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 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.
Max sharpness, default details. Worm explosion.
Max sharpness, min details. Honestly not much different looking from my initial edit with much less drastic changes to sharpness sliders.
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.
...Show more →
|
. 
