Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones? Locked

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
This thread is locked.
Tapper123
Senior MemberPosts: 1,166Gear list
Fuji just needs to be made aware...
In reply to mistermejia, 7 months ago

mistermejia wrote:

Is it Fuji itself ??

Yes, and I think it's on purpose. Having read that recent interview it was said that Fuji had many female customers in Asia who prefer "dreamy" soft/smooth looking portraits, which is opposite what Western customers prefer.

Fuji is very good at responding to customer needs, so we just have to find a way to let Fuji know that options for much less or even no NR at high ISO is highly desirable to their Western markets.

For a start, sites like DPreview and others need to use their contacts with Fuji to communicate this on behalf of the user base.

I'm pretty sure a firmware update could resolve this complaint pretty effectively. Just a matter of adding more NR options really. And Fuji is king of firmware updates.

 Tapper123's gear list:Tapper123's gear list
RX100 III Sony Alpha NEX-F3 +2 more
Joel Stern
Forum ProPosts: 10,275Gear list
Re: Now it is clear as light
In reply to nixda, 7 months ago

nixda wrote:

In the images processed from the raw data without excessive noise reduction, you look 20 years older. Since some of the Fuji X-Trans cameras are targeted primarily to young Japanese women, it is clear why they would render the images the way they do.

What about the claims by others that NR is being allied to RAW at all ISO settings?

-- hide signature --

If i am typing on my iPad, please excuse any typos.

TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Defeat
In reply to taz98spin, 7 months ago

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

I had a broken watch once, and it was right twice a day.

I could go on and on, but if we are going to talk about "many professionals", lets get a clear look at how many actually shoot jpeg vs RAW. RAW will always have it's advantages and jpeg will always have it's compromises. There is a reason for all of this. If you want the final say and to get the most out of your images, for yourself or for your clients, then you shoot Raw. If other factors are more important to you than those, then you make compromises.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Ask any studio photographer in Korea that works for a studio that does themed wedding/ engagement photos.

Not sure if you know what I'm talking about, but many studios in Korea have sets built inside their studios to mimic different locations, so many couples will do their wedding photos / engagement photos there in a controlled environment to announce their engagement or show the photos on the day of the wedding.

So of course you'll ask me how do I know if most studios shoot JPEG. I shopped around 7 of the most popular places in Seoul to get my own photos taken and every studio told me that they shoot JPEGS. So if the top 7 are shooting JPEGs, what makes you think the other studios will shoot RAW?

This trend is popular in China/Taiwan as well. Although, I can't vouch that the Chinese studios use JPEG, but if the formula works in Korea, I don't see a reason to differ.

I also had my real wedding in Las Vegas. The photographer that came with the wedding package for the MGM Grand also shoots JPEGS only. And.. being a photographer myself, we talked quite a bit and he told me his peers in the Las Vegas wedding market shoot JPEGs.

& if you think he's lying, when we initially shopped around for venues in Las Vegas, we went to 5 different venues, and all the wedding photo packages had photographers that shot JPEGs.

So there, that is my proof of "Many professionals I know"

Did I ever say that RAW does not have advantage?

But like you mentioned, "other factors", as in time & money are important to some, so "get it right in camera" is what I and the many JPEG photographers try to do.

-- hide signature --

So you are saying jpeg is the new pro standard? Yeah, okay... I work as head of photography for a company that employs over 400 photographers as independent contractors. They all shoot raw. Using your logic I know far more working pros shooting raw, and that is just within one company, than you know shooting jpeg, so I guess I win. I also work with photographers that shoot a lot of high end portraits for celebrities (I am not involved in this on a photography basis and am not a portrait shooter), and all of these photographers, who make a pretty penny I might add, shoot raw.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with shooting jpegs, but making it sound like jpeg is some sort of standard amongst pros? Let me tell you that you are talking about a minority. Don't even get me started on wedding photographers. I don't know a single one who shoots in jpeg, and here in LA/Hollywood/Beverly Hills, we have some really great ones.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

I did not say that JPEG is the new pro standard. I said I know many professionals that shoot JPEG.

And I pointed out that, relatively speaking, you are referring to a minority of pro photographers.

It's impressive that you know more than 400 professional photographers & that you're the head of photography! If you're such an influential person in photography, I guess I should feel honored that you're even responding to me & take your word as the truth?

I don't even know a quarter of those photographers personally, but there is a standard that we use, and they all follow. Raw files are stored on servers for a certain amount of time in case there are issues, then they are flushed.

How do you even have the time to spend on the forums, I can't imagine how busy you must be to manage 400 photographers!

I make the decisions when it comes to photography issues, hiring and firing, setting up deals with equipment manufacturers and retailers, training, and other various photography related business. Your  reductio ad absurdum argument suggesting I micro manage 400 individuals is stupid.

& as for the high end celebrity photographers and great wedding photographers in California, maybe you can connect me to some of them, so I too can make a pretty penny. Maybe then, I'll be able to walk away from my 90k + job and shoot RAW too!

90K. Thats cute. I remember my first job.

Oh and also, good for you that you got to win in a forum discussion or should I saw argument? Must be a great achievement for you!

It may have been if it wasn't so easy.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,587
trying to beat the test charts
In reply to mistermejia, 7 months ago

mistermejia wrote:

Is it Fuji itself ?? Or could this be a SABOTAGE thing from the sensor maker itself??

Does Fuji actually make this sensors, or do they buy them from Sony or someone else? I am just curious because i CAN'T believe that the jpegs are changing so much with the new sensors, i couldn't possibly believe that Fuji is just bypassing or ignoring this skin tone issue.

I just moved from nikon to get away from plastic looking skin tones, and Fuji's new cameras are all coming out like this now??? I don't get it.

I noticed lately it's been a trend among manufacturers using very aggressive noise reduction even at low ISOs. Everybody is employing adaptive algorithms nowadays separating areas with low special frequencies and reducing color saturation and cranking up the noise reduction in those. Every manufacturer gets different results, and they are all ugly. It's just Fuji was especially unlucky with their noise reduction algorithms producing very noticeable plastic looks.

TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to BillyInya, 7 months ago

BillyInya wrote:

TThorne wrote:

BillyInya wrote:

TThorne wrote:

BillyInya wrote:

TThorne wrote:

BillyInya wrote:

TThorne wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Is it Fuji itself ?? Or could this be a SABOTAGE thing from the sensor maker itself??

It is in the processing. I believe that, in an attempt to win the more tangible battle, showing less noise at higher ISO, aggressive NR and processing is causing this issue. So many consumers these days equate lack of noise to low light IQ, because it is tangible and can be seen easily, that they forget the other, and some times more important aspects of low light IQ, like texture and detail retention. Fuji is smart here. They know who they are catering to and so they pull their own special wool sheet.

Does Fuji actually make this sensors, or do they buy them from Sony or someone else?

They buy them from Sony.

I am just curious because i CAN'T believe that the jpegs are changing so much with the new sensors, i couldn't possibly believe that Fuji is just bypassing or ignoring this skin tone issue.

I doubt they are ignoring it, but there is only so much they can do before they introduce noise back not the photo, which is fine in my opinion, but then it will effect all the people who only ever post DPR high ISO sample comparison shots to declare Fuji the noiseless low light king.

I just moved from nikon to get away from plastic looking skin tones, and Fuji's new cameras are all coming out like this now??? I don't get it.

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

Give yourself one full week with an S5Pro, or even an ancient S3Pro for that matter, and you won't be able to understand why people even bother with RAW let alone are talking about it.

Thats funny. One of the things the S5 Pro was known for was it's amazing highlight retention, being able to pull back up to 5 stops while retaining detail and color. Pretty amazing feature of that camera. Oh, by the way, that was a function of the raw files.

I'm afraid if you think the S5pro (or S3Pro as they have exactly the same sensor) only gave you extra in RAW then you don't know the camera.

Oh, is that the case Billy? Are the jpegs as flexible in post as the raw files in the S5/S3? Hmmm...

Is a matter of fact yes. The jpegs out of the S3Pro and S5Pro hold up surprisingly well to quite a bit of post processing when compared to other jpegs. If you had experience with either camera you would know this.

If you are talking about RAW, then I can't help you. I gave up labouring away with RAW almost a decade ago. But by all means, you keep plodding along at it.

So you are comparing the jpegs vs other cameras jpegs while I am talking about the extreme highlight recovery of the raw files vs the jpeg files. Why? I could care lass how the jpegs stack up against other jpegs. Jpegs only handle a finite amount of information, whereas raw files, and this is a fact Billy, contain substantially more information.

I'll say it again in a different way. If you want to get the most out of the S5/S3, especially with regards to this one feature that the camera is well known for, then you are shooting raw.

For goodness sake, pick up an S5Pro or an S3Pro, hold it in your actual hand, shoot with it and inspect the image quality coming straight out of it and learn why for so many shooting RAW is almost totally unneccessary and a chore of the past.

Typical Billy. Gets into a corner and starts repeating some mantra without addressing anything in the post. You are so predictable.

Perhaps before you start to tell us all about the S5Pro, perhaps you should ... oh I don't know ... maybe use one !!

Are you aware if I have or have not Billy? Funny thing is that there are a couple for sale near me and I bet I could buy one and a couple lenses and come back here and post photos from it before you ever post anything from any of your imaginary cameras.

You don't own an S5Pro and you don't know the S5Pro so if I were you I would not be telling us all about the S5Pro.

I could literally say the same about you.

No you can't.

I am not convinced you are a photographer of any sort, nor that you own any cameras. There, I said it.

But yes, why don't you go and buy one of the ones near you. After using it for a while you will begin to understand what I and others are saying.

No need to understand because you are arguing something totally different than what I am talking about, just for the sake of doing it. Totally worthless. Thanks for being consistent.

What is worthless is when people come in here and attempt to start to lecture the community on a camera they do not own and have never owned.

Actually, you seem to be the one who is misrepresenting the conversation. I am not discussing the merits so much of the camera so much as I am saying that an 8 bit jpeg container does not hold the information that a raw file does, and that is an irrefutable fact.

The irony here is that you will argue against that fact, and then turn around and start pumping out drivel about how a few PDAF pixels reduce resolution in new X series cameras and make the older models superior. You are the laughing stock of this forum.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,587
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to TThorne, 7 months ago

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

Yes, how many? Do you have any statistical data? Are we all just rehashing our limited experiences? In my limited experience I haven't seen a single wedding photographer shooting raw. If you ask them you get an obvious answer: time is money!

Joel Stern
Forum ProPosts: 10,275Gear list
Re: Fuji just needs to be made aware...
In reply to Tapper123, 7 months ago

Tapper123 wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Is it Fuji itself ??

Yes, and I think it's on purpose. Having read that recent interview it was said that Fuji had many female customers in Asia who prefer "dreamy" soft/smooth looking portraits, which is opposite what Western customers prefer.

Fuji is very good at responding to customer needs, so we just have to find a way to let Fuji know that options for much less or even no NR at high ISO is highly desirable to their Western markets.

For a start, sites like DPreview and others need to use their contacts with Fuji to communicate this on behalf of the user base.

I'm pretty sure a firmware update could resolve this complaint pretty effectively. Just a matter of adding more NR options really. And Fuji is king of firmware updates.

What about the presence of NR in RAW files?  Why do they do this?

-- hide signature --

If i am typing on my iPad, please excuse any typos.

hellocrowley
Senior MemberPosts: 1,193
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to TThorne, 7 months ago

Guys, read this link http://gizmodo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-olympic-photographers-capture-s-1521746623

AP and Getty pros all shoot JPEG exclusively at the Olympics and get amazing photos. RAW is not the only thing that pros use.

TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to forpetessake, 7 months ago

forpetessake wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

Yes, how many? Do you have any statistical data? Are we all just rehashing our limited experiences? In my limited experience I haven't seen a single wedding photographer shooting raw. If you ask them you get an obvious answer: time is money!

Thats funny. A well known wedding photographer here in LA asked me the other day if I would be interested in being a second shooter, which I politely turned down as that is not my cup of tea. However, he was telling me nightmares of a past second shooter who thought that raw files were simply unaltered jpegs out of the camera, and that when this guy gave him a a hard drive full of jpegs, he was mortified and never worked with him again.

I do not know any wedding photographers that shoot jpeg. I am not saying they do not exist. In fact, I bet they do and I believe you. But wedding photographers that I know all shoot raw and have the most amazing sets of shortcuts and presets built into Photoshop and Lightroom that I could ever imagine. One of them even has a custom keyboard setup that I can't explain fully, but that has entire processes built into one touch keys. That is the type of thing that highly successful guys in that arena do to save time.

Cutting out the safety net of the raw file for a high paying job is just irresponsible in my opinion, but I am happy for anyone who can get away with it on a regular basis. I do not love processing photos at all. But it is a necessary thing.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
nixda
Senior MemberPosts: 1,876Gear list
Re: Now it is clear as light
In reply to Joel Stern, 7 months ago

Joel Stern wrote:

nixda wrote:

In the images processed from the raw data without excessive noise reduction, you look 20 years older. Since some of the Fuji X-Trans cameras are targeted primarily to young Japanese women, it is clear why they would render the images the way they do.

What about the claims by others that NR is being allied to RAW at all ISO settings?

As far as I understand, the demosaicing algorithm with it's interpolation and associated averaging automatically leads to some sort of noise reduction. There does not seem to be any active noise reduction on top of it. There mud be a similar effect for demosaicing the Bayer CFA, but perhaps less than for the X-Trans CFA.

 nixda's gear list:nixda's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8
TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to hellocrowley, 7 months ago

hellocrowley wrote:

Guys, read this link http://gizmodo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-olympic-photographers-capture-s-1521746623

AP and Getty pros all shoot JPEG exclusively at the Olympics and get amazing photos. RAW is not the only thing that pros use.

This makes sense as there entire focus is the speed at which they can get it to print. Not only is there no time to process raw files, but they have to send the files back over hot spots and dedicated internet feeds, so smaller file sizes are necessary to facilitate the transfer of heavy loads of images going back to base. This is a situation where it just makes sense.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
taz98spin
Contributing MemberPosts: 508Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to TThorne, 7 months ago

TThorne wrote:

hellocrowley wrote:

Guys, read this link http://gizmodo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-olympic-photographers-capture-s-1521746623

AP and Getty pros all shoot JPEG exclusively at the Olympics and get amazing photos. RAW is not the only thing that pros use.

This makes sense as there entire focus is the speed at which they can get it to print. Not only is there no time to process raw files, but they have to send the files back over hot spots and dedicated internet feeds, so smaller file sizes are necessary to facilitate the transfer of heavy loads of images going back to base. This is a situation where it just makes sense.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

So can you tell me how many professional photographers are at the Olympics shooting JPEG please?

-- hide signature --
 taz98spin's gear list:taz98spin's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-Pro1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Fujifilm X-T1 Sony Alpha 7S +8 more
TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to taz98spin, 7 months ago

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

hellocrowley wrote:

Guys, read this link http://gizmodo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-olympic-photographers-capture-s-1521746623

AP and Getty pros all shoot JPEG exclusively at the Olympics and get amazing photos. RAW is not the only thing that pros use.

This makes sense as there entire focus is the speed at which they can get it to print. Not only is there no time to process raw files, but they have to send the files back over hot spots and dedicated internet feeds, so smaller file sizes are necessary to facilitate the transfer of heavy loads of images going back to base. This is a situation where it just makes sense.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

So can you tell me how many professional photographers are at the Olympics shooting JPEG please?

-- hide signature --

Easy, they have to. It is a matter of transfer speed over the internet and getting the photo to print. This is a very specific need, and not to be confused with most types of photography. Getting it published first is the name of their game.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to taz98spin, 7 months ago

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

hellocrowley wrote:

Guys, read this link http://gizmodo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-olympic-photographers-capture-s-1521746623

AP and Getty pros all shoot JPEG exclusively at the Olympics and get amazing photos. RAW is not the only thing that pros use.

This makes sense as there entire focus is the speed at which they can get it to print. Not only is there no time to process raw files, but they have to send the files back over hot spots and dedicated internet feeds, so smaller file sizes are necessary to facilitate the transfer of heavy loads of images going back to base. This is a situation where it just makes sense.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

So can you tell me how many professional photographers are at the Olympics shooting JPEG please?

-- hide signature --

Oh, and by the way, you can use the term "many" to describe any size group you want to, but when it is on the line and the image quality is the first thing that matters, your "many" is a minority.

Look, I would rather shoot jpegs also, and I am a bit jealous of these olympics guys who get to shoot and shoot and never sit and process. But it just doesn't work out that way.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
Lyle From Canada
Senior MemberPosts: 1,358
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to TThorne, 7 months ago

Who cares what pros shoot, the point is they shoot, and topics like this are of zero interest to them.

-- hide signature --

Fuji x-pro1 with 14, 18, 23, 35, 60, 55-200, fuji x100s and WA adapter, fuji x10

taz98spin
Contributing MemberPosts: 508Gear list
Don't Argue with TThorne, he's an industry established head of photography <nt>
In reply to forpetessake, 7 months ago

forpetessake wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

Yes, how many? Do you have any statistical data? Are we all just rehashing our limited experiences? In my limited experience I haven't seen a single wedding photographer shooting raw. If you ask them you get an obvious answer: time is money!

-- hide signature --
 taz98spin's gear list:taz98spin's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-Pro1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Fujifilm X-T1 Sony Alpha 7S +8 more
taz98spin
Contributing MemberPosts: 508Gear list
Re: Who is at fault for the waxy skin tones?
In reply to DocetLector, 7 months ago

DocetLector wrote:

Are you going to tell us that in a "controlled enviroment" you need to shoot above ISO 1600?

I don't know. What do you think I said?

-- hide signature --
 taz98spin's gear list:taz98spin's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-Pro1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Fujifilm X-T1 Sony Alpha 7S +8 more
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,718Gear list
Re: Fuji just needs to be made aware...
In reply to Joel Stern, 7 months ago

Joel Stern wrote:

Tapper123 wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Is it Fuji itself ??

Yes, and I think it's on purpose. Having read that recent interview it was said that Fuji had many female customers in Asia who prefer "dreamy" soft/smooth looking portraits, which is opposite what Western customers prefer.

Fuji is very good at responding to customer needs, so we just have to find a way to let Fuji know that options for much less or even no NR at high ISO is highly desirable to their Western markets.

For a start, sites like DPreview and others need to use their contacts with Fuji to communicate this on behalf of the user base.

I'm pretty sure a firmware update could resolve this complaint pretty effectively. Just a matter of adding more NR options really. And Fuji is king of firmware updates.

What about the presence of NR in RAW files? Why do they do this?

I don't know that they do, I haven't seen it.  Could you please post some examples of what you're talking about?

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
TThorne
Senior MemberPosts: 2,486Gear list
Re: Don't Argue with TThorne, he's an industry established head of photography <nt>
In reply to taz98spin, 7 months ago

taz98spin wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

Yes, how many? Do you have any statistical data? Are we all just rehashing our limited experiences? In my limited experience I haven't seen a single wedding photographer shooting raw. If you ask them you get an obvious answer: time is money!

-- hide signature --

Real mature. You should go around telling people how much you wish you made some more.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

 TThorne's gear list:TThorne's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7S Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 Asph Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH +5 more
taz98spin
Contributing MemberPosts: 508Gear list
Re: Don't Argue with TThorne, he's an industry established head of photography <nt>
In reply to TThorne, 7 months ago

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

TThorne wrote:

taz98spin wrote:

TThorne wrote:

For the life of me I can't understand people wanting a serious system camera and all the fixings just to shoot jpeg, but to each their own. Mix poor light, high ISO, and bad WB settings, then demand a SOOC jpeg, and that is what you may get.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

Many professionals that I know, shoot jpeg. It saves time + smaller file size for storage.

I shoot portraits and events and on top of that, I have a full time job. I have no time, nor desire to tinker with the RAW files.

-- hide signature --

"Many professionals I know"

Okay, I am not going to jump all over that one other than to ask, how many pros out there do you think shoot RAW?

Yes, how many? Do you have any statistical data? Are we all just rehashing our limited experiences? In my limited experience I haven't seen a single wedding photographer shooting raw. If you ask them you get an obvious answer: time is money!

-- hide signature --

Real mature. You should go around telling people how much you wish you made some more.

-- hide signature --

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Sir Winston Churchill

What's wrong? You are head of photography, are you not?

I did you a favor and advised forpetessake not to argue with you.

Or do you want to argue and get another "win" to boost your ego?

-- hide signature --
 taz98spin's gear list:taz98spin's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-Pro1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Fujifilm X-T1 Sony Alpha 7S +8 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads