Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

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

4 5 end

Archive 2014 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Sal Baker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

I've found that when Iridient has the occasional moire issue, Capture One is a much better fallback then LR. 16x20 inch prints look beautiful from X-Trans II files so I think I need to back off from microscopic pixel level analysis for a while.

Sal

Mar 10, 2014 at 03:42 PM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Sal Baker wrote:
I've found that when Iridient has the occasional moire issue, Capture One is a much better fallback then LR. 16x20 inch prints look beautiful from X-Trans II files so I think I need to back off from microscopic pixel level analysis for a while.

Sal

It's interesting with this particular problem image because, to my eye, Capture One completely fails with this image, even compared to Adobe at reduced size for soft proofing a 16 x24" print - so not microscopic pixel level but what the print is going to look like.

Each image was resized to 16"x24"@240ppi and then downsized 50% for soft proofing. Of the X-E2 versions, I think Adobe is still better here. Capture One seems to make a mess of all the branches - and still shows some color issues compared to Adobe.

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/captureOnex.jpg

Edit: I was curious to get an objective opinion about these three soft proof renderings so I asked my wife - who is not a photographer but is an artist- which she preferred of all three above and why. She knows completely nothing about this whole discussion (and would certainly find it ridiculous!). Here is what she said:

1) She dislike the image on the far right because of the person visible behind the tree with the colorful shirt on!

2) She dislikes the image on the far left because of the purplish color behind/in the trees.
3) She likes the center image except that she prefers seeing more detail in the trees like is visible in the image on the far right.

Edited on Mar 10, 2014 at 04:40 PM · View previous versions

Mar 10, 2014 at 04:27 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Tariq Gibran wrote:
Just looking at the moire crop example I posted and what it would look like in a print, I think you might be happy with Adobe's rendering of the X-E2 compared to seeing the color noise that would still even be visible in the example Dave posted in a 16" (short side) print.

To get 16"'s on the short side, the image must still be resized up about 20% for output at 240ppi. If we then soft proof this by resizing down to 50% view (which, in my experience, will show any detail/ issues that will remain visible in the...Show more →

Agreed, I'd probably go with Adobe in this particular situation. That's what drives me a bit batty with these files. Sometimes, Adobe looks best at print size, but, other times, Adobe's issues show up in much smaller jpegs, so it ends up being a raw converter and processing roulette.

Of course, even with Bayer, different raw converters and settings yield different results in terms of artifacts, color, detail, etc., but they're all good enough to where I can use just about any of them comfortably. With X-Trans, it seems to vary a lot more, depending on the scene.

edit: I'm just now seeing your C1, Adobe, and Bayer Adobe comparison directly above, and both X-trans files do show that weird, painterly vibe, even at that size. The Bayer looks much better, to me.

Mar 10, 2014 at 04:33 PM

galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Great, there are some really good observations here and it's useful, I think, to have the X-A1 as a comparator. Clients are keeping me very busy this week, I have some more shots to post but won't get to that until tomorrow. Looks like there are definitely some tradeoffs with the different converters, and I am now much less impressed with C1 than I used to be.

FYI - both shots were from a bridge (solid footbridge, no cars) and the camera(s) was placed on some wide railing set to a 2s delay. My anticipation would be that there was no camera movement. I could be wrong so I'll double check.

I'd like to find the "magic" settings in PN, but we'll see if that happens.

Mar 10, 2014 at 07:39 PM

justruss
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

If I get a chance I'll try to post a couple PN vs. Aperture jpgs (X-E1), and the RAW file.

This is an excellent thread!

After years of arguing about XTrans this and that, we're finally building up a resource that shows specific examples, outputs, etc. I agree, the X-A1 is a superb control to have. I'd like to pick one up once I have the time and extra money; it'd also make a non-mission-critical camera to put on indefinite loan to my gf.

Mar 11, 2014 at 03:11 AM

Dave McGaughey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

galenapass wrote:
FYI - both shots were from a bridge (solid footbridge, no cars) and the camera(s) was placed on some wide railing set to a 2s delay. My anticipation would be that there was no camera movement. I could be wrong so I'll double check.

I'd like to find the "magic" settings in PN, but we'll see if that happens.

Interesting. I wonder if the removed AA filter on the X-E2 is actually improving the acuity of the scene. The X-A1 has a AA filter, right?

Mar 11, 2014 at 09:02 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Dave McGaughey wrote:
Interesting. I wonder if the removed AA filter on the X-E2 is actually improving the acuity of the scene. The X-A1 has a AA filter, right?

You're always going to need to sharpen an AA filtered image a little more than an AA-less one, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Mar 11, 2014 at 09:11 AM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Dave McGaughey wrote:
Interesting. I wonder if the removed AA filter on the X-E2 is actually improving the acuity of the scene. The X-A1 has a AA filter, right?

The X-A1 does have an AA filter but it appears to be fairly weak. In this shot, for instance, with just the minimum default adobe sharpening, we can begin to see hints of moire in the sign.

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/FortM.jpg
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/XAmoire.jpg

Mar 11, 2014 at 09:44 AM

mjk115
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

I've been doing my own raw converter comparison, and I tend to agree that there's something erratic to the issues with ACR/LR. Some images work great. Some areas of other images look pretty bad when compared with PN. One thing I have noticed that is different between these 2 converters in that distortion correction appears to be applied by default in ACR with no way to undo it, while PN does not apply distortion correction. I'm wondering if this stretching and compressing involved with ACR/LR distortion correction may contribute to the weird areas.

On a different note, while I always try to achieve the best possible IQ with my images, for my intended uses, I don't see ACR/LR as a problem. PN is 1 more program to learn and use. If landscape was my main use, however, I would probably start using it.

Mar 11, 2014 at 10:57 AM

galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

I've been working on a method to remove or at least reduce moire in PN. I can't say that I have the problem solved but PN does have a defringe sldier that works well.

Here is the a portion of the original photo from the X-E2, processed in PN with default settings:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s5/v130/p1019158256-5.jpg

Here is the X-A1 processed in LR for comparison (default settings):

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v90/p723690897-5.jpg

Now turn up the defringe slider all the way on the X-E2 shot:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v15/p764118474-4.jpg

Result:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v82/p774447712-5.jpg

Getting better.

raw file for the
X-A1 and X-E2

Mar 12, 2014 at 12:21 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

galenapass wrote:
I've been working on a method to remove or at least reduce moire in PN. I can't say that I have the problem solved but PN does have a defringe sldier that works well.

Here is the a portion of the original photo from the X-E2, processed in PN with default settings:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s5/v130/p1019158256-5.jpg

Here is the X-A1 processed in LR for comparison (default settings):

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v90/p723690897-5.jpg

Now turn up the defringe slider all the way on the X-E2 shot:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v15/p764118474-4.jpg

Result:

http://mlschragphotos.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v82/p774447712-5.jpg

Getting better.

raw file for the
X-A1 and X-E2

The defringe slider in PN seems to do a pretty good job.

The thing that is sticking out to me is how the rendering of even PN still has that weird X-trans look to it, which is pretty noticeable compared to the X-A1. It's hard to describe, but it's what I saw in files from all of the converters with varying subject matter, even outside of trees and foliage. It's kind of a painterly, sharp but smooth vibe. It looks kind of artificial to me, for lack of a better term, but maybe I'm just too used to looking at Bayer files.

Mar 12, 2014 at 12:37 AM

galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Yep - I see what you are talking about. But, please know that these are 100% crops. The overall picture looks good.

Mar 12, 2014 at 12:44 AM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

galenapass wrote:
Yep - I see what you are talking about. But, please know that these are 100% crops. The overall picture looks good.

Yeah, I've found that the size at which it is noticeable depends on the subject matter. I don't suppose you could post 50% crops?

Mar 12, 2014 at 01:04 AM

galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Here you go...

Mar 12, 2014 at 01:16 AM

justruss
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

If someone could print a couple of the crops-- to simulate large print reproduction-- from the X-A1 vs X-E2.

I've done large prints, 30 inch long side, using the X-E1 RAW, 60mm, and Aperture. But it was a close detail shot of a Japanese maple leaf... no watercolor at 100% crop on screen either. Looked great.

But I wonder how this holds up at these infinity shots.

Mar 12, 2014 at 03:20 AM

Sal Baker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

The only time I see anything that resembles a painterly look is when the converter presets are used. The various smoothing, first stage luminance NR, chroma NR and moire reduction are unusually set much higher than needed. Lower ISO X-Trans really needs little to no NR IMO.

It would seem intuitive to then use low radius USM to avoid halos, but smoothed images with sharp edges create a watercolor look. For print I usually use a deconvolution sharpener with low iterations to support the structure of edges, then do final sharpening with a higher radius USM to bring out surface texture. Slight edge halos at 100% disappear with printing on most high-quality papers.

Sal

Mar 12, 2014 at 06:52 AM

Sal Baker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

<Double Post> The cat did it.

Edited on Mar 12, 2014 at 04:53 PM · View previous versions

Mar 12, 2014 at 06:54 AM

galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Mar 12, 2014 at 09:30 AM

Dave McGaughey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

Sal Baker wrote:
The only time I see anything that resembles a painterly look is when the converter presets are used. The various smoothing, first stage luminance NR, chroma NR and moire reduction are unusually set much higher than needed. Lower ISO X-Trans really needs little to no NR IMO.

It would seem intuitive to then use low radius USM to avoid halos, but smoothed images with sharp edges create a watercolor look. For print I usually use a deconvolution pre-sharpener with low iterations to support the structure of edges, then do final sharpening with a higher radius USM to bring out...Show more →

Thanks Sal, this is interesting. I think the crux of the X-Trans "look" relative to Bayer is that when you apply a lot of USM sharpening to a Bayer image, you start getting "dot noise" or "texture." This gives the impression of extra detail. X-Trans reacts much differently - they start smooth and stay smooth even with moderately aggressive sharpening. From a bit of tinkering I've found that the oddly smooth ACR X-Trans images look a little more Bayer-like when you add noise to the image.

Mar 12, 2014 at 10:32 AM

Sal Baker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Fujifilm X-Trans Infinity Scene RAW Processing Comparison

galenapass wrote:
I'd like to check what you are saying here for my own edification. What software are you using?

I'm mostly using Iridient. It has many alternative sharpening and scaling methods available in the conversions.

Sal

Mar 12, 2014 at 11:45 AM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end

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