Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fuji X-Trans: Which raw developer do you use?  (Read 12003 times)
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 393



WWW
« Reply #20 on: September 03, 2013, 11:17:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan, thank you.
I was aware of the C1/LR auto correction and assumed Iridient also, but have never heard of LCP profiles. Any idea what they are ?

M

LCP are just Lens Correction Profiles, they are embedded in the Fuji raw files for Fuji and Zeiss lenses and some m-mount Leica lenses via the Fuji M-adapter. Obviously adapted lenses will not have built in profiles and the Samyang lenses do not have profiles.

You can create your own LCP's via Adobes DNG lens profile creator, you can download from Adobe Labs, it is basically photographing a grid from different angles and letting Adobe's software measure and estimate the lens correction from the images you took with the pattern. This works for any lens but can be time consuming and depending on your skills be difficult.

Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 485


« Reply #21 on: September 04, 2013, 03:35:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Alan, many thanks.
Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2013, 08:40:28 PM »
ReplyReply

I would add Iridient Developer to the C1/LR5 combo I'm using right now. The latest ID 2.2 seems to be a definite step-up.

I would agree with that.  I wasn't entirely convinced with 2.1 but 2.2 seems to be more pleasing.

But when it comes to the X-trans sensors I can't imagine not going with C1.

C1 definitely is a contender but in my opinion does not stand out from the others.

Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1634


WWW
« Reply #23 on: September 05, 2013, 01:01:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan:

I am curious on the automatic application of the Lens correction profiles as at least with LR 5 and 4.4 no vignetting correction seems to be applied.  I have worked several different series now taken the the 18-55 @ 18mm and most times no vignetting correction is being applied.  With Canon and Nikon lens if you pick the specific lens and use the auto function a vignetting correction is also applied (not always perfect but at least a start) along with distortion. 

Also LR lists the Fuji X-100, with it's fixed lens, which is why I assumed that LR only had worked up profiles for the X-100, and non of the X-1pro etc and lenses.  Looking back on Capture one work, I do notice on the same file less vignetting so it must be seeing something. 

Curious also what the Fuji meta has that LR sees, which is different than say a Canon or Nikon as they also write all the lens info to the metadata.  Tried to google this, but came up empty.

Thanks

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 485


« Reply #24 on: September 05, 2013, 01:17:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Curious also what the Fuji meta has that LR sees, which is different than say a Canon or Nikon as they also write all the lens info to the metadata.  Tried to google this, but came up empty.

Not that I have any idea what the data means, but this is a screenshot (courtesy of Jeffrey Friedl's Metadata Viewer) which I suspect applies the lens correction parameters.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2013, 01:20:01 PM by Manoli » Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 393



WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 05, 2013, 02:46:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan:

I am curious on the automatic application of the Lens correction profiles as at least with LR 5 and 4.4 no vignetting correction seems to be applied.  I have worked several different series now taken the the 18-55 @ 18mm and most times no vignetting correction is being applied.  With Canon and Nikon lens if you pick the specific lens and use the auto function a vignetting correction is also applied (not always perfect but at least a start) along with distortion. 

Also LR lists the Fuji X-100, with it's fixed lens, which is why I assumed that LR only had worked up profiles for the X-100, and non of the X-1pro etc and lenses.  Looking back on Capture one work, I do notice on the same file less vignetting so it must be seeing something. 

Curious also what the Fuji meta has that LR sees, which is different than say a Canon or Nikon as they also write all the lens info to the metadata.  Tried to google this, but came up empty.

Thanks

Paul Caldwell


Paul,

I have never looked into the actual values in the metadata. I have compared the images before and after lens correction by using dcraw and comparing with lightroom. There is a difference and it is slight on on the vignette correction.  I believe that Eric Chan stated in the LuLa video that was the update to the LR4 videos that they do apply the data but maybe not full strength. I am pretty sure that is what I remember I will have to go back and look. Vignetting is easy to correct using ACR or LR and also C1.

I don't believe that Canon and Nikon write lens correction information, they have data about the lens settings and focus point but not correction. Olympus is one that writes the data and Eric mentioned that as well in the video interview.

Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
mvsoske
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



WWW
« Reply #26 on: September 05, 2013, 05:35:28 PM »
ReplyReply

I believe that Eric Chan stated in the LuLa video that was the update to the LR4 videos that they do apply the data but maybe not full strength. I am pretty sure that is what I remember I will have to go back and look.

Alan:  You are correct.  Eric talks about 4/3rds, and other mirrorless cameras which enable LR to read the lens data.  It is on the LR 4 Update video titled "Eric Chan Interview Part 1" and starts at the 7:18 mark.

Mark
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2101


« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2013, 07:06:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Many of the mirrorless models do have metadata-driven lens corrections.  In the case of vignetting and distortion, these corrections are often a bit conservative (i.e., they tend to undercorrect, rather than correct fully). 
Logged

Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1634


WWW
« Reply #28 on: September 05, 2013, 09:11:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks to Alan, and others who answered this. 

I wasn't aware of this process being done under the covers.  Based on my results LR is doing a bit more heavy lifting on the Canon and Nikon preset lens profiles.  So far I am not too impressed with the results on the 18-55 in this regard.  LR in the past has always been tack on with default vignetting corrections from the LCP's that are fixed.  On the Fuji, it's not very accurate and in fact tend to over correct in the opposite direction. 

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
gwyrdd
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #29 on: February 21, 2014, 12:04:54 AM »
ReplyReply

While a total newbie to this forum, I feel pressured to add a comment.
I recently bought an X-E2 (having got tired of lugging my heavy Pentax DSLR around while out trekking, etc). Though I love my Pentax, I am blown away by the quality of the X-E2 files (all Raw).
I spent a significant amount of time looking for a suitable converter. While I really love my LR 4.x, I have a problem at the moment with Adobe's CC plans, so have looked for alternatives (I am a PC, Win 7 user). Photo Ninja has some nice features, but I could find no way to do copy/paste of edits, so this was out. For financial reasons, I selected Capture One Express 7 (really great range of first-rate options, very well presented & easy to use) as I did not need the extras for the Pro version.
What followed was a nightmare - I was totally unable to activate my purchase, despite multiple attempts and numerous emails to Support. They ended up suggesting that I disable my firewall & antivirus software before trying the activation process again! Whoa, hello, why must I do such a stupid thing, something that I have never ever had to do before? Needless to say, I have now requested a full refund, & would to raise a minor alarm about this problem for other potential purchasers.
As a result, I have gone back to the SilkyPix which came with the camera. While not particularly friendly or easy to use, I have got wonderful results by using this to simply produce my tif file, then have continued the editing with an older version of Photoshop or LR - miles better than the C1 files. My thinking is that Fuji have helped & worked with these guys (who I have previously avoided, having LR) because they have been able to generate the best demosaicing algorithm for their X-trans files. Once I have a great quality tif, I can do whatever I want afterwards. I have been astounded at the sharpness of my edited file (with a little help from Topaz Detail) - examples available if anyone wants to see them.
While this process is more time-consuming than LR alone, the quality of the result more than justifies it - I am gob-smacked!
Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 542


« Reply #30 on: February 21, 2014, 11:21:41 AM »
ReplyReply

As a result, I have gone back to the SilkyPix which came with the camera. While not particularly friendly or easy to use, I have got wonderful results by using this to simply produce my tif file, then have continued the editing with an older version of Photoshop or LR - miles better than the C1 files. My thinking is that Fuji have helped & worked with these guys (who I have previously avoided, having LR) because they have been able to generate the best demosaicing algorithm for their X-trans files. Once I have a great quality tif, I can do whatever I want afterwards. I have been astounded at the sharpness of my edited file (with a little help from Topaz Detail) - examples available if anyone wants to see them.
While this process is more time-consuming than LR alone, the quality of the result more than justifies it - I am gob-smacked!

I don't disagree with you.  I used SilkyPix 3 and CS5 initially.  While the user interface is retarded I thought as a raw converter it worked quite well.

I then bought a license for SilkyPix 5.  The user interface is definitely not perfect but it is better than version 3.

I eventually switched over to Iridient Developer and CS5 because with version 2.2 I thought Iridient got it right. 
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad