Lightroom rendering poor detail w/ Fuji X-Pro1's RAW

Started May 30, 2012 | Discussions
boinkphoto
Contributing MemberPosts: 908Gear list
Like?
Re: how about for portraits?
In reply to Usee, Jun 1, 2012

The way I look at RAW files is that you can always run them through the supplied (in this case SilikyPix) RAW converter unmanipulated and in bulk to get OOC JPEG equivalents. Yes, it's an extra step, but not an onerous one.

If you shoot JPEG only however, you're SOL if the data you needed is outside the 8 bits that it gets manged into.

In short, if you want the relative convenience of JPEG but the insurance of RAW, then just batch all of your images through the RAW converter with the default settings.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,152Gear list
Like?
Re: Lightroom rendering poor detail w/ Fuji X-Pro1's RAW
In reply to headofdestiny, Jun 1, 2012

Well my opinion hardly matters, and I might or might not know what I'm doing, but certainly hundreds of others, including thousands of their photos, means something, no? And what about pretty much every reviewer?

Why would I post examples? I don't have an issue with the jpegs, and thousands of examples already exist online to support my perspective, and Tariq posting his jpeg doesn't make his opinion of any more value than mine. It's not a contest.

If you really wanted to take up his fight, maybe you should post some corroborating jpegs? Just a suggestion.

headofdestiny wrote:

Maybe it won't make the jpegs less impressive to you, but that doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist. At least Tariq posted various examples, and you should do the same.

RealXenuis wrote:

Spending more time on fred miranda might learn me something, but it's not gonna make the jpegs from the XP1 any less impressive, and your attempt at snarkiness isn't helping Tariq's argument that the Jpegs have issues. I think you've confused yourself. Regardless, thanks for your suggestion, I was just thinking how I (and apparently you) don't spend enough time on forums and that I should really find where all the serious ones are! For you know, seriously ppl like you

headofdestiny wrote:

RealXenuis wrote:

Uhh, no. Everything you said. You should buy one, or search the web for more examples and not point to fred miranda. Really.

The Jpegs are overwhelmingly praised, both by users and reviewers. It's your MO to disagree, but if you're looking for a preponderance of evidence, you're gonna find it hard to find.

LOL. Tariq was one of the first to own this camera, and those are HIS samples on fred miranda. You should spend more time on serious forums, like fred miranda, if you actually want to learn a little bit.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
headofdestiny
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,179
Like?
Re: Lightroom rendering poor detail w/ Fuji X-Pro1's RAW
In reply to RealXenuis, Jun 1, 2012

RealXenuis wrote:

Well my opinion hardly matters, and I might or might not know what I'm doing, but certainly hundreds of others, including thousands of their photos, means something, no? And what about pretty much every reviewer?

Why would I post examples? I don't have an issue with the jpegs, and thousands of examples already exist online to support my perspective, and Tariq posting his jpeg doesn't make his opinion of any more value than mine. It's not a contest.

You're refuting Tariq's claims, and that's why you should post examples. So far, we have tangible examples from a well known poster on various forums being refuted by someone who has barely been in these forums for a year and refuses to post examples to prove the contrary. What do you expect?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeff Seltzer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,680
Like?
My experience so far is fine
In reply to Todd Owyoung, Jun 1, 2012

I admit, I'm not a pixel-peeper. Honestly, I wish I never even saw this thread, because it has me looking for things I would not otherwise look for with LR. I think if I'm seeing anything wrong, it's more based on the power of suggestion than anything else.

If you look at my photography (website), you will see that I have a special fondness of trees, so this is all important to me. You will also see I'm detailed oriented, so I do care. I will continue to monitor this thread, but my own experience with LR so far has been fine.

(Since other cameras receive much quicker LR support, I wonder if they are spared this level of extreme pixel-peeping scrutiny? And, if they were subjected to this level of analysis, I bet we'd see lots of complaints as well?)

Anyway, I've only processed a few images so far in LR from yesterday (I don't see the need to re-process anything since I was quite pleased with the first results). Personally, no complaints with LR...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmstraton
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: Lightroom rendering poor detail w/ Fuji X-Pro1's RAW
In reply to jwalker019, Jun 2, 2012

You're wrong - there is micro detail in the jpegs that is not showing up on Lightroom, it's a posterization effect - the only thing better in LR is the shadows and the ability to pull back highlights. Beyond that the jpegs are better. It's sad, so sad the camera is going back. I blame Fuji more thn adobe.
--
Doug

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
davidjlee
Regular MemberPosts: 130Gear list
Like?
Re: My experience so far is fine
In reply to Jeff Seltzer, Jun 2, 2012

My experience has been good as well.

I spent a few hours today post-processing 28 photos from RAW in Lightroom 4.1 that I took in April. I processed many of the same pictures from JPG at the time.

I agree with what everyone has said -- that the dynamic range available is much greater. That's not a big surprise. Several images that were throwaways as JPG I could recover from RAW in Lightroom.

I didn't see any signs of Lightroom mishandling the images as described in this thread. Granted, there aren't many pictures of green leaves.

Lightroom did (not surprisingly) make me remove fringing that the in-camera JPG engine took care of automatically.

I posted the images here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidjlee/sets/72157630005949318/detail/

If someone sees a Lightroom problem with them I'd love to hear about it (or maybe not, because then I'd just worry).

 davidjlee's gear list:davidjlee's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tariq
Senior MemberPosts: 1,507Gear list
Like?
Re: Lightroom rendering poor detail w/ Fuji X-Pro1's RAW
In reply to headofdestiny, Jun 2, 2012

This is exactly why I should just not bother with the forum here at DpReview. I naively thought things might be different on the Fuji Forum as it was quite different here 8 years ago when I owned my S2 and was a regular contributor. Back then, there were more serious folks - objective and critical thinkers - who were not just out to defend their brand no matter what. It was a small group but we actually achieved a lot, such as getting the attention of Thomas Knoll when we discovered issues with ACR's quality when handling Fuji S2 raws - and I posted many examples which showed the issue. Result - raw quality was improved for us S2 owners thanks to Thomas. Not sure that could happen today with the bozo's around here who can't be taken seriously. Anyway, lesson learned.

headofdestiny wrote:

RealXenuis wrote:

Well my opinion hardly matters, and I might or might not know what I'm doing, but certainly hundreds of others, including thousands of their photos, means something, no? And what about pretty much every reviewer?

Why would I post examples? I don't have an issue with the jpegs, and thousands of examples already exist online to support my perspective, and Tariq posting his jpeg doesn't make his opinion of any more value than mine. It's not a contest.

You're refuting Tariq's claims, and that's why you should post examples. So far, we have tangible examples from a well known poster on various forums being refuted by someone who has barely been in these forums for a year and refuses to post examples to prove the contrary. What do you expect?

 Tariq's gear list:Tariq's gear list
Sony RX1 Ricoh GR Pentax K-3
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
erik schmitt
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
Re: My experience so far is fine
In reply to Jeff Seltzer, Jan 13, 2013

I've just spent two days testing the xpro1 against my nikon d700. I've come to the conclusion that the Fuji has superior dynamic range and comparable image quality. The smearing or watercolor effect is visible at actual pixel level in photoshop. And it is enhanced by resing the image up (I resed up both xpro and d700 images of foliage shots to 20x30 to test this). However, the 13x19 crops of the 20 x 30 images I printed from the files on my Epson 3880 tell an interesting story. The xpro images are superior to me and to everyone I've shown the images to. They look different but better to me.

If the images look great on screen and great as prints what more can you ask for?

This is new imaging technology. It does look and behave in a way that is unfamiliar. We don't like change so we have a tendency to reject it. I admit to being wary of this and I'm tempted to stick to what I know already (the Nikon system). But I love using the camera and the results seem superior to the d700 and that is amazing.

Here is a link to some test images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/erikschmitt/sets/72157632511445881/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Imagefoundry
Regular MemberPosts: 269
Like?
Re: My experience so far is fine
In reply to erik schmitt, Jan 13, 2013

7 month old thread, beaten to death, revived in your first post to the forum...

Welcome to DPReview!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads