x-trans images; wormy

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Click to expand...

Let me suggest that you start by searching the forum using keywords like "worms", "lightroom", etc. and read what others have been talking about here. Then, you can get more specific answers with a separate thread here. This has been covered MANY times before here over a few years' time.

--
Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

Was wondering how many % zoom did you do to see these worms?

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Click to expand...

Too much sharpening will cause this, although I've been using an X-T1 for 4 years but never had such an issue. I only shoot in RAW (RAF).

In LR or Photoshop ACR, I zoom to 100% then hold the Shift (PC) key down and move the Masking slider to the right until just white outlines are visible. Then , I move the Amount slider to the right until it looks OK. This is usually around 80-90%.

No worms on any of my images, although I don't peep any more than 100%. My preferred RAW edit process is with SilkyPix Pro7 or Capture One Express. Photoshop-cc is used for what I can't do with the other programs.

Hope this helps.

Bob

Yes, this is a known issue with how LR handles Fuji files. I love LR but was frustrated with this so recently found a good solution. I import my files into LR, cull them, and run all my keepers through Iridient x transformer (using a LR plugin). Then I can sharpen the dng files with no worms. Works great and allows me to can’t I’d using adobe tools which I like overall. Hope this helps.

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1.

Click to expand...

Under what context, in real life away from LIghtroom, would you ever view a photo at 400% magnification?

Kung Fu said:

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1.

Click to expand...

Under what context, in real life away from LIghtroom, would you ever view a photo at 400% magnification?

Click to expand...

When you are cropping your images quite a lot (macro) and want to print on around A3/A4.

@OP its just a matter of time that someone is going to come, bash you and take over this discussion as your attempt to undermine FUJI as a company and what not ...

Like a mod already posted there are quite a few topics on this.

There is no definite solution to your and my problem other than that don't use the detail slider in Lightroom/ACR, which Has been working great with my Nikon NEF Files.

So My conclusion was that as of now in Lightroom you cannot sharpen your Fuji images as much you can with say Nikon NEF. If you need to you need to use some other tool for that.

The problem lies much more with the adobe sharpening algorithm as opposed to the X-trans itself. If Adobe fixes it, great, but if they don't we can develop these certain images in question in alternate software. (breaks the workflow though).

This behavior made me move from Lightroom to Capture One years ago when I got my X-T1.

I was also a skeptic by what others were saying but after migrating to C1 I have to agree. This worm issue is extremely highlighted in LR. less noticeable in other solutions. It is definitely annoying.

These worms are ugly creatures indeed. I've found that processing the RAW files in Silkypix 3.0 or Capture One Fuji Express gets rid of them.

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Click to expand...

?

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Click to expand...

Try free PhaseOne Capture One Essential for Fuji and show us the result of processing this photo with Capture One.


--
Best Regard
EMs1950

atalwar said:

There is no definite solution to your and my problem other than that don't use the detail slider in Lightroom/ACR, which Has been working great with my Nikon NEF Files.

So My conclusion was that as of now in Lightroom you cannot sharpen your Fuji images as much you can with say Nikon NEF. If you need to you need to use some other tool for that.

The problem lies much more with the adobe sharpening algorithm as opposed to the X-trans itself. If Adobe fixes it, great, but if they don't we can develop these certain images in question in alternate software. (breaks the workflow though).

Click to expand...

Wait a minute here. You're suggesting he doesn't use the Detail slider because that's what works for your Nikon raw files, a manufacturer whose raw files are encoded completely differently to Fuji's? I mean the whole basis of this 'problem' is that Fuji raw files are totally different to everyone elses.

I'm a bit baffled by that suggestion.

OP, I would offer a completely different suggestion. It's fairly widely suggested by people who've experimented a LOT with Fuji raw files that you SHOULD actually use the Detail slider, quite heavily, and instead not use the Amount slider nearly as much. Basically the opposite of what's recommended for most other raw files.

For example: Amount 20, Detail 80, Masking 50 works for me really well as a starting point for all my low-to-mid ISO raws from events and weddings.

Sonykon88 said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I looked but didn't see anything specific to my issue. I am fairly new to the Fuji system. This image of the side of a nose is zoomed in a 4-1. Why does the skin have little "squigglies" or a wormy look to it? Is it a product of the x-trans sensor in my x-t2? Also, I use Lightroom CC for editing. Any insight would be appreciated. No insults please. I'm fragile.

Click to expand...

First, when will anyone EVER see this tiny a portion of one of your photos at this level of magnification?

Second, what settings had you used to create this effect?

As mentioned X-Trans files need to be converted in a completely different way to most other cameras and Adobe just haven't bothered to do a top quality job on that. Other editors allegedly do a better job (you'll see Iridient and Capture 1 mentioned) but (whisper it) I've tried exporting the same file from all three and to be perfectly honest at the size that 99% of people will ever see any image I produce, either printed or on screen, I've yet to be able to notice any difference in detail rendering *whatsoever* between properly-sharpened RAF exported from either LR, Iridient or C1.

It's perfectly possible that certain scenes may be more prone to it. I've yet to notice. It's perfectly possible that if you zoom in to 100% or more you'll spot a subtle difference; show me that difference evident at the size people will actually view the photo, though; it's perfectly possible to grossly misuse the LR sharpening tool and get this effect visible at a zoomed out level, but that's just using LR wrong.

So, overall, I think you have to take the furore with a pinch of salt. My first question is always: how will this photo ACTUALLY be seen, and what settings have you used here?

crosson said:

I was also a skeptic by what others were saying but after migrating to C1 I have to agree. This worm issue is extremely highlighted in LR. less noticeable in other solutions. It is definitely annoying.

Click to expand...

"Extremely highlighted"

I've never seen it on mine unless I zoom right in and totally botch the sharpening. But I don't shoot foliage much, where I've heard it can be most noticeable. I also don't present images that are 400% crops to my clients...

RivkiLocker said:

Yes, this is a known issue with how LR handles Fuji files. I love LR but was frustrated with this so recently found a good solution. I import my files into LR, cull them, and run all my keepers through Iridient x transformer (using a LR plugin). Then I can sharpen the dng files with no worms. Works great and allows me to can’t I’d using adobe tools which I like overall. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Just a caveat to the OP: each DNG produced from a raf by IXT will be likely triple to quadruple the size of the original raf. Plus the original raf itself if you want to keep it.

Fine for amateurs handling a couple of dozen keepers, but practically unmanageable for, say, event and wedding pros handling hundreds and hundreds of keepers from a shoot.

rac1941 said:

In LR or Photoshop ACR, I zoom to 100% then hold the Shift (PC) key down and move the Masking slider to the right until just white outlines are visible. Then , I move the Amount slider to the right until it looks OK. This is usually around 80-90%.

No worms on any of my images, although I don't peep any more than 100%. My preferred RAW edit process is with SilkyPix Pro7 or Capture One Express. Photoshop-cc is used for what I can't do with the other programs.

Hope this helps.

Bob

Click to expand...

This. (In Mac hold the alt key down). Really 'surprised' you couldn't find anything by searching.

They say the problem is the way LR demosaic's the files, and the sharpening just 'highlights' the problem, imo. But, although I have Iridient X-Transformer, I seldom use it as I am happy with the results from LR (using the Masking / alt key). Easy to over sharpen images when zooming in, and that's never a good look.

It would be interesting to know what processing parameters the OP used in LR. Then the discussion can become meaningful.

Also the iphone label on the Exif is odd, unless it is a photo from the screen.

Anyway, this is pointless.

owenb said:

RivkiLocker said:

Yes, this is a known issue with how LR handles Fuji files. I love LR but was frustrated with this so recently found a good solution. I import my files into LR, cull them, and run all my keepers through Iridient x transformer (using a LR plugin). Then I can sharpen the dng files with no worms. Works great and allows me to can’t I’d using adobe tools which I like overall. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Just a caveat to the OP: each DNG produced from a raf by IXT will be likely triple to quadruple the size of the original raf. Plus the original raf itself if you want to keep it.

Fine for amateurs handling a couple of dozen keepers, but practically unmanageable for, say, event and wedding pros handling hundreds and hundreds of keepers from a shoot.

Click to expand...

Nope, my IXT generated files are practically the same size. I have IXT installed as a plugin and access it through the plugin extras after selecting the RAF in the Library. I think IXT has to already be open, not sure whether it would launch automatically.

markam04 said:

owenb said:

RivkiLocker said:

Yes, this is a known issue with how LR handles Fuji files. I love LR but was frustrated with this so recently found a good solution. I import my files into LR, cull them, and run all my keepers through Iridient x transformer (using a LR plugin). Then I can sharpen the dng files with no worms. Works great and allows me to can’t I’d using adobe tools which I like overall. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Just a caveat to the OP: each DNG produced from a raf by IXT will be likely triple to quadruple the size of the original raf. Plus the original raf itself if you want to keep it.

Fine for amateurs handling a couple of dozen keepers, but practically unmanageable for, say, event and wedding pros handling hundreds and hundreds of keepers from a shoot.

Click to expand...

Nope, my IXT generated files are practically the same size. I have IXT installed as a plugin and access it through the plugin extras after selecting the RAF in the Library. I think IXT has to already be open, not sure whether it would launch automatically.

Click to expand...

You *sure*? How is this possible? I would genuinely love to know. It's widely reported that using IXT to convert a raf to a dng will absolutely vastly increase the size as it has to save three full channels of colour separately rather than them being mosaiced together in the raf. Hence at least triple. And that was my experience too.

I have never ever seen anyone create a dng from the Fuji raf in IXT that wasn't huge in comparison. What settings are you using, and how is it all set up with LR? I ran it as a separate app rather than an LR plugin but I don't see how there could be a difference in how it works, assuming we are both doing the same thing.