Fuji xe2

stimpy said:

Sal Baker said:

stimpy said:

Sal Baker said:

Robertisha said:

First of all how is everyone doing. I am new to this forum.

I am planing on picking up a xe2 ..and I mainly shoot raw. I don't shoot jpg at all. And currently have photoshop cs6. My question is. Will cs6 open the fuji raw files. And how is everyone feeling about their xe2. Thanks

Click to expand...

I spent part of yesterday testing my X-E2 RAW files in the new Capture One 7 that was released a couple of days ago. As mentioned in my other post, I have previously been using LR5.3 and Iridient Developer. They both produce excellent conversions when the settings are set to similar specs, and the converted files look about as good as my 5DII RAW files. But the Capture One 7 release is very impressive. The converted files are much more pleasing than my FF files, which is probably due to the 5DII having a low pass filter.

I think the Capture One people really took their time and really nailed X-Trans RAW conversion. The other converters I use are still very good, but they don't pull out as much fine detail without a lot of sharpening, and C1 gets it right much more quickly. I can't wait to print some of the C1 converted files.

Once you get your camera you can download free demos of all these converters and try them out. It's the only way to make an accurate judgement.

Sal

Click to expand...

Care to post raws and jpegs? I've only spent a little time with Capture one 7 and it fell short compared to Photo Ninja.

Click to expand...

Be glad to when I have time. I actually have an X-E2

How about you? Let's see the comparisons you mentioned. You seem to have a pretty definitive assessment of X-E2 files with the latest converters. Considering you don't own an X-E2, X-E1, X-Pro1 or X100s it will be interesting to see what you post.

Sal

Click to expand...

Sure, been testing most of the day.

PN - C1 - LR

Photo Ninja is doing a sterling job - pretty much from a one man band as well, and that should be applauded.

Click to expand...

Sal Baker said:

Robertisha said:

First of all how is everyone doing. I am new to this forum.

I am planing on picking up a xe2 ..and I mainly shoot raw. I don't shoot jpg at all. And currently have photoshop cs6. My question is. Will cs6 open the fuji raw files. And how is everyone feeling about their xe2. Thanks

Click to expand...

I spent part of yesterday testing my X-E2 RAW files in the new Capture One 7 that was released a couple of days ago. As mentioned in my other post, I have previously been using LR5.3 and Iridient Developer. They both produce excellent conversions when the settings are set to similar specs, and the converted files look about as good as my 5DII RAW files. But the Capture One 7 release is very impressive. The converted files are much more pleasing than my FF files, which is probably due to the 5DII having a low pass filter.

I think the Capture One people really took their time and really nailed X-Trans RAW conversion. The other converters I use are still very good, but they don't pull out as much fine detail without a lot of sharpening, and C1 gets it right much more quickly. I can't wait to print some of the C1 converted files.

Click to expand...

Sal Baker said:

Once you get your camera you can download free demos of all these converters and try them out. It's the only way to make an accurate judgement.

Sal

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Sal Baker said:

Robertisha said:

First of all how is everyone doing. I am new to this forum.

I am planing on picking up a xe2 ..and I mainly shoot raw. I don't shoot jpg at all. And currently have photoshop cs6. My question is. Will cs6 open the fuji raw files. And how is everyone feeling about their xe2. Thanks

Click to expand...

I spent part of yesterday testing my X-E2 RAW files in the new Capture One 7 that was released a couple of days ago. As mentioned in my other post, I have previously been using LR5.3 and Iridient Developer. They both produce excellent conversions when the settings are set to similar specs, and the converted files look about as good as my 5DII RAW files. But the Capture One 7 release is very impressive. The converted files are much more pleasing than my FF files, which is probably due to the 5DII having a low pass filter.

I think the Capture One people really took their time and really nailed X-Trans RAW conversion. The other converters I use are still very good, but they don't pull out as much fine detail without a lot of sharpening, and C1 gets it right much more quickly. I can't wait to print some of the C1 converted files.

Click to expand...

I agree. I downloaded the C1 upgrade yesterday morning and haven't had a lot of time with it yet, but my overall reaction is very positive. C1 has been my default converter for years and I'm very comfortable using it. My experience over the years is that the lab staff at Phase One takes their time and gets it right and when they do release support for a camera you can take it to the bank.

In the past couple years I've been most impressed with Jim Christian and his efforts with PhotoNinja. I have nothing but praise for him and I decided to purchase PhotoNinja and follow it's maturation closely. I find myself using it more and more. It's not the mature product that C1 is and I'm left with a little more to do in Photoshop after converting a photo in PN, but at this point my confidence in PhotoNinja is solidly fixed.

Here's that RAF file of the pumpkin I posted in this thread processed through C1: smokin_jack I find the result excellent.

Ysarex said:

Once you get your camera you can download free demos of all these converters and try them out. It's the only way to make an accurate judgement.

Sal

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

stimpy said:

No. Do you even read this thread lol

Click to expand...

stimpy said:

Well being that this image is specifically what my post is discussing of course it's what's going to be posted.

Why are you so provocative to everyone?

Click to expand...

Sal Baker said:

stimpy said:

Well being that this image is specifically what my post is discussing of course it's what's going to be posted.

Why are you so provocative to everyone?

Click to expand...

I do apologize, I did miss an earlier post as noted.

Sal

Click to expand...

Sal Baker said:

Thanks Ysarex. I tried PhotonNinja, I could have upgraded from my Noise Ninja license. I just found one little edging issue that I couldn't seem to fix, kind of like an USM halo even with sharpness at normal levels. A little more time and I could have probably found the right settings. But of the 3 converters I've run my X-Trans files through, I really like C1 7 the best for my use. I like having the local, adjustments available at conversion so I just invested in the Pro version as the 30% off sale ends on Sunday.

Click to expand...

Sal Baker said:

These converters have all matured nicely around the X-Trans sensors, taking advantage of all the detail locked in the RAW files. It would be fun to see what a 24mp version of the Fuji sensor would look like!

Sal

Click to expand...

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

ACR/LR will do a good job most of the time but, when the going gets tough, ACR/LR shames itself. With this photo it crashes and burns.

Click to expand...

In what sense do you think it crashes and burns? LR default settings are under-sharpened and under-saturated, but once you correct for this, as you must, I can't see the smoke (other than the one in the shot). It's true that the colour of the pumpkin is different, but I wager than every converter will give that a different colour. C1 is different to both LR and your version (I haven't felt the need to buy an extension of my PN license yet, so can't try out PN 1.2.1 myself).

B.

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

ACR/LR will do a good job most of the time but, when the going gets tough, ACR/LR shames itself. With this photo it crashes and burns.

Click to expand...

In what sense do you think it crashes and burns? LR default settings are under-sharpened and under-saturated, but once you correct for this, as you must, I can't see the smoke (other than the one in the shot). It's true that the colour of the pumpkin is different, but I wager than every converter will give that a different colour. C1 is different to both LR and your version.

Click to expand...

ACR/LR's conversion of that RAF file has noticeable color smearing and blooming over the surface of the pumpkin that smears over the fine detail. I'm not sure what's going on yet and I'm not finished investigating. The problem is file specific -- most RAF files that I've run through ACR/LR convert acceptably. Then along comes a file like this one and ACR/LR tanks. So far it's definitely an orange/red problem.

Click to expand...

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

ACR/LR will do a good job most of the time but, when the going gets tough, ACR/LR shames itself. With this photo it crashes and burns.

Click to expand...

In what sense do you think it crashes and burns? LR default settings are under-sharpened and under-saturated, but once you correct for this, as you must, I can't see the smoke (other than the one in the shot). It's true that the colour of the pumpkin is different, but I wager than every converter will give that a different colour. C1 is different to both LR and your version.

Click to expand...

ACR/LR's conversion of that RAF file has noticeable color smearing and blooming over the surface of the pumpkin that smears over the fine detail. I'm not sure what's going on yet and I'm not finished investigating. The problem is file specific -- most RAF files that I've run through ACR/LR convert acceptably. Then along comes a file like this one and ACR/LR tanks. So far it's definitely an orange/red problem.

Click to expand...

I'd be grateful if someone could post an extract that shows this, because after I've applied the edits I described, I can't see it.

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

ACR/LR will do a good job most of the time but, when the going gets tough, ACR/LR shames itself. With this photo it crashes and burns.

Click to expand...

In what sense do you think it crashes and burns? LR default settings are under-sharpened and under-saturated, but once you correct for this, as you must, I can't see the smoke (other than the one in the shot). It's true that the colour of the pumpkin is different, but I wager than every converter will give that a different colour. C1 is different to both LR and your version.

Click to expand...

ACR/LR's conversion of that RAF file has noticeable color smearing and blooming over the surface of the pumpkin that smears over the fine detail. I'm not sure what's going on yet and I'm not finished investigating. The problem is file specific -- most RAF files that I've run through ACR/LR convert acceptably. Then along comes a file like this one and ACR/LR tanks. So far it's definitely an orange/red problem.

Click to expand...

I'd be grateful if someone could post an extract that shows this, because after I've applied the edits I described, I can't see it.

Click to expand...

Here's a 100% on a section of the pumpkin. As the DOF begins to fall off the color blooms. I've circled offending areas where the detail is getting lost in the pasty smear by ACR/LR. NOTE: I have made every effort -- sharpened too much, saturation reduced, clarity raised -- I can't get rid of the bloom. For reference the same section converted in C1 is below -- no bloom and much better detail.

clr_smear.jpg

Here again is the same ACR/LR section after a standard color bloom repair in Photoshop. As you can see the image responds as expected and the bloom clears up. This repair step should not be necessary -- ACR/LR isn't cuttin' the mustard here.

clr_smear_repair.jpg

I've had the X-E2 for a month now and in that time I've managed to take 1/2 a dozen photos where ACR/LR makes a mess. Those same files are no problem for PhotoNinja and C1.

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Here's a 100% on a section of the pumpkin. As the DOF begins to fall off the color blooms. I've circled offending areas where the detail is getting lost in the pasty smear by ACR/LR. NOTE: I have made every effort -- sharpened too much, saturation reduced, clarity raised -- I can't get rid of the bloom. For reference the same section converted in C1 is below -- no bloom and much better detail.

clr_smear.jpg

Here again is the same ACR/LR section after a standard color bloom repair in Photoshop. As you can see the image responds as expected and the bloom clears up. This repair step should not be necessary -- ACR/LR isn't cuttin' the mustard here.

clr_smear_repair.jpg

I've had the X-E2 for a month now and in that time I've managed to take 1/2 a dozen photos where ACR/LR makes a mess. Those same files are no problem for PhotoNinja and C1.

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Here's a 100% on a section of the pumpkin. As the DOF begins to fall off the color blooms. I've circled offending areas where the detail is getting lost in the pasty smear by ACR/LR. NOTE: I have made every effort -- sharpened too much, saturation reduced, clarity raised -- I can't get rid of the bloom. For reference the same section converted in C1 is below -- no bloom and much better detail.

clr_smear.jpg

Here again is the same ACR/LR section after a standard color bloom repair in Photoshop. As you can see the image responds as expected and the bloom clears up. This repair step should not be necessary -- ACR/LR isn't cuttin' the mustard here.

clr_smear_repair.jpg

Click to expand...

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

Here's a 100% on a section of the pumpkin. As the DOF begins to fall off the color blooms. I've circled offending areas where the detail is getting lost in the pasty smear by ACR/LR. NOTE: I have made every effort -- sharpened too much, saturation reduced, clarity raised -- I can't get rid of the bloom. For reference the same section converted in C1 is below -- no bloom and much better detail.

clr_smear.jpg

Here again is the same ACR/LR section after a standard color bloom repair in Photoshop. As you can see the image responds as expected and the bloom clears up. This repair step should not be necessary -- ACR/LR isn't cuttin' the mustard here.

clr_smear_repair.jpg

Click to expand...

I've spent some time looking at these images, and also my own LR rendition. I don't see what you're so concerned about, but then again I don't get the same output from LR either. The image needs tweaks as it's a little under-exposed, and I'm not sure what colour Jack is supposed to be - I've changed the hue of orange a little. I've attached a crop of my LR rendition - do you think it shows blooming? (I don't normally post images, so I hope this works.)

I'd also encourage anyone doing these comparisons to download the images and look at them in a decent colour-managed application - I don't trust browsers.

[edit after posting - the colours I see in my browser do NOT match what I see in PS]

B.


edited only in LR - 100% crop in PS with no PS edits

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Yes, I think your rendition shows the same problem I've been having with ACR/LR. You've processed the photo considerably darker than I did but the color blooming is still apparent. The finest detail in the photo is lost -- smeared over in the color bloom.

Click to expand...

Brian_Downunda said:

Ysarex said:

Yes, I think your rendition shows the same problem I've been having with ACR/LR. You've processed the photo considerably darker than I did but the color blooming is still apparent. The finest detail in the photo is lost -- smeared over in the color bloom.

Click to expand...

Thanks again for going to the trouble. It confirms my view that what people claim is a major issue, in my opinion for the most part is a minor one. These are differences that would not overly concern me for most practical purposes. There are other things that I generally consider more critical.

I do concede that LR resolves less fine detail sometimes, and I think that's the main thing going on here.

B.

Click to expand...

Ysarex said:

Yes, and I find it both curious and troubling that it's variable and only evident in some photos but not others. I'm happy if you want to think of the issue as a trifle. If I were forced to work with ACR/LR (in fact I am to some degree), I'd deal with this as an irritant. But I recall one of my favorite quotes: "Trifles make perfection and perfection is no trifle." --Michelangelo

Click to expand...