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
  

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 12:28 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
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 12:39 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 12:48 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 12:57 PM
newhaven
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files?








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 12:58 PM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
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 02:17 PM · View previous versions



Jan 24, 2023 at 01:20 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 02:17 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

molson
Offline
• • • • • •
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 03:33 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
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 03:38 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





Image at 200% capture sharpened using ACR






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


Edited on Jan 26, 2023 at 01:28 PM · View previous versions



Jan 24, 2023 at 03:59 PM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
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 04:23 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 06:58 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 09:06 AM
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      Reset password