p.1 #1 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
I’m thinking of picking up a X100VI but have read that Lightroom really struggles converting Fuji raw files. Is that a thing of the past or is it still somewhat marginal in doing the task? Or did Adobe fix all that so it’s good to go? If so, how good is it? Thanks for your help.
p.1 #2 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
I've only ever used LR (and PS) for my Fuji file conversion and editing.
I used to see the worms with my X-E3 and older versions of LR, it was possible to reduce that by adjusting the import sharpening settings.
I don't worry about it and don't see it any more with the last few years of LR (Camera Raw).
If you go digging, you might see a little bit sometimes, but you never see it when looking at photos normally or printing them.
I'm not about to throw away 30 odd years of Adobe software learning to change to some other workflow, just to suit a single camera brand.
p.1 #4 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
Thanks. I am aware of the other options but was hoping to not have to add another workflow stream. I’m glad I asked. “AI” says LR does an excellent job but I was skeptical. Guess I’ll look further into the other options.
p.1 #5 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
samuelphoto wrote:
Thanks. I am aware of the other options but was hoping to not have to add another workflow stream. I’m glad I asked. “AI” says LR does an excellent job but I was skeptical. Guess I’ll look further into the other options.
It is a thing of the past. AI was right :-)
I used to rung my Fuji files through DxO but since a couple of years now, LR can handle Fuji files just fine.
p.1 #6 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
Adobe products do an excellent job with Fujifilm files.
A DECADE AGO, when x-trans first came out, critical users (I am one) could occasionally find “color smearing” if we looked very hard at high magnification and knew where the issue might occur. And at extreme screen magnifications (well beyond what you would see in, say, a 20” x 30” print) you might find the “worms” effect in areas of low contrast, slightly out of focus, extremely fine detail in the green channel. You would not, however, see it in a print. I have tested it with 40” wide prints on my P9000.
Lightroom does not “struggle” with Fujifilm files.
It is beyond me why people continue to spout hyperbolic nonsense about this.
samuelphoto wrote:
I’m thinking of picking up a X100VI but have read that Lightroom really struggles converting Fuji raw files. Is that a thing of the past or is it still somewhat marginal in doing the task? Or did Adobe fix all that so it’s good to go? If so, how good is it? Thanks for your help.
p.1 #7 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
Likewise I now have no trouble, even in earlier times as @gdanmitchell says it was scarcely a problem in normal use. Just had to remember.ber not to be heavy handed with sharpening, which the unique sensor array and lack of anti aliasing filter didn't need anyway. Oversharpening causes nasty patterns whatever the system used.
p.1 #9 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
gdanmitchell wrote:
It is beyond me why people continue to spout hyperbolic nonsense about this.
Same reason as people still spout "Apple is made for art, Windows is not".
When for years Adobe products were running better on Windows than Mac.
It's like a religious fervour with some people.
p.1 #11 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
I have long been an Apple guy, but when my students (in college electroscoustic music classes) would ask me which to get I would tell them to get what their friends and family used unless they had a strong preference in another direction.
When it comes to camera gear I have some theories about why some people feel the need to bleat about imaginary “fatal flaws” with this or that gear…
pw-pix wrote:
Same reason as people still spout "Apple is made for art, Windows is not".
When for years Adobe products were running better on Windows than Mac.
It's like a religious fervour with some people.
p.1 #12 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
I've been using Lightroom with my Fujifilm files since I got into Fuji in 2013. The Adobe processing engine did struggle with fine detail, especially in foliage, but that hasn't been an issue in several years.
p.1 #13 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
What presented challenges years ago was something like the following: largish areas af essentially random fine details with low contrast that were slightly soft, and most often strong in green tones and sometimes a bit with blues.
Fortunately, even back then the issue would only be visible at high screen magnification… and only in a few images. I never saw it in a print and I regularly printed up to 24” along the long dimension, and sometimes larger.
It was also, as mentioned above, a failure to use sharpening settings optimized for Fujifilm files: lower details setting.
kenbennett wrote:
I've been using Lightroom with my Fujifilm files since I got into Fuji in 2013. The Adobe processing engine did struggle with fine detail, especially in foliage, but that hasn't been an issue in several years.
p.1 #16 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
If you are interested in comparing LR processing of a raw file from X100VI with that in Capture One or DxO Photolab 9, feel free to download the two jpegs. In both cases, the processing was minimal: I applied the default lens corrections and denoising. WB was taken from the scene. In Capture One the profile was Generic with Curve Film standard. In PL9, the color profile was the default DxO camera profile.
p.1 #17 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
I started using C1 because of the rumor of X-Trans problems in Lr. In the end I did not see any real problem in Lr although film simulations are better integrated to C1. This was more than 5 years ago.
However, C1 seems to do convert Sony and old Nikon (D700) files more to my liking than Lr. Better colors and tonality before editing - this translates to quicker and more fun workflow. Now I have moved all to C1, but it is not because of Fujifilm.
p.1 #18 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
If you only rely on microscopic inspection at huge magnifications to search for exciting but tiny differences between things that may or may not make any objective difference you can have the thrilling experience of imagining that there are huge, earth-shaking problems with things that work great and, as a consequence, feel all tingly and alive.
From all evidence you can use pretty much any raw converter you prefer with fine results.
p.1 #19 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
gdanmitchell wrote:
If you only rely on microscopic inspection at huge magnifications to search for exciting but tiny differences between things that may or may not make any objective difference you can have the thrilling experience of imagining that there are huge, earth-shaking problems with things that work great and, as a consequence, feel all tingly and alive.
From all evidence you can use pretty much any raw converter you prefer with fine results.
Obligatory smiley goes here.
That's exactly the point: it helps to have evidence and to make decisions based on sufficient evidence.
As to one "can use pretty much any raw converter ... with fine results" this hasn't been my experience in the specific case of Capture One and DxO Photolab 9. In my usage, when processed independently, I almost always like the result from C1 better than than that from PL9. However, when processing in C1 from the original raw files and from the corresponding dng exported from PL9, some times I like the result of processing from the dng. The differences can be visually very significant despite the same person doing the processing.
My evidence is limited of course, but I have the impression that processing a raw file in different raw converters is likely to give visually different results. It is possible that, technically, all these can be "fine results" when processed expertly. Nevertheless, I believe that the choice of a raw converter is an important decision that can significantly impact one's photography and experience.
p.1 #20 · Converting Fuji RAW Files in Lightroom Classic
X-trans and Lightroom Classic are fine. No longer the old wormy look. They’ve come along way. I would not worry a moment about getting the VI and doing initial ingestion and editing in Lightroom.
For the “keepers” you get, that you plan to print, buy DXO Pure Raw and have DXO demosaic the raw and then apply the Lightroom edits back in on re-import of the DXO result. Works extremely well.
