Fuji S5 Pro post-processing comparisons (love Cameras, hate Computers (software))

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

fPrime wrote:

dadu007 wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Congrats on picking up an S5 Pro! As you’ve found, there’s no currently made Fuji camera (GFX included) that can quite match the S5 Pro’s colors.

Every converter has options for developing RAW files, and particularly with HU some of these are less than obvious to brand new users. You might just not be using HU with best practices yet.

If you’d like, post a link to a RAW file from your S5 Pro and the output from RAW Therapee that you like. I’d be happy to run it through my own optimized HU processing so that you can see the rendering differences.

fPrime

Sure! I'd love to see what you can do with the file in HU.

Here's the link to a folder with the .jpg from my Raw Therapee and the original .RAF from my Fuji S5 Pro. I also included a screenshot of the file loaded fresh in HU:

Fuji S Pro RAF and RT jpg

Thanks! You actually chose a good RAW here with skin tones, highlights close to being blown, plenty of detail, and outdoors where the WB is relatively predictable. I went with 5000K for WB and didn't apply any lens corrections outside of CA removal since I wasn't sure which 35mm was used.

Here's my HU VS-3 output for the file you shared:

HU VS-3

And just so we can flip back and forth here is the RT processed file:

RAW Therapee

Before I bias the comparison with my own observations, what differences can you see between these two?

fPrime

Any particular reason to avoid Lightroom? it does a decent job as well.

I'm glad you guys are happy with this old camera but, sorry, I don't see anything magic about the color, rendering, anything really.

Lightroom

Hi Erik,

You make a good point. LR is a very decent converter for the S5 Pro and even holds several advantages over HU VS-3 like better highlight recovery, hot pixel suppression, and CA removal with lens profile corrections for many F-Mount lenses.

I use LR for the rest of my Nikon, Canon, and Leica cameras and truly tried to use it as my default Fuji S5 Pro converter. The only thing I can tell you is that after converting many, many images with both LR and HU VS-3 that I invariably preferred the color and tones of Hyper Utility time and time again. There is a color difference particularly under mixed or artificial lighting where Adobe has difficulty emulating Fuji’s intended S5 Pro colors.

Seems to me that a tweaked custom profile (or preset) would solve that problem in a jiffy. Do you see a significant color advantage to your HU VS-3 version over the LR version above? You can tweak the color just about any way you want it with a RAW file.

With the OP’s image the LR and HU VS-3 renderings are indeed similar, but I do see color differences that would be more obvious if we were to look at a head and shoulders portrait RAW.

It's a common urban myth that a custom profile can make camera colors equal. In reality each camera has its own intrinsic color signature even after profiling.

Here a pro photographer created custom profiles for 5 different cameras with an X-rite color checker under fixed studio lighting. Then he photographed the same model with those cameras and calibrated profiles and compared the results:

http://sodium.nyc/blog/2019/12/camera-color-science-does-it-exist-and-if-so-what-to-do-aboutit

Likewise to our comparison here, I find the skin tones above similar but not the same. A custom profile may allow you to match the colors for a 24-patch color target, but when you photograph human skin the colors are most certainly not identical. Jim Kasson here on DPR stated unequivocally that when profiled sensors are actually measured the data shows that color differences persist:

"Yes, it is quite obvious that different CFA designs would yield different color responses. Color profiles can tweak this response, but rendition differences will remain."

Lastly, with regard to not seeing any special magic in this image, realize that dadu007 probably shared it for the properties that made it a good converter comparison, less so to demonstrate the color and rendering prowess of the S5 Pro's SuperCCD sensor. I've found that one sees these sorts of rendering differences much more clearly when the same scene is shot h2h by the S5 Pro and another camera. The S5 Pro will inevitably appear more filmic, less digital.

Somehow, I kinda doubt that.

Maybe dadu007 can demonstrate this difference if he's willing to shoot a scene h2h between the S5 Pro and one of his other cameras?

fPrime

Sure, I’d like to see that. I suspect that an S5 SOOC jpeg may exhibit some unique qualities, but I’d be surprised if a RAW from the competing camera couldn’t be processed to match (or exceed) the S5 image.

Hopefully someone with both an S5 Pro and modern CMOS camera can take two such RAW's.

fPrime