Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              8       9       end
  

Archive 2013 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'

  
 
zlatko
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Here it is at 50%, closer to how it would look in a 24 x 36" print. Doesn't look too funky or watercolored, in my opinion.
http://zlatkobatistich.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fuji-crop-4.jpg



Apr 04, 2013 at 11:30 AM
asbalyan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


I am not a RAW processing expert & dont have X100s.... But my experience with X100, LR 3.x and Picture Window Pro 7 Beta (still free to use), PWP 7 provides mush better and realistic output with X100 (compare to LR 3.x)....

PWP 5.x is horrible with RAW processing (like for TIFF/JPG processing) (esp with Canon.. and I never got upgraded to 6.0)



Apr 04, 2013 at 11:36 AM
corposant
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


ayler wrote:
OK, that's a start. Maybe your processing bests (and I'm not being ironic) DPReview's? I've just been to the Imaging Resource Comparometer and in the still-life the fabric swatches are all over the shop, as is the PS 69, but the bottles and the rest are all swell. Care to post some crops of fabrics, patterns, that sort of thing?


Fabrics? Not really much of a textile product photographer - I tend to use mine more for people/portraits, because the skin tones come out almost perfect (most of the time). Not sure if this would be helpful, but here's the tshirt/blazer of a recent artist. I don't have a clearance for technical discussions (ha), so it's just crops. JPG vs. RAW should be pretty obvious.

http://corposant.smugmug.com/Private-Galleries/Items-for-Sale/i-Zxk7Rd7/0/XL/Screen%20Shot%202013-04-03%20at%206.49.06%20PM-XL.png

http://corposant.smugmug.com/Private-Galleries/Items-for-Sale/i-j7MRRXN/0/XL/Screen%20Shot%202013-04-03%20at%206.49.33%20PM-XL.png



Apr 04, 2013 at 11:39 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


zlatko wrote:

Here it is at 50%, closer to how it would look in a 24 x 36" print. Doesn't look too funky or watercolored, in my opinion.
http://zlatkobatistich.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fuji-crop-4.jpg



It does to me - and I would not be happy with that artifact in a print myself. Ultimately though, I just did this experiment to show this artifact, which is peculiar to the X-Trans sensor, is still there. How relevant it is to any individual for their use is of course subjective.



Apr 04, 2013 at 12:33 PM
sdfreeland
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Steve Huff in his review said that there are some watercolor effects in Raw even in the new lightroom 4.4. He mentioned that it only occured with the x100s. The X-Pro he said converted just fine.

Check out the edge of the newspaper. There is way more water color effect than the jpg.

RAW converted in LR 4.4
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/DSCF25382.jpg

OOC JPG
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/DSCF2538-2.jpg



Edited on Apr 04, 2013 at 12:58 PM · View previous versions



Apr 04, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


asbalyan wrote:
I am not a RAW processing expert & dont have X100s.... But my experience with X100, LR 3.x and Picture Window Pro 7 Beta (still free to use), PWP 7 provides mush better and realistic output with X100 (compare to LR 3.x)....

PWP 5.x is horrible with RAW processing (like for TIFF/JPG processing) (esp with Canon.. and I never got upgraded to 6.0)


All bets are off though since the X100 sensor is a traditional bayer sensor, not X-Trans. In the little testing I have done thus far though, the X100S does show a noticeable resolution improvement over the X100.



Apr 04, 2013 at 12:35 PM
zlatko
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Tariq Gibran wrote:
It does to me - and I would not be happy with that artifact in a print myself. Ultimately though, I just did this experiment to show this artifact, which is peculiar to the X-Trans sensor, is still there. How relevant it is to any individual for their use is of course subjective.


I guess I'm not seeing it. What artifact are you seeing in my 50% crop that would make it unacceptable in print?



Apr 04, 2013 at 12:38 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


sdfreeland wrote:
Steve Huff in his review said that there are some watercolor effects in Raw even in the new lightroom 4.4. He mentioned that it only occured with the x100s. The X-Pro he said converted just fine.



Well, unfortunately Steve Huff is wrong on that. The artifact is still there and visible in the right (or wrong) scenario. Here is the same scene taken much earlier with the X-Pro1, processed in ACR 7.4 and processed with all defaults (no added sharpening, clarity, exp. and so on), re-sized to the same as the X100S example.

http://www.gibranstudio.com/xpro1.jpg

Here is a link to the X-Pro1 Raw the above was taken from:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5540407/_DSF0129.RAF





Apr 04, 2013 at 01:20 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


zlatko wrote:
I guess I'm not seeing it. What artifact are you seeing in my 50% crop that would make it unacceptable in print?



For me, the worst/ most noticeable is the bright green foliage towards the top right against the sky. They are not that "impressionistic filter" looking in reality.



Apr 04, 2013 at 01:25 PM
honorerdieu
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


I've had the X-Pro1 since last year and I have never had a single RAW image with the watercolor effect.


Apr 04, 2013 at 01:26 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


honorerdieu wrote:
I've had the X-Pro1 since last year and I have never had a single RAW image with the watercolor effect.


Then you're shooting it wrong!

Seriously, it's only going to show up in very specific situations and likely even then, only when the image is printed at larger than native sizes.



Apr 04, 2013 at 01:37 PM
wolfloid
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Thanks Tariq for your level-headed approach to this. I see the problem very clearly even in the 50% image, enough that I would not buy the camera as a tool for landscapes with foliage. At the larger size, everything looks like a bad cartoon.

I have an X100s, so I do have an investment in the IQ being as good as possible. I just hope that Adobe can improve their algorithms, because this does not do their image as the default post processing program much good.

As a qualifier though, I bought the camera as a light, discrete, easy to take with me tool for people shots mostly. For that it seems almost perfect.



Apr 04, 2013 at 01:48 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


wolfloid wrote:
As a qualifier though, I bought the camera as a light, discrete, easy to take with me tool for people shots mostly. For that it seems almost perfect.


That's probably the reason I will likely end up keeping my X100S. That's also the best use I found for the original X100.

As far as landscape, I did some more testing today against a few other cameras (DP1 + DP2 Merrills and my Pentax K5) and what I noticed right off is that the X100S lens (just like I found with the X100) is super sharp in the central area but at infinity/ landscape distances, the lens is simply soft at the borders/ sides regardless of the aperture. So, an X100S would obviously not be a great choice for this type of shooting in any case.



Apr 04, 2013 at 02:19 PM
zlatko
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Tariq Gibran wrote:
Here is a link to the X-Pro1 Raw the above was taken from:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5540407/_DSF0129.RAF


Quite frankly, I think you're needlessly scaring people with bad processing (over-sharpening) combined with massive enlargement. Again, you're showing a fragment of a 36" print at screen resolution, which makes it look like a fragment of an 8 or 10 foot wide print! Sure, the image is not perfect, but it's not nearly as bad as you make it seem.



Apr 04, 2013 at 03:00 PM
zlatko
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Here is a more realistic view of that X-Pro 1 crop ... close to how it would look in a 36" print:
http://zlatkobatistich.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fuji-crop-5.jpg



Apr 04, 2013 at 03:03 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


zlatko wrote:
Quite frankly, I think you're needlessly scaring people with bad processing (over-sharpening) combined with massive enlargement. Again, you're showing a fragment of a 36" print at screen resolution, which makes it look like a fragment of an 8 or 10 foot wide print! Sure, the image is not perfect, but it's not nearly as bad as you make it seem.


All I can say is that we all have different quality criteria. The reason I provided the raw files is so folks can decide for themselves if it's an issue or not for their use. Again, the only reason I posted these examples is to show the artifacts that are inherent to the X-Trans sensor, which the OP'r requested.

As far as bad processing, the X-Pro1 example posted above was converted with all default settings (no extra processing) and enlarged using Alien Skin Blow UP with sharpening set to "low". The raw file is there for all to play around with in any case.



Apr 04, 2013 at 03:39 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


zlatko wrote:

Here is a more realistic view of that X-Pro 1 crop ... close to how it would look in a 36" print:
http://zlatkobatistich.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fuji-crop-5.jpg


So is that a conceptual piece? I'm not seeing an image.



Apr 04, 2013 at 03:40 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


He didn't say how close the viewer is standing to the print. That looks about right for 1mm...


Apr 04, 2013 at 04:12 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


jcolwell wrote:
He didn't say how close the viewer is standing to the print. That looks about right for 1mm...


Well, I did say it's not for 10' to 15' foot away. I don't think you would see the issue 15' away if the print was 24"x36". You would see it at 3' to 4' away though and, at least for my quality criteria, that would not get it for professional quality output that would have to withstand critical viewing by all, not just old, blind women (or men!).



Apr 04, 2013 at 04:19 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Fujifilm X100s 'Funkiness'


Wasn't there a firmware update between when this shot was taken and now?


Apr 04, 2013 at 04:30 PM
1       2      
3
       4              8       9       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              8       9       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.