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 | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
  

Archive 2023 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?

  
 
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


molson wrote:
But reducing the Detail slider to 0 doesn't make the artifacts go away - it just blurs them a bit (as one would obviously expect...)


You would likely not see any detail in this part of the image from a similar resolution bayer sensor either. And if you try to sharpen that bayer sensor output to get details, you will still get artifacts, they will just be different artifacts. What you are trying to do is to extract detail where none exist, and that will always result in artifacts.

At least that was my experience comparing a similar resolution bayer and x-trans sensor side by side on the same scenes. I didn't find any instance where the bayer sensor had real detail in a part of the scene which showed an artifact on x-trans side. The bayer image would just be muddy in those parts. YMMV.



Jan 24, 2023 at 01:28 PM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


curious80 wrote:
You would likely not see any detail in this part of the image from a similar resolution bayer sensor either. And if you try to sharpen that bayer sensor output to get details, you will still get artifacts, they will just be different artifacts. What you are trying to do is to extract detail where none exist, and that will always result in artifacts.


You're talking about sharpening artifacts.

I'm talking about the specific fractal artifacts from the Adobe demosaicing algorithm; they are noticeably different than typical sharpening artifacts, are clearly visible even without any sharpening applied, and don't occur in Bayer CFA images.



Jan 24, 2023 at 01:39 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


molson wrote:
You're talking about sharpening artifacts.

I'm talking about the specific fractal artifacts from the Adobe demosaicing algorithm; they are noticeably different than typical sharpening artifacts, are clearly visible even without any sharpening applied, and don't occur in Bayer CFA images.


I understand what you are saying. What I am saying is that in my experience the parts of the image which might show these artifacts are the parts where level of detail is so fine that the sensor doesn't have enough resolution to resolve that. Even in a bayer sensor that image wouldn't have any detail in that part. The only difference is that in case of bayer, it would just be muddy instead of having an artifact. So viewing at 200% to look for artifacts in a part of the scene which didn't have any details anyway is not really very useful as far as I am concerned. I take your word for it that Capture One might be handling that better but frankly at least for me this has never been a real word issue using lightroom. Maybe it was worse in your 16MP X-T1. I have only used 26MP Fuji sensors.



Jan 24, 2023 at 01:48 PM
Sharona
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


robfilms wrote:
I have read/watched many, many, many vids debating Lightroom vs Capture One vs some other piece of software used to process Fuji's RAF raw files.

Call me thick but Capture One (free) does not work for me.

I have tried to learn Capture One.

There is something about the UI that doesn't work for me.

(I am not blaming Capture One. I am acknowledging it is me)

But if I rely on LR to process my X-T1 and X-T2 RAF files, will I REALLY regret my decision to use just Lightroom?

(do you need to pixel peep to see the worms?)

I use my Fuji's for mostly
...Show more

Careful what you ask....




Jan 24, 2023 at 01:57 PM
newhaven
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


https://i.ibb.co/k9MDmt0/DSCF0547.jpg

I found this raw file in the dpreview gallery of the fuji x-h2s. If you download the raw file, zoom in to the center flower where there is some interesting detail in the brown spots. When sharpening using LR it becomes a worm show. However, using my capture one 23 trial version, I see natural detail.

The enhance feature in LR seems to do a good job.



Jan 24, 2023 at 01:58 PM
mdude85
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


@ molson

Without diving too deep into the details, you're not correct that the Details slider has no impact on the appearance of wormy artifacts. It absolutely can. Even Dan posted a series of images that clearly showed this. I have also experienced this myself, as have many others.

One other thing, you're not using the term "fractal deconvolution" correctly at all. These seem like two words that sound scientific to you (and perhaps you use them because they sound scientific to others), but they're not at all describing the exaggerated visual features you're looking at.

The sharpening algorithms in Lightroom perform sharpening that is similar to what you might achieve if you deconvolute an image, but Lightroom is not performing deconvolution. It is applying selective contrast to certain groupings of pixels to enhance the edges of details, which is perceived by our eyes to improve detail.

So there's no question that it is also going to enhance the appearance of wormy or swirly artifacts if you apply it too strongly.

Of course, none of this really matters when you post an image to the web or even make a print of it -- you won't be able to notice any of those artifacts.



Edited on Jan 24, 2023 at 03:17 PM · View previous versions



Jan 24, 2023 at 02:20 PM
Sharona
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


newhaven wrote:
https://i.ibb.co/k9MDmt0/DSCF0547.jpg

I found this raw file in the dpreview gallery of the fuji x-h2s. If you download the raw file, zoom in to the center flower where there is some interesting detail in the brown spots. When sharpening using LR it becomes a worm show. However, using my capture one 23 trial version, I see natural detail.

The enhance feature in LR seems to do a good job.


I couldn't resist, so I downloaded this raw file. I think you may just be seeing texture and puckering from the plant's bud. I used Photoshop unsharp mask and couldn't see worms and I do know what they look like. I could be wrong but I studied horticulture in a former life and I think you're just seeing natural puckers.



Jan 24, 2023 at 03:17 PM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


mdude85 wrote:
@ molson

Without diving too deep into the details, you're not correct that the Details slider has no impact on the appearance of wormy artifacts. It absolutely can. Even Dan posted a series of images that clearly showed this. I have also experienced this myself, as have many others.

One other thing, you're not using the term "fractal deconvolution" correctly at all. These seem like two words that sound scientific to you (and perhaps you use them because they sound scientific to others), but they're not at all describing the exaggerated visual features you're looking at.

The sharpening algorithms in Lightroom perform
...Show more

I meant to say "demoasicing" instead of "deconvolution" in that post - I 'm surprised that only one person understood that it was the wrong term... .

As far as choosing words because they "sound scientific"... that would be stooping to the level of some of the other posters here, especially those whose comments are largely cut-and-pasted from Wikipedia (and you know who you are...).

And I have to disagree with you that Dan's posted images showed anything relevant about the demosaicing artifacts, since there were none present in any of the images he chose to show.

I guess the bottom line is that those who recognize and understand the issue are now all happily enjoying the benefits of alternate processing software, and the rest simply don't know or don't care. I'm happy that the OP was able to gain some useful information from my posts, as apparently he did care.




Jan 24, 2023 at 04:33 PM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


newhaven wrote:
https://i.ibb.co/k9MDmt0/DSCF0547.jpg

I found this raw file in the dpreview gallery of the fuji x-h2s. If you download the raw file, zoom in to the center flower where there is some interesting detail in the brown spots. When sharpening using LR it becomes a worm show. However, using my capture one 23 trial version, I see natural detail.

The enhance feature in LR seems to do a good job.


I downloaded that RAW file and ran it through LR - there is absolutely no trace of any demosaicing artifacts in that image.



Jan 24, 2023 at 04:38 PM
newhaven
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


Image at 200% capture sharpened using Capture One
https://i.ibb.co/Jng6D1s/DSCF0547-CO-200.jpg
Image at 200% capture sharpened using ACR
https://i.ibb.co/M5DFbX0/DSCF047-ACR-200.jpg

Anyone can process the raw file and draw their own conclusions.


Edited on Jan 26, 2023 at 02:28 PM · View previous versions



Jan 24, 2023 at 04:59 PM
mdude85
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


molson wrote:
And I have to disagree with you that Dan's posted images showed anything relevant about the demosaicing artifacts, since there were none present in any of the images he chose to show.

I guess the bottom line is that those who recognize and understand the issue are now all happily enjoying the benefits of alternate processing software, and the rest simply don't know or don't care. I'm happy that the OP was able to gain some useful information from my posts, as apparently he did care.



They look pretty obvious in post #19 to me. (The one where you thought that the image wasn’t even taken with an X-trans camera, implying you were perhaps deceived).

In that photo, even in a 100% crop (not zoomed in), a trained eye can tell the rocks take on sort of "painterly" or blurred effect where the edges of details appear to bleed into each other. One can already predict that pushing up the Details slider is going to exacerbate that effect even more, and lo and behold it did.

I've also noticed that same effect when I was photographing in the Tetons -- obviously, faraway shots of rocks and trees featured prominently in my photos as well.

It seems to me that you're convinced that there are no wormy artifacts in the images posted in this thread, and that anyone who claims to see them is mistaken or is looking at something completely different. Obviously, in your not-very-humble opinion, you couldn't possibly be mistaken.



Jan 24, 2023 at 05:23 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


molson wrote:
Your reading comprehension skills are just as bad as your eyesight.


You seem nice.



Jan 24, 2023 at 07:58 PM
Sharona
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


newhaven wrote:
Image at 200% capture sharpened using Capture One
https://i.ibb.co/6HvZnQm/DSCF0547-CO23-01.jpg
Image at 200% capture sharpened using ACR
https://i.ibb.co/n32TC6W/DSCF0547-ACR-01.jpg

Anyone can process the raw file and draw their own conclusions.


I can see that in your examples for sure. They look different in other ways, too. The thing is, you can see strange noise artifacts in just about any image - from Sony, Nikon, Canon... when enlarged too much or sharpened in a given way. (We use Getty images for some of our products/services and you can see the camera info on most of those files.)

So many variables, such as the kind and extent of sharpening, etc. My last thoughts: I'm glad I don't print or present my work at 200%; and it's great to have options that work for each individual.

Bottom line, enjoy your process and do things as you like!



Jan 25, 2023 at 10:06 AM
marsguy
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


What a surprise, another FM Fuji thread with the same 2 old dudes arguing. It wouldn't be complete without personal attacks!! Are you really that insecure with yourselves? Cripes...

As for my experience, I use LR pretty much exclusively and shoot mostly landscapes with my X-T3/X-T4 with lots of trees and foliage due to the natural flora of my area. I have experienced the worms since my X-E2, but the issue is far less prevalent with my X-T4. Yes, the detail slider makes the worms more apparent, as does simply increasing the sharpening, but you can increase sharpening more if you decrease the detail slider without pulling out worms.

Here is an example of exactly what Dan and others have said, an OOF area with foliage, shot with the X-T3 and 16-55, 100% crop, with the settings I settled on when I last edited it. It has a slight watercolor look to it, only slightly wormy, which is also common for in-focus leaves and branches that have been slightly oversharpened, but in this case it's off in the distance and doesn't affect the subject, especially considering we're looking at 100% here which you won't do in normal viewing. Then I pump up the sharpness to max (leaving default detail) to show worm explosion, and then I bring the detail down to 0 and you can see the worms basically disappear.

So, if it is unclear after this that the detail slider DOES affect the prevalence of worms, then I don't know how else to prove it.

https://i.imgur.com/WNTn6rf.png


Max sharpness, default details. Worm explosion.

https://i.imgur.com/CmDxBma.png


Max sharpness, min details. Honestly not much different looking from my initial edit with much less drastic changes to sharpness sliders.

https://i.imgur.com/Nhm9G6j.png


Overall I am less bothered by worms these days than I have been in the past, but I still need to drop the detail slider to avoid them. If I have a photo I really like and I think it's worth trying to squeeze every drop of detail out of it, then I will use low sharpening in LR and then pivot to PS for the Unsharp Mask. I'm lazy though so I don't do this for every photo, but it definitely does a better job than LR. I've used Capture One in the past but the workflow didn't catch on with me, and I couldn't see enough of a sharpness benefit to warrant switching everything over to it.

I am thinking of switching most of my shooting to an R5, as I feel like I'm not getting the sharpness I want, and I'm pretty sure it's more because of lenses than my technique (though I know that can always use work too). I'd also like 4K120 and more resolution as well. It'd be nice to be free from the worms, have more resolution for larger prints, and have sharper lenses in the system even if they're double the price on average. I would still keep some small Fuji stuff around, where Fuji excels, but if I'm going to carry a 3-4lb camera setup, it might as well provide as much performance for that size/weight as possible.




Feb 05, 2023 at 01:59 PM
vallejo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


Out of curiosity, ever tried DXO Photolab? For conversion and initial adjustments, not editing… after many years with LR/CO experimenting, was a game changer to me…

marsguy wrote:

What a surprise, another FM Fuji thread with the same 2 old dudes arguing. It wouldn't be complete without personal attacks!! Are you really that insecure with yourselves? Cripes...

As for my experience, I use LR pretty much exclusively and shoot mostly landscapes with my X-T3/X-T4 with lots of trees and foliage due to the natural flora of my area. I have experienced the worms since my X-E2, but the issue is far less prevalent with my X-T4. Yes, the detail slider makes the worms more apparent, as does simply increasing the sharpening, but you can increase sharpening more if you
...Show more



Feb 05, 2023 at 02:28 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?


That's in line with my (extensive) experience with x-trans cameras over the past decade, ranging from 16MP models though 24MP and now 40MP.

I can reliably make excellent prints with fine details at 20" x 30" and sometimes larger. The key (as I now switch back into broken record mode) was finding the optimal sharpening settings for the x-trans files. Like you, I found that meant using a combination of settings with lower "details" (which is not an issue since the non-AA filtering sensor tends to need less sharpening than some others might) and, also like you, doing more than one stage of sharpening when doing critical work.

Your second image also illustrates another reason to be careful about high details settings with x-trans files, at least with pre-40PM sensors. In an image with some noise — in particular with those shot at high ISOs — the details slider, even if it doesn't produce worms, can produce some enhanced noise "stuff" around edges.

I'm also a Photoshop user. I can make LR work, but my native environment is ACR/Photoshop. That affects my sharpening approach, no matter what camera system I'm using.

First off, when I move to any new camera — and not just a new brand — I spend some time sorting out what settings work the best on the particular gear. I'm actually doing that again right now as I come up to speed with the new XT5, where I'm discovering, for example, that I can use somewhat higher details settings than I used on the 24MP and (especially) the 16MP x-trans files.

My sharpening has three phases, so any changes I make in one phase likely lead to compensatory changes at other points in my workflow. Phase one is initial sharpening in ACR, and this is where I keep an eye on the details level with x-trans files. I also do an input sharpening operation when I bring the smart object into Photoshop from ACR, here using a small radius (like .3) and a fairly high amount setting — here I may use a slightly higher amount setting on Fujifilm files than with my Canon files. Then I use various output sharpening settings, depending upon whether I'm aiming for a screen-display jpg or a print.

It all works pretty well.

marsguy wrote:

What a surprise, another FM Fuji thread with the same 2 old dudes arguing. It wouldn't be complete without personal attacks!! Are you really that insecure with yourselves? Cripes...

As for my experience, I use LR pretty much exclusively and shoot mostly landscapes with my X-T3/X-T4 with lots of trees and foliage due to the natural flora of my area. I have experienced the worms since my X-E2, but the issue is far less prevalent with my X-T4. Yes, the detail slider makes the worms more apparent, as does simply increasing the sharpening, but you can increase sharpening more if you
...Show more




Feb 05, 2023 at 04:34 PM
1       2       3      
4
       end




FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       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.