Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?

Started Dec 9, 2013 | Discussions
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,076Gear list
Like?
Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
Dec 9, 2013

Old subject and debate

The answer is definitly no. The issue is with the JPEG of foliage

If you develop the RAF in a good raw developper like C1 this is what you get

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52682516

The same with my EOS 52 and ACR gives excatly the same results with a samll advantage to the Fuji

The JPEG engine does not processe correctly foliage with loss of fine details

This is typically the part of the shoots where RAW development is needed

No issue, just proper handling even if other cameras can handle foliage in JPEGs in a better way

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 9, 2013

I think it's fair to say in some situations there is an issue and in others there isn't.

For those who have their workflow geared around Lightroom (such as myself) it is a problem still

Avoiding the problem does not necessarily remove the problem. I am still hoping Adobe & Fuji can work together to fix this.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WT Jones
Senior MemberPosts: 2,475
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 9, 2013

I have yet to see a problem with any of my shots. My raw conversion is 100% LR

-- hide signature --

Warren

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,268Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to WT Jones, Dec 9, 2013

This summer some of the greens like pastures didn't look quite right in the jpegs.

Since using Photo Ninja on the RAW files those same shots look fine and much nicer than the ACR conversions.

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,889Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 10, 2013

baobob wrote:

Old subject and debate

The answer is definitly no. The issue is with the JPEG of foliage

If you develop the RAF in a good raw developper like C1 this is what you get

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52682516

The same with my EOS 52 and ACR gives excatly the same results with a samll advantage to the Fuji

The JPEG engine does not processe correctly foliage with loss of fine details

This is typically the part of the shoots where RAW development is needed

No issue, just proper handling even if other cameras can handle foliage in JPEGs in a better way

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

I haven't tried Photo Ninja yet, but I have tried Iridient Developer.  No issues with foliage.  I haven't downloaded the LR beta as it expires soon.  I'll wait to see how Aperture and the release of the new LR handles raw before I commit to another converter.

If you must use OOC jpegs with folliage and have the Nik Collection, use Sharpenor 3 and sharpen based on color range.  Select the folliage color with the eye dropper, and only the folliage will be sharpened.  Looks very nice.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chris Dodkin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,115Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Sal Baker, Dec 10, 2013

Got to love NIKs products - they were worth it when they were individually priced

As a bundle it's a no brainer

-- hide signature --

http://www.dodkin.com
Chris@1D-Images.com
Mac Pro/MacBook Pro/iPods/iPhones/iPad

 Chris Dodkin's gear list:Chris Dodkin's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS-1D Canon EOS-1D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 30D +34 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,076Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to tinpusher, Dec 10, 2013

I use C1 7E and also find foliage much better than ACR

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hexxthalion
Contributing MemberPosts: 536Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 10, 2013

CaptureOne user here - no problems at all (been LR user since the first BETA)

 hexxthalion's gear list:hexxthalion's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alessandro63
Contributing MemberPosts: 787
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 10, 2013

baobob wrote:

Old subject and debate

The answer is definitly no. The issue is with the JPEG of foliage

The correct answer is, well, yes, because the most used raw converter (Camera RAW, the engine of Photoshop and LR) shows it.

I agree it's not a sensor's issue. Third-party developers demonstrate that there is a better way to extract detail from this sensor, but this doesn't mean there is not a problem. We don't exactly know where the origin is, but until Adobe's converter and perhaps fuji's own in-camera conversion will be fixed, the problem is there and WE solve it by using different software when needed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Alessandro63, Dec 10, 2013

Alessandro63 wrote:

baobob wrote:

Old subject and debate

The answer is definitly no. The issue is with the JPEG of foliage

The correct answer is, well, yes, because the most used raw converter (Camera RAW, the engine of Photoshop and LR) shows it.

I agree it's not a sensor's issue. Third-party developers demonstrate that there is a better way to extract detail from this sensor, but this doesn't mean there is not a problem. We don't exactly know where the origin is, but until Adobe's converter and perhaps fuji's own in-camera conversion will be fixed, the problem is there and WE solve it by using different software when needed.

Problem is it's not just foliage, ACR can often smudge and smear details of the X-Trans RAWs or bleed color. This is why some pros and bloggers dislike the X series - not so much the camera, but the roadblocks in workflow to those who use Lightroom / Photoshop.

I just don't think the X cameras are successful enough yet for Adobe to really give much of a care to be honest. Hopefully in time they will start to take notice.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alessandro63
Contributing MemberPosts: 787
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to WT Jones, Dec 10, 2013

WT Jones wrote:

I have yet to see a problem with any of my shots. My raw conversion is 100% LR

-- hide signature --

Warren

Because, perhaps, you haven't looked for it...

LR does a very good job in general. But there are occasions in which you can actually see a big difference in small detail/foliage when compared to "better" converters (those that extract more detail as C1, Iridient, RPP and the like).

OOF small details, and a sort of "facet" effect, in particular on the foliage (the one someone call watercolor and such) are visible even without pixel-peeping. Also, sort of blurred borders you may find on some coloured object against a blue sky (that may result in a lighter border on buildings/roofs when converting to B&W).

These are known conversion problems using camera raw (PS and LR). They're getting better, but there's still room for crisper results, as demonstrated by other converters.
What "saves" camera raw is that, compared to crisper developers, it shows way less noise (guess: adobe's using some anti-aliasing/noise "under the hood" procedure). It would suffice adobe offered a way to choose between the crisper/noisier and the softer output...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to WT Jones, Dec 10, 2013

WT Jones wrote:

I have yet to see a problem with any of my shots. My raw conversion is 100% LR

-- hide signature --

Warren

Well if you haven't used anything else, you have no real basis for comparison.

You may find this interesting - some good recent comparisons and also a bit on the false detail issue as well

http://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/2013/11/iridient-developer-lightroom-fuji-x-trans-files/

Indeed a lot of users who switch say it's like having a new camera the difference is so obvious at 100%.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alessandro63
Contributing MemberPosts: 787
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to stimpy, Dec 10, 2013

stimpy wrote:
I just don't think the X cameras are successful enough yet for Adobe to really give much of a care to be honest. Hopefully in time they will start to take notice.

On the contrary, I think X cameras are quite successful. In my opinion, it's the software department at Fuji that's not the most brilliant one. Adobe's big enough to do a better job but I think they need help by the maker. After all, it should have been Fuji to give technical details on the sensor and development to Adobe, am I wrong?

Perhaps I could be wrong, judging from the results coming from free software (I mean DCRAW and all its derived converters). But we must take into account that there are many other things apart pure detail, and there are good photographers getting sensational stuff out of LR with X-Trans.

In fact the use of, say, Iridient as an alternative engine for LR is useful only in certain, particular situations. I'll repeat that, if Adobe offered the choice to disable its pre-denoising/antialiasing, we would get the best out of its products in any case. But I cannot know if it would indeed be switchable or if they would have to rewrite the converter...

All in all, we know that Adobe has not made the best but is also slowly correcting things. Pity, its bad development at start has induced a sort of X-Trans paranoia, where the sensor is instead a very good one, and capable of lots of detail too. It's having a good success despite these hiccups with development, this is meaningful, isn't it?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,076Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Alessandro63, Dec 10, 2013

I agree it's not a sensor's issue. Third-party developers demonstrate that there is a better way to extract detail from this sensor, but this doesn't mean there is not a problem. We don't exactly know where the origin is, but until Adobe's converter and perhaps fuji's own in-camera conversion will be fixed, the problem is there and WE solve it by using different software when needed.

Good detailed analysis of the issue indeed!

Using C1 Ninja IR, ... solves the problem

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Spud0
Regular MemberPosts: 187
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 10, 2013

I guess its a good thing I don't take tired, hacky landscapes of trees.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Alessandro63, Dec 10, 2013

Alessandro63 wrote:

stimpy wrote:
I just don't think the X cameras are successful enough yet for Adobe to really give much of a care to be honest. Hopefully in time they will start to take notice.

On the contrary, I think X cameras are quite successful. In my opinion, it's the software department at Fuji that's not the most brilliant one. Adobe's big enough to do a better job but I think they need help by the maker. After all, it should have been Fuji to give technical details on the sensor and development to Adobe, am I wrong?

Perhaps I could be wrong, judging from the results coming from free software (I mean DCRAW and all its derived converters). But we must take into account that there are many other things apart pure detail, and there are good photographers getting sensational stuff out of LR with X-Trans.

In fact the use of, say, Iridient as an alternative engine for LR is useful only in certain, particular situations. I'll repeat that, if Adobe offered the choice to disable its pre-denoising/antialiasing, we would get the best out of its products in any case. But I cannot know if it would indeed be switchable or if they would have to rewrite the converter...

All in all, we know that Adobe has not made the best but is also slowly correcting things. Pity, its bad development at start has induced a sort of X-Trans paranoia, where the sensor is instead a very good one, and capable of lots of detail too. It's having a good success despite these hiccups with development, this is meaningful, isn't it?

What I mean is user base. 700,000 sales since the X100 is pretty insignificant. Ojly Fuji would know if this was 'a success' or not.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Spud0, Dec 10, 2013

Spud0 wrote:

I guess its a good thing I don't take tired, hacky landscapes of trees.

Helpful.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kewlguy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,570Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to baobob, Dec 10, 2013

I prefer C1 and Iridient over LR and way better than ooc JPG.

 kewlguy's gear list:kewlguy's gear list
Canon EOS 600D Nikon 1 J1 Canon EOS 6D Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tony Bonanno
Contributing MemberPosts: 722Gear list
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Spud0, Dec 10, 2013

Spud0 wrote:

I guess its a good thing I don't take tired, hacky landscapes of trees.

Made me laugh :-D.  In reality though, the issue of "smearing" fine detail is not just with foliage, although it reveals itself with foliage perhaps more severely.  Occasionally an issue with certain "skin" detail when compared side by side with Bayer sensor file.  As others have pointed out there are RAW conversion tools that address the issue better than LR/ACR.

-- hide signature --

Tony Bonanno Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
ASMP General member
www.bonannophoto.com

 Tony Bonanno's gear list:Tony Bonanno's gear list
Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Spud0
Regular MemberPosts: 187
Like?
Re: Is there a foliage issue with the X trans sensor ?
In reply to Tony Bonanno, Dec 10, 2013

Tony Bonanno wrote:

Spud0 wrote:

I guess its a good thing I don't take tired, hacky landscapes of trees.

Made me laugh :-D. In reality though, the issue of "smearing" fine detail is not just with foliage, although it reveals itself with foliage perhaps more severely. Occasionally an issue with certain "skin" detail when compared side by side with Bayer sensor file. As others have pointed out there are RAW conversion tools that address the issue better than LR/ACR.

-- hide signature --

Tony Bonanno Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
ASMP General member
www.bonannophoto.com

No doubt, I just meant that in jest(thought with a tinge of honesty to it - but to each their own :-P)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads