X-Trans for commercial work

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
Najinsky
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,598
Like?
Re: X-Trans for commercial work
In reply to Randy Benter, 8 months ago

Randy Benter wrote:

Asylum Photo wrote:

Looks like we've had a few shooters reply that they've had no issues.

Certainly no one here has said they do have issues.

But we have one guy who doesn't have the camera(s) claiming that there are issues.

This place is predictable.

You seem to have missed the point; the OP is not asking if the artifacts/smearing exist. It is well known that this can be a problem when looking at pixel-level detail in X-Trans files. The OP posted examples of the artifacts he is concerned about.

The OP is asking if any pros have had issues with submitting X-Trans files for professional use. He is not claiming there are such issues; he is asking. If the OP has previously had his images subjected to pixel-level scrutiny, then he has a valid concern and question for the forum.

Your attempt to discredit and dismiss the OP was rude and "predictable".

To the OP: As far as I know, no pros have reported problems with submitting X-Trans images. Some of them even use Adobe raw processing, though other converters eliminate the pixel-level artifacts. I tend to agree with others who have said that a good photo is a good photo even if you can pixel-peep and find a few pixels that aren't as they should be. If a pro ever does have an X-Trans image rejected due to such artifacts, they could address the issue by processing the raw file with a different application (like the aforementioned CaptureOne). Whether or not it is worth purchasing/using another application is completely up to the individual.

Thanks Randy, your response is appreciated.

-Najinsky

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow