more than you do about what Apple will do.

  • Lightroom Support for Pentax K5IIs

    I just purchased a Pentax K5IIs along with upgrading from LR3 to LR4, but it appears that LR4 cannot read my camera's raw files.
    Assistance would be appreciated!

    While the current official version of LR is 4.2, and the check-for-update feature in the software you have installed will indicate it as up to date, there is a "release candidate" for the new 4.3 version available on Adobe Labs, often referred to as 4.3RC.
    This includes explicit support for both the K-5 II and the K-5 IIs.
    http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-3/?tabID=details#tabTop
    What you get with explicit support (and you will see this both with DNG and with PEF), is the benefit of Adobe's calibration of colour profiles, processing defaults etc for that particular camera. The initial position of the various adjustment sliders may still be zero, but that does not mean no processing is happening; with generic (unknown camera) DNG support such generic processing will, in my experience, not quite get the most out of the camera. Also, one may prefer to adopt (e.g.) Adobe Standard profile as the basis for editing, instead of getting no choices but "Embedded".  I don't recall exactly, but I am not sure if lens profile recognition works in this mode?
    Generic DNG does not guarantee that the file will be properly used, just that it will become usable. A lot better than nothing of course.
    This RC is NOT some kind of a semi-experimental Beta version, with all that entails. It can IMO be used entirely as if it were a final release, though you may prefer to increase the frequency of backup. Also be sure to retain a separate copy of your current Catalog before opening that into the new software.

  • Lightroom support for Nikon lossless-compressed NEFs

    Hi,
    I shoot in NEF (12-bit, no compression) with a Nikon D200.
    I then edit the files with Nikon Capture NX2, and, doing so, I save them as lossless compressed NEF.
    I then finish editing in View NX2, where I further add geotagging and star rating.
    I would like to import the NEF images straight into Lightroom 3.
    My need is only to use the database and slideshow functions of Lr3; I understand and accept that, if I want to re-edit the image, I must use Capture again.
    ONLY IN THE CASE I wanted to individually proceed editing in Lr3, I accept the need to extract the embedded jpeg and edit it in Lr3, ending up with two separate images.
    In principle, I do not want to duplicate all my images saving them twice also as jpeg.
    If I try now to import my lossless-compressed NEFs in Lr3.2, during import preview I can positively see the images, with editing applied. But after import, sometimes it shows an image composed solely by "noise", and sometimes it shows the image, but without any editing. If I open the individual image view, it always says "An error has occurred in elaboration of the image".
    For testing, I also tried to save the edited image as NEF non-compressed and import it; I do not obtain the "noise" images any more, but the images are shown in the original version, without editing.
    Only if I try to import the original images, it works.
    I do not understand such a strange behaviour, since if I use a much simpler program like ExifPro v1.1.11, everything works fine and also the LL-c NEFs are correctly shown, with edits.
    I also tried the NXTooey plugin by Rob Cole, but I end up duplicating my images as jpegs, and I do not want it (either I do not use it correctly?).
    Thanks for your help
    Danilo

    Thank you for your prompt answers
    @ Lee
    I can understand that the philosophy of Lr wants it to be a program for editing, and not merely for viewing - but, indeed, it is not ONLY an edit program (and for editing it has some features I like very much, and it is the reason why I would like to keep using it): it has also the database features, the slideshow, etc., so I cannot understand the intention to deliberately keep such a limitation: to me, such an option could be useful to many users, in many scenarios apart from editing.
    The feature could be offered as an optional setting for the user (use internal render - use embedded jpeg), so it is an enlargement of the capabilities of the program, and not a limitation.
    Moreover, in my understanding, it is not true that the edited raw images contain only the metadata relative to the editing infos: they certainly contain also an embedded jpeg (or tiff) of the edited image, ready to be extracted.
    Infact, programs like ExifPro show the image at 100% quality (not a thumbnail) with editing applied, and they are extremely fast. It is not possible that they have the capability:
    1) to fully understand the proprietary matadata - part of them are not even disclosed out of Nikon
    2) to apply them on the fly, always and without any misunderstanding
    3) perform such an heavy elaboration 10 to 20 times faster than Capture or Lr
    So,they instead certainly look into the file for an area where they know it is embedded the edited jpeg, ready and done.
    And this could be easily done in the same way also by Lr with minimal effort.
    Of course, I accept that, if I want to continue editing in Lr, (since it cannot understand the proprietary metadata), the embedded edited jpeg is extracted and saved, and from now on, I have two separate files that are no more in sincrony with editing.
    @ Rob
    The firmware of the D200 unfortunately does not have the option to save in NEF Lossless-compressed: either you save in NEF NON-compressed (12-bit),
    or you save in NEF LOSSY-compressed (apart from the options of saving in Jpeg)
    And so I do not want to save in LOSSY since I would lose infos.
    Yes I know that the more recent cameras have the option to save Lossless, and I would always use it indeed, if I had.
    Given that, I agree with you for what you say in the second part of your answer.
    But I would like to make the temptative anyway: I like very much Lr, it is a program full of options and opportunities (among them, the ability to edit
    in a powerful and fast way - who knows if I will abandon Capture in the future and adopt LR for some editings, and for others no)
    So: +1 vote: Lightroom option for persistent display of embedded jpeg (could it be offered as an option, or a flag to be checked in the settings??), and
    optional extraction for editing.
    And I will submit the "noise" phenomenon as a bug - Now I only have to find how to do it...
    Thank you again
    Danilo

  • New RAW support for Fuji X10 camera

    I really appreciate all the work that must be done at Adobe in order to keep up with new cameras and their un-ending parade of new RAW file formats. Case in point, the new Fuji X10. RAW support was added for this model in the most recent Lightroom/Photoshop update and I was very glad for that since I acquired a new X10 just a couple of weeks ago. However, I am not able to get a handle on the noise reduction and sharpening aspects of the RAW files from the X10. Is it possible that since Fuji uses a non-typical array on their EXR sensor inside the camera that the usual sharpening and noise reduction controls are not adequate? They produce some very strange and inpleasant results. It's really puzzling since I have been a ACR user for many years with other camera makes and models and have always been able to optimize the RAW files in such a way as to better the camera's JPEG output. Not so with the X10. I should note that all the other adjustable parameters seem to work as would be expected when processing RAW files from the X10. It's just the Noise and Sharpaning parameters which do not seem to work very well. At least not as well as the camera's own internal noise and sharpening processing does. Suggestions? Maybe I'm misssing something, but I think I have tried every combination of adjustment possible from within Lightroom to try and improve the noise and sharpening from X10 files, but with very little success. It actually seems to work better to re-process out of camera JPEGs or "in camera processed" RAW files. At least the results from these files act more like one would expect, but this does give up much of the flexibility of working directly on a RAW file especially in areas such as recovering highlight detail, etc.
    Hope someone can provide some answers!
    Tom

    Exactly my experience, plus blue/cyan difficult to get right, on 2 (Apple) computers/monitors...OOC jpegs are good, more easily processed, what gives?

  • Support for FUJI Real 3D W1 .MPO Format

    Does anyone know if this new format for storing 3d images created by the new Fuji camera is going to be supported by iphoto 09, there are a lot of us stereographers out here that use this new format and camera and only use Macs, its bad enough that Fuji haven't produced any decent software for this camera but i would like to see the ability to store these photos in my library even if i cant edit them directly with Iphoto, there are specific product for this that work well, it just cataloging them i want to see.

    What format are the photos? If the 3d is just two JPEGs viewed together with special software then they would import and be available as individual photos in iPhoto but not as 3D photos - and it it might not be easy to access them with the 3d software
    Tell us more about the photos format and viewing if this does not help - I've never seen or hear of the process
    LN

  • LIGHTROOM SUPPORT FOR OLYMPUS OM-D E-M10

    CANNOT OPEN RAW FILES FOR OLYMPUS OM-D E-M 10

    On the front page of the Lightroom forum, you will see
    which will answer all your questions ... specifically, brand new cameras usually aren't supported in Lightroom for a while after the camera is released

  • 8.4RC mentions support for Fuji lens profiles - any details known?

    Curious if this is new support or if it's always been there and now ACR shows a message about it. I installed the ACR 8.4RC and loaded a RAW file from my X-T1. Looking at the Lens Corrections tab and the Profile sub-tab, there's now a message at the bottom that says "Built-in lens profile applied: XF14mmF2.2 R. Click for more info." When I clicked, a small dialog box appeared which  offered a little more info:
    Fujifilm X-T1
    XF14mmF2.8R
    This raw file contains a built-in lens profile for correcting chromatic aberration and vignetting. The profile has already been applied automatically to this image.
    I experimented and got this for RAWs shot with my X-E2 as well and also my 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. I then went back to ACR 8.3 and confirmed that the messages are not there.
    I notice that despite what they say, going to the Color sub-tab and checking Remove Chromatic Aberration was still required for some images.
    I didn't see this aspect of the update listed in any release notes. Does anyone know any details about this? Is there a way to turn it off if so desired? I'm curious if the Fuji profile is as good as one that could be created with the Lens Profile Creator. The message doesn't mention geometric correction which would be nice.

    The information about what built-in lens profile is being applied is new to ACR 8.4, but the application of built-in lens profiles is not new. 
    Whether those lens profiles do a perfect job is another matter, of course.  And just like in previous versions, you cannot turn the built-in profiles off, but if someone creates an external profile those can also be applied. 
    The one thing to be careful of is if the built-in lens profile also corrects the same aspect as the external profile, for example, vignetting, then it’ll get double-corrected and the way to avoid this is to set the manual strength setting of that profile correction parameter, either vignetting or distortion, to its minimum value, effectively turning off the external profile’s contribution.

  • 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.

Maybe you are looking for