These are downsampled to about 1 MP.I didnt shoot these images but can you tell which image was shot with which camera. GFX100II vs A7RV
blog.kasson.com
www.flickr.com
I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
This may be the fist time I've seen someone call Greg diplomatic.
On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
The way he dodged answering the question was very diplomatic.This may be the fist time I've seen someone call Greg diplomatic.
As I understand it all manufacturers have a base level of processing baked into the raw files before you ever get them into photoshop. 40 sharpening is a lot.On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
Default sharpening - 40
Saturation and Vibrance - 0
played mainly with exposure and WB to match.
Not at all what I've seen.As I understand it all manufacturers have a base level of processing baked into the raw files before you ever get them into photoshop.On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
Default sharpening - 40
Saturation and Vibrance - 0
played mainly with exposure and WB to match.
Too much, IMHO.
This was default when the Sony and Fuji RAWs were loaded into LR. I didnt touch it.Not at all what I've seen.As I understand it all manufacturers have a base level of processing baked into the raw files before you ever get them into photoshop.On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
Default sharpening - 40
Saturation and Vibrance - 0
played mainly with exposure and WB to match.
Too much, IMHO.
Then wouldn’t all raw files from every manufacturer look the same in photoshop ACR with all values set to zero?Not at all what I've seen.As I understand it all manufacturers have a base level of processing baked into the raw files before you ever get them into photoshop.On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
Default sharpening - 40
Saturation and Vibrance - 0
played mainly with exposure and WB to match.
Too much, IMHO.
Fuji A, C. Sony B, D.Take two of the comparison. Here are the high resolution files from both cameras. Processed from RAW files in LR and cropped to match.
A
B
C
D
Should I be turning the sharpening to zero when importing RAW files in LR?Fuji A, C. Sony B, D.Take two of the comparison. Here are the high resolution files from both cameras. Processed from RAW files in LR and cropped to match.
A
B
C
D
Still downsampled, this time to 32 MP. Both images are oversharpened.
No. CFA differences, sensor stack differences, microlens differences, pitch differences, lens differences.Then wouldn’t all raw files from every manufacturer look the same in photoshop ACR with all values set to zero?Not at all what I've seen.As I understand it all manufacturers have a base level of processing baked into the raw files before you ever get them into photoshop.On all pics:I'll take a guess. B and D have more saturated colors, more contrast and more sharpening applied to gussy them up. I'd say A and C are Fuji.I'll reveal the results after I have enough participants take the test.
Default sharpening - 40
Saturation and Vibrance - 0
played mainly with exposure and WB to match.
Too much, IMHO.
The right number varies with the sensor pitch, which is something that Adobe hasn't yet figured out. My default for the GFX 100x is 20.Should I be turning the sharpening to zero when importing RAW files in LR?Fuji A, C. Sony B, D.Take two of the comparison. Here are the high resolution files from both cameras. Processed from RAW files in LR and cropped to match.
A
B
C
D
Still downsampled, this time to 32 MP. Both images are oversharpened.
blog.kasson.com
Moving the sharpening slider back and forth at 200-300% reveals a very evident threshold past which artifacts appear. Setting the sharpening slider to a value right before the artifacts appear seems to work well for me for on-screen viewing and general online use. I find I apply much less sharpening this way versus applying it while viewing at 100% magnification.The right number varies with the sensor pitch, which is something that Adobe hasn't yet figured out. My default for the GFX 100x is 20.Should I be turning the sharpening to zero when importing RAW files in LR?Fuji A, C. Sony B, D.Take two of the comparison. Here are the high resolution files from both cameras. Processed from RAW files in LR and cropped to match.
A
B
C
D
Still downsampled, this time to 32 MP. Both images are oversharpened.
Thats correct, Jim! How’d you figure that out? Id like to know what you saw.Fuji A, C. Sony B, D.Take two of the comparison. Here are the high resolution files from both cameras. Processed from RAW files in LR and cropped to match.
A
B
C
D
