Fuji dropped the ball big time on JPEGS? Locked

What has happened to Fuji JPEGS? Did I do something really wrong with my XH1 settings?? I shot in JPEG for the very first time since I got the camera and IMHO the jpegs look just terrible. The skin tones over all look pretty darn bad SOOC. The skin tones have this really unpleasant unnatural look and I sure don't remember my XE1/XT1 or S5 Pro looking like the photos below. Maybe my color settings are completely out of tune, but first impression look very poor, honestly. I am going to use a different film simulation and mess around with everything else but so far I'm kind of disappointed.

Having said that, here is the good thing, I hardly ever shoot in JPEG now but still, so far I am really impressed as to how bad Fuji skin tones and WB have degraded. Like I said I am going to mess around with the jpeg settings and select a different film simulation to see if I get better results. The white balance has degraded as well. That's pretty sad.

The way I have the cameras set to is:

Provia Standard

Highlight Tone -1

Shadow Tone +3

Color 0

Sharpness 0

Noise Reducition -3

Please feel free to let me know if you have found much better settings compared to my settings above.

Seems rather counterintuitive to say Fuji has dropped the ball on jpeg when you’ve gone and modified the standard jpeg settings. Perhaps you’ve dropped the ball?

A +3 shadow setting will darken the shadows creating a harsher appearance to the image. For portraits, Fuji recommends pro neg high for outdoors and pro neg standard for indoors.

Try following Fuji’s advice and see if the image is still not to your liking. I’d also humbly suggest taking into consideration titles for your future posts. Imagine being a colour engineer at Fujifilm and seeing your headline.

fcracer wrote:

Seems rather counterintuitive to say Fuji has dropped the ball on jpeg when you’ve gone and modified the standard jpeg settings. Perhaps you’ve dropped the ball?

I didn't say Fuji dropped the ball, I asked, and I also asked if I'm the one that set my XH1 jpegs incorrectly and honestly I haven't shot in jpeg in a very long time.

A +3 shadow setting will darken the shadows creating a harsher appearance to the image. For portraits, Fuji recommends pro neg high for outdoors and pro neg standard for indoors.

Okay got it that's probably where I messed up. Maybe by going the opposite way at -3 the skin tones will look much better? Based on your experience what has worked best for you?

Thanks.

Try following Fuji’s advice and see if the image is still not to your liking. I’d also humbly suggest taking into consideration titles for your future posts. Imagine being a colour engineer at Fujifilm and seeing your headline.

-- hide signature --

Personal photo blog: www.fcracer.com
Instagram: fcracer
Flickr: fcracer

Batdude wrote:

fcracer wrote:

Seems rather counterintuitive to say Fuji has dropped the ball on jpeg when you’ve gone and modified the standard jpeg settings. Perhaps you’ve dropped the ball?

I didn't say Fuji dropped the ball, I asked, and I also asked if I'm the one that set my XH1 jpegs incorrectly and honestly I haven't shot in jpeg in a very long time.

A +3 shadow setting will darken the shadows creating a harsher appearance to the image. For portraits, Fuji recommends pro neg high for outdoors and pro neg standard for indoors.

Okay got it that's probably where I messed up. Maybe by going the opposite way at -3 the skin tones will look much better? Based on your experience what has worked best for you?

Thanks.

Try following Fuji’s advice and see if the image is still not to your liking. I’d also humbly suggest taking into consideration titles for your future posts. Imagine being a colour engineer at Fujifilm and seeing your headline.

Maybe approaching this with the assumption that perhaps it’s something you’re doing rather than inciting a negative response with titles like “Fuji dropped the ball...?” might help you get more help and a bit less heat. I process from RAW and so far have seen virtually no difference in the colors, detail, or any other aspect of IQ between the X-T2 and X-H1.

Let me just gently suggest that you approach this a bit differently next time around if you really want to get helpful information.

Jerry-astro wrote:

Batdude wrote:

fcracer wrote:

Seems rather counterintuitive to say Fuji has dropped the ball on jpeg when you’ve gone and modified the standard jpeg settings. Perhaps you’ve dropped the ball?

I didn't say Fuji dropped the ball, I asked, and I also asked if I'm the one that set my XH1 jpegs incorrectly and honestly I haven't shot in jpeg in a very long time.

A +3 shadow setting will darken the shadows creating a harsher appearance to the image. For portraits, Fuji recommends pro neg high for outdoors and pro neg standard for indoors.

Okay got it that's probably where I messed up. Maybe by going the opposite way at -3 the skin tones will look much better? Based on your experience what has worked best for you?

Thanks.

Try following Fuji’s advice and see if the image is still not to your liking. I’d also humbly suggest taking into consideration titles for your future posts. Imagine being a colour engineer at Fujifilm and seeing your headline.

Maybe approaching this with the assumption that perhaps it’s something you’re doing rather than inciting a negative response with titles like “Fuji dropped the ball...?” might help you get more help and a bit less heat. I process from RAW and so far have seen virtually no difference in the colors, detail, or any other aspect of IQ between the X-T2 and X-H1.

Let me just gently suggest that you approach this a bit differently next time around if you really want to get helpful information.

Well if you can change it to something like "Best JPEG Skin Tone Settings?" that would be great so that people won't feel hurt.

Yeah, RAW is not a problem, the problem is jpeg but I will follow fcrecer and Fuji's recommendation to use pro neg high for outdoors. Again, I will say that I don't remember getting ugly images with provia standard and astia soft and those two were the settings I would usually use almost everywhere with pretty darn good looking images almost all the time, but I can understand that things have changed now with these newer models, and please forgive me but I haven't shot in jpeg in quite a while.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

Batdude wrote:

Well if you can change it to something like "Best JPEG Skin Tone Settings?" that would be great so that people won't feel hurt.

Yeah, RAW is not a problem, the problem is jpeg but I will follow fcrecer and Fuji's recommendation to use pro neg high for outdoors. Again, I will say that I don't remember getting ugly images with provia standard and astia soft and those two were the settings I would usually use almost everywhere with pretty darn good looking images almost all the time, but I can understand that things have changed now with these newer models, and please forgive me but I haven't shot in jpeg in quite a while.

Best to recognize that this isn’t about people feeling hurt.  It’s about remaining credible.  I’ll leave it at that.

Same image shot with the X-H1 and X-T2 with like settings should look very similar.

In the beginning (X100, X-T10, X-E2), I just used JPEGs and shot everything in Velvia.  Very punchy.  People didn't always look their best, however.

Lately, X-PRo2, X-T2, X-H1, my go-to for JPEG is Provia.  Just the defaults, no messing with the settings.  I like it better than Astia even though I think Fuji suggests Astia makes people look better.

However, my use of JPEGs is now for fast previewing and getting a sense of what the picture could look like.  My normal mode is RAW+JPEG and for my keepers, I'll refer to the JPEGs as a start, but will work on the RAWs, tweaking and doing spot and area adjustments to get the final image.

So the short of it is:  No, Fuji has NOT dropped the ball.  Provia looks just fine to me.

Try using Provia at its defaults with the same subjects, in the same positions and then deviate from the defaults a little at a time, keeping all else (lighting, etc.) the same.

canonbcguy wrote:

In the beginning (X100, X-T10, X-E2), I just used JPEGs and shot everything in Velvia. Very punchy. People didn't always look their best, however.

Lately, X-PRo2, X-T2, X-H1, my go-to for JPEG is Provia. Just the defaults, no messing with the settings. I like it better than Astia even though I think Fuji suggests Astia makes people look better.

However, my use of JPEGs is now for fast previewing and getting a sense of what the picture could look like. My normal mode is RAW+JPEG and for my keepers, I'll refer to the JPEGs as a start, but will work on the RAWs, tweaking and doing spot and area adjustments to get the final image.

So the short of it is: No, Fuji has NOT dropped the ball. Provia looks just fine to me.

Try using Provia at its defaults with the same subjects, in the same positions and then deviate from the defaults a little at a time, keeping all else (lighting, etc.) the same.

Yes thank you.  To start I will lower the shadow tone to see if it really looks better/less harsh and more natural looking and will also try pro neg hi.

Batdude wrote:

canonbcguy wrote:

In the beginning (X100, X-T10, X-E2), I just used JPEGs and shot everything in Velvia. Very punchy. People didn't always look their best, however.

Lately, X-PRo2, X-T2, X-H1, my go-to for JPEG is Provia. Just the defaults, no messing with the settings. I like it better than Astia even though I think Fuji suggests Astia makes people look better.

However, my use of JPEGs is now for fast previewing and getting a sense of what the picture could look like. My normal mode is RAW+JPEG and for my keepers, I'll refer to the JPEGs as a start, but will work on the RAWs, tweaking and doing spot and area adjustments to get the final image.

So the short of it is: No, Fuji has NOT dropped the ball. Provia looks just fine to me.

Try using Provia at its defaults with the same subjects, in the same positions and then deviate from the defaults a little at a time, keeping all else (lighting, etc.) the same.

Yes thank you. To start I will lower the shadow tone to see if it really looks better/less harsh and more natural looking and will also try pro neg hi.

Those JPGS look strange. Try this.

1. Keep the settings you used for those JPGS in the C2 in the Q menu.

2. Create a new C3 setting in the Q menu with all settings to camera base setting. (color, black etc.).

3. Take some shots with the old setting and new one. This should clarify whether this is a camera problem or a setting problem.

To me it looks like the those JPGS were underexposed and lighten up after.:-)?

Assuming you have the RAWs for those photos, why not make use of Fuji X Raw Studio and then you can experiment on your computer with various JPEG settings on those actual photos to find the setting(s) that you are happy with. Personally I find it a lot easier to experiment with JPEG settings that way than in-camera.

Batdude wrote:

fcracer wrote:

Seems rather counter intuitive to say Fuji has dropped the ball on jpeg when you’ve gone and modified the standard jpeg settings. Perhaps you’ve dropped the ball?

I didn't say Fuji dropped the ball ...

That's true, you did not say that, or rather you did not say just that.

You said "Fuji dropped the ball big time..."

And in my view, that was at least an order of magnitude worse.

And you didn't just say it, you chose to scream it out loud in a subject line of a new thread you started.

I share Jerry's opinion: it's not about anybody getting hurt. It's about your credibility.

There are several sites online that recommend certain film simulations based on certain scenarios, but perhaps it’s best to go to the source:

Fujifilm website: https://fujifilmxgfx.com/gfx-techniques/fujifilm-film-simulation-modes/

Fujifilm official owner’s manual for X-H1: http://fujifilm-dsc.com/en/manual/x-h1/menu_shooting/image_quality_setting/index.html#film_simulation

...try taking that shadow tone back down to zero and use Astia simulation...

I usually use Provia for portraits but you always have to analyse the light. In a cloudy day Provia can render skin tones a bit dull and on the cold side so I switch to Astia. Indoors in warm artificial light Astia and Provia sometimes result in too saturated skin color so I switch to Pro Neg Hi.  I never use Pro Neg Standard.

.lars

I have two H1's and the JPEG's are excellent - great color and rendition in all respects.  I use flat settings.

I agree ---- I seems that this is another case of user error - and blaming the camera.

You are being disingenuous.  By asking the question the way you did, and posting the comments the way you did, you were clearly saying that the H1 is at fault.  In fact it is your user error - you screwed up - admit it.

giarc wrote:

fcracer wrote:

Try following Fuji’s advice and see if the image is still not to your liking. I’d also humbly suggest taking into consideration titles for your future posts. Imagine being a colour engineer at Fujifilm and seeing your headline.

Curious where they recommend different film sims for different situations? I've not seen those and would like to mind you, I have a bad habit of not reading manuals until _after_ I get stuck.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61164893