LR Alternatives for Fuji

Started 6 months ago | Discussions
OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: darktable, and LUTs that mimic Fujifilm film simulations

Rightsaidfred wrote:

darktable runs perfectly fine on Windows. I did this for the first one or two years.

My workflow should provide you quite good OOC looking images.

The. OOC look is thanks to Stewart Sowerby's great LUTs. I have never encountered as good Fujifilm film simulations mimicking LUTs as those. But the newer film simulations are lacking. Also, they're actually made for X-Trans III. But the difference to the generation IV is not that big so they work also with the X-T4.

Please let me know should you have good LUTs.

Also thinking of making own LUTs but but similarly like you, I have too many interests and hobbies, too much work, family, and never find enough time

Regards,

Martin

Hi Martin

Sorry I didnt mean to imply it didnt run well in Window - Its just very linuxy in its interface which always causes me strife - i'm very flexible with software.. just something about linux stops me dead in my tracks Hope you understand what I mean?

I get close to the OOC images - but i'm using bastibes plug in to do this using either stuarts LUTS or Bastibes.. as he is working on a set i'm a month or so behind now so not sure what progress he made but the plugin basically applies whatever simulation is used from the camera.. my is generally on provia.. so imports as such. It works ok just a bit slow. Not sure i'd want to import my latest 1200 images... other than before bed. Unfortunaly i'm not that skilled so I have to rely on other peoples genius and generosity to to the smart things.

Steve

OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

Bob Janes wrote:

5teveO wrote:

Capture 1 - Bloody expensive now and hard to justify - lovely rendering of the images though. Sharpening can be pushed hard, adjustments are pretty quick and colours match LR pretty well.

Have you tried the free Fujifilm specific Capture 1 Express for Fujifilm?

Free makes it far more easy to justify and to adapt to the interface...

https://www.captureone.com/en/capture-one-express/fujifilm?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI6suHgMbS-QIVBe3tCh3qoAmxEAAYASAAEgIEjfD_BwE

Its a great thought.. i'm not sure how limited it is.. but like you say.. its an easy way to learn the interface.. or even get quick basic edits. Hmm It does look from the full feature list that a lot is cut out but then its free..

Steve

OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: darktable isn't a rocket science either

FujiShooterCY wrote:

You can start with some basic sample workflow, shared by knowledgeable person, take it as a good example preset as a basic starting point , customize it to taste a bit with just one of your images, and when done Ok, store your personal preset style, made as a full snapshot of your example image's history stack.

Then you may apply your style to all images selected earlier from a given set for further processing, apply your style to the selected group, and scan the group for cropping, correcting the horizon, retouching and further minor corrections.

Than export selected images and you are done. Pretty straightforward, actually.

Yes you are correct - but it can get a lot more complex if you need it too. I'm not advanced in my image editing, so one of my prerequisites for this new camera / brand is that I like to start as the JPG looks SOOC this gives me my baseline. So LR imports look the same - C1 look the same on1 have a slight yellow cast on skin and Darktable was a mile out to start with, which I know is because of minimal processing to the raw file to get it to a neutral state. I'm learning how the presets work, but I also have a fuji import script that applies the settings in the raw file (simulation etc) and applies them from presets / luts etc, to give a close to SOOC. Its not quite there yet but its easy enough to get something looking ok. Its my skill (and impatience) that is the limiting factor.. certainly not the software!

Steve

OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

lewiedude2 wrote:

5teveO wrote:

biza43 wrote:

I have been using LR for ages, on version 6.14. Means I have to use an external RAF > DNG converter because the RAFs are not recognized. I use Iridient for the conversion, and then process in LR. LR still works fine for m, no need to learn another software.

Thanks - I really need to try iridient again.. It was clearly user error but I saw not difference in the ability to sharpen files without artifacts. As its so well liked I couldnt understand it at the time.. but will try the workflow again.

Steve

Steve, I completely agree with Jerry and others promoting IxTransformer. Search out Erik Baumgartner’s setting for it as he has gotten to a definitive set of settings - removing any and all sharpening and noise reduction capability. I renders a DNG file that is really quite easy to work with. ED in LR is something you can also do to the DNG if you are looking for some mods that may take you to another level. Give it a search and your thread is a good addition to this never ending debate. Good luck and happy shooting.

Yes I need to try it.. I could also use the same workflow with DXO photo raw but I need to try iridient again. I'm fairly sure I used eriks settings.. but must have screwed something up royally as I saw no advantage.

Steve

Rightsaidfred
Rightsaidfred Senior Member • Posts: 2,102
Re: darktable, and LUTs that mimic Fujifilm film simulations

5teveO wrote:

Hi Martin

Sorry I didnt mean to imply it didnt run well in Window - Its just very linuxy in its interface which always causes me strife - i'm very flexible with software.. just something about linux stops me dead in my tracks Hope you understand what I mean?

To be honest: no. darktable is actually quite straightforward and logical IMO once you got it. It has a modular structure that is pretty good IMO. But yes, it takes time to lean. I watched countless videos and still consider myself more a darktable beginner than an expert.

Technically, I find it very capable.

There is just no AI functionality. Masks need to be drawn manually for example. Noise reduction is OK but far from excellent. I have recent threads on noise reduction of high ISO images.

Lens correction is a potential limitation because darktable relies on the Lensfun database.

And another limitation, the latest camera models typically take some time to be implemented.

As soon as you apply a LUT, there are of course technical limitations depending on the LUT. See my comments in my darktable baseline post.

So of course, there are limitations. But it works very well. We cannot thank the darktable developers enough who do all their work for free.

I get close to the OOC images - but i'm using bastibes plug in

What is this, Bastibe's plugin? I am interested.

to do this using either stuarts LUTS or Bastibes..

You mean this?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66326018

I wanted to try this, too. Just need a little "me time."

as he is working on a set i'm a month or so behind now so not sure what progress he made but the plugin basically applies whatever simulation is used from the camera.. my is generally on provia.. so imports as such. It works ok just a bit slow. Not sure i'd want to import my latest 1200 images... other than before bed. Unfortunaly i'm not that skilled so I have to rely on other peoples genius and generosity to to the smart things.

Haha I think everyone has their expert fields. No-one can cover it all.

Steve

Cheers,

Martin

 Rightsaidfred's gear list:Rightsaidfred's gear list
Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T4 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +5 more
Pixel8888 Contributing Member • Posts: 941
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

<<Re: The biggest downside is of course price - C1 is very expensive.>>

B&H has the C1 perpetual license for $179.00 on sale at the moment

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1611906-REG/capture_one_88200202_pro_21_download.html

But the yearly upgrade circle is end of the year around Nov. Would make sense in case you want to skip the upgrade for a year.

It's also possible that they sell it with free upgrade to the next version in a few weeks for a similar price.

 Pixel8888's gear list:Pixel8888's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Voigtlander 35mm F2.5 Color Skopar Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 II +6 more
OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: darktable, and LUTs that mimic Fujifilm film simulations

Rightsaidfred wrote:

5teveO wrote:

Rightsaidfred wrote:

darktable runs perfectly fine on Windows. I did this for the first one or two years.

My workflow should provide you quite good OOC looking images.

The. OOC look is thanks to Stewart Sowerby's great LUTs. I have never encountered as good Fujifilm film simulations mimicking LUTs as those. But the newer film simulations are lacking. Also, they're actually made for X-Trans III. But the difference to the generation IV is not that big so they work also with the X-T4.

Please let me know should you have good LUTs.

Also thinking of making own LUTs but but similarly like you, I have too many interests and hobbies, too much work, family, and never find enough time

Regards,

Martin

Hi Martin

Sorry I didnt mean to imply it didnt run well in Window - Its just very linuxy in its interface which always causes me strife - i'm very flexible with software.. just something about linux stops me dead in my tracks Hope you understand what I mean?

To be honest: no. darktable is actually quite straightforward and logical IMO once you got it. It has a modular structure that is clear IMO.

Lens correction is a potential limitation because darktable relies on the Lensfun database.

The latest camera models typically take some time to be implemented.

I get close to the OOC images - but i'm using bastibes plug in

What is this, Bastibe's plugin? I am interested.

to do this using either stuarts LUTS or Bastibes..

You mean this?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66326018

I wanted to try this, too. Just need a little "me time."

as he is working on a set i'm a month or so behind now so not sure what progress he made but the plugin basically applies whatever simulation is used from the camera.. my is generally on provia.. so imports as such. It works ok just a bit slow. Not sure i'd want to import my latest 1200 images... other than before bed. Unfortunaly i'm not that skilled so I have to rely on other peoples genius and generosity to to the smart things.

Haha I think everyone has their expert fields. Noone can cover it all.

Steve

Cheers,

Martin

Hi Martin

Yes that guy... Bastibes plugin and lutmaker stuff is here - https://github.com/bastibe/Fujifilm-Auto-Settings-for-Darktable I had a few issues on windows getting it running but it seems to work quite well. The only thing I have an issue is white balance but I have noticed a few people moaning about that in DT4.

In general I like DT - i'm just not sure how it would deal with large import qtys.. I have to try it and see.. especially the culling side. I tend to go overkill on images to make up for my lack of talent.. so I end up with lots to cull

Steve

OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

Pixel8888 wrote:

<<Re: The biggest downside is of course price - C1 is very expensive.>>

B&H has the C1 perpetual license for $179.00 on sale at the moment

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1611906-REG/capture_one_88200202_pro_21_download.html

But the yearly upgrade circle is end of the year around Nov. Would make sense in case you want to skip the upgrade for a year.

It's also possible that they sell it with free upgrade to the next version in a few weeks for a similar price.

Thanks for that - around $250aud.. not too bad.. if they will sell it to me in Oz.. as it may be restricted to US only..  but B&H are normally pretty good with overseas stuff.

Steve

Bob Janes
Bob Janes Veteran Member • Posts: 5,207
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji
1

5teveO wrote:

Bob Janes wrote:

5teveO wrote:

Capture 1 - Bloody expensive now and hard to justify - lovely rendering of the images though. Sharpening can be pushed hard, adjustments are pretty quick and colours match LR pretty well.

Have you tried the free Fujifilm specific Capture 1 Express for Fujifilm?

Free makes it far more easy to justify and to adapt to the interface...

https://www.captureone.com/en/capture-one-express/fujifilm?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI6suHgMbS-QIVBe3tCh3qoAmxEAAYASAAEgIEjfD_BwE

Its a great thought.. i'm not sure how limited it is.. but like you say.. its an easy way to learn the interface.. or even get quick basic edits. Hmm It does look from the full feature list that a lot is cut out but then its free..

Steve

I treated myself to the Sony 'Pro' version of C1 some time ago, but now tend to use the (constantly updated) express version along with my outdated version of DXO PL2.

The conversions are all there, some of the editing stuff is out, but I tend to use a bitmap editor later in my process for anything that requires layers.

-- hide signature --

Save a life, become a stem-cell donor.
Hello to Jason Isaacs!
https://bobjanes.smugmug.com/PoTB/
Please respect a BY-NC-ND cc licence on all my public internet images

OP 5teveO Forum Member • Posts: 95
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

OK so for an example I have ran through LR, C1, On1, Ex 7 and a bonus of a 2 second edit in Darktable just for fun

My 5 year old taking a break from fun in the pool to grab some food. Xt4, 18-135 lens.

LR - NR -25 / Sharpening pushed to 80 - check the iris edges at 100% starting to get wormy as are most contrasty edges

Exposure X7 - bit flat but didnt try too much with colour - looks a bit grainy..

On1 Raw - Slight yellow cast to skin.. but not bad.

Capture one - Probably the sharpest of the lot.. I think.. similar to LR colours which is reassuring.

Wildcard - Darktable - quick edit.. using fuji script to apply some Fuji simulation LUTS. Added a bit of NR (profiled - non local means auto) and pushed the sharpness a bit too.. altered the WB to as shot. Not as warm as C1 and LR and Blue is not as deep. Again my skill shortage.. but I didnt try too hard as this is about rendering.  Just also noticed - JPG colour is different to DT screen colour - need to find out why....

Coldpaw Contributing Member • Posts: 729
DXO PhotoLab

First off, I am one of the very few people here who actually never ever used Adobe Lightroom a single time. Yes it is the industry leader and there are reasons for it and why essentially everyone is using it, however I am not a fan of the subscription model and decided to not even bother with LR.

I have since settled with DXO PhotoLab as it is being called since a few years now. For my kind if use it's almost perfect, plus the DeepPRIME noise reduction is very welcome, especially for my Micro Four Thirds kit. I also enjoy their Film Pack which adds a bunch of presets to alter the look with a few clicks.

What I especially enjoy about the software: You can open images right away, no need to import them into sessions or catalogs or whatever.

If you should be interested in DXO just an important information:
They will release a new, major version in about 8-9 weeks, once that version is out, the current version 5.x won't get any new updates or support for newer cameras, it will stay as it is and the new version 6.x will be supported from then on.

I've also used Capture One (Express) and liked it almost more than PhotoLab, especially due to the nice output of the X-Trans files. I feel like C1 makes it easier to maintain a more "natural" look for an image than PhotoLab does, but that might be just my impression. However I never upgraded to the fully featured version because for my use it's just not worth the heavy price tag they are asking. Plus I'd use DXO anyways for my MFT equipment, so I couldn't really justify buying their software.

XenonDeathFlash Junior Member • Posts: 41
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

Just keep using LR and when you've culled, edited and so on use Enhance detail on all the files. It solves all problems with sharpening Fuji files in LR and gives better results than C1 (in my opinion anyway).

Bill Ferris
Bill Ferris Veteran Member • Posts: 9,162
Save Yourself Time & Money...
4

and make this simple adjustment to your Lightroom workflow. Working in the Develop module in the Detail panel, hold the Alt button while increasing Masking until only the areas with detail are highlighted white. Subtract that number from 100 and manually enter the result in the Amount setting.

It takes less than 30-seconds and goes a long way toward keeping the worms at bay. If you're a Lightroom user and not doing this, you're missing out. If you wanna go crazy and add another 5 seconds to your workflow, change Radius to 0.7.

-- hide signature --

Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ
http://www.billferris.photoshelter.com

 Bill Ferris's gear list:Bill Ferris's gear list
Nikon D610 Nikon D500 Fujifilm X-T20 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +4 more
FujiShooterCY Regular Member • Posts: 445
DT color vs. JPG screen color

darktable heavily utilize the color management abilities of the OS.

They even have a command line utility to check the consistency and correctness of your system color management settings.

Try launching darktable-cmtest in your terminal command window and see what it tells you. The mismatch between display color profile and display video-LUT may cause the effect you described.

-- hide signature --

All I post is my own, humble, personal, subjective and highly biased opinion. It may change in time upon new facts and convincing arguments arrival.

FTOG Senior Member • Posts: 1,338
Re: LR Alternatives for Fuji

5teveO wrote:

OK so for an example I have ran through LR, C1, On1, Ex 7 and a bonus of a 2 second edit in Darktable just for fun

LR - NR -25 / Sharpening pushed to 80 - check the iris edges at 100% starting to get wormy as are most contrasty edges

Capture one - Probably the sharpest of the lot.. I think.. similar to LR colours which is reassuring.

Imho, the colours aren't that close between LR and C1 in your edits.

  • LR renders the skin tone a lot warmer, with some strong yellow/orange tones (e.g. on the forehead above the right eye).
  • Light streaks in the hair almost make it appear as if your son had some hair frosting done - ON1 does this even more strongly.
  • The blue shirt and brackground also are lighter, with stronger contrast between the flatter sections of the fabric and the dark areas. Again, ON1 does this more strongly, where it reminds me of some of HDR edits...
  • Interestingly the LR and ON1 lens profiles apply a very different correction, compared to C1, Exposure X7 and Darktable

Going off of your examples:

  • Exposure X7 is a good base, but as you say it's rather flat to begin with.
  • C1 is already better and appears pretty realistic/neutral; some might find it bland without edits
  • As described above, LR is a bit warmer and to my eyes appears as if some base clarity is applied. Has a bit more pop, which might be a look some might go for, rather than the more toned down C1 look
  • It feels like ON1 replicates the Adobe profile but with the knob at 11/10. For my taste, it's too much and not neutral enough as a starting point for an edit. It's almost cartoonish to my eyes.
  • Darktable is difficult to judge, considering your note on colours. The blue being so far off compared to the competition leaves me wondering
 FTOG's gear list:FTOG's gear list
Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR Fujifilm 50mm F2 R WR Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 R WR +3 more
JNR
JNR Veteran Member • Posts: 4,573
Re: darktable isn't a rocket science either

5teveO wrote:

FujiShooterCY wrote:

You can start with some basic sample workflow, shared by knowledgeable person, take it as a good example preset as a basic starting point , customize it to taste a bit with just one of your images, and when done Ok, store your personal preset style, made as a full snapshot of your example image's history stack.

Then you may apply your style to all images selected earlier from a given set for further processing, apply your style to the selected group, and scan the group for cropping, correcting the horizon, retouching and further minor corrections.

Than export selected images and you are done. Pretty straightforward, actually.

Yes you are correct - but it can get a lot more complex if you need it too. I'm not advanced in my image editing, so one of my prerequisites for this new camera / brand is that I like to start as the JPG looks SOOC this gives me my baseline. So LR imports look the same - C1 look the same on1 have a slight yellow cast on skin and Darktable was a mile out to start with, which I know is because of minimal processing to the raw file to get it to a neutral state. I'm learning how the presets work, but I also have a fuji import script that applies the settings in the raw file (simulation etc) and applies them from presets / luts etc, to give a close to SOOC. Its not quite there yet but its easy enough to get something looking ok. Its my skill (and impatience) that is the limiting factor.. certainly not the software!

Steve

Now you're getting into the realm of why I stick with C1, and find it an overall timesaver. C1 and Silkypix (very limited OEM software) are the only software to have a formal relationship with Fujifilm - and the resulting film sims are exactly specified as the starting point. The others backward engineer - and the results are highly variable - often not all that close. You end up saving a lot of processing time, especially as you get more familiar with the selected raw converter. In fact, by most accounts when set up properly, C1 is found to be especially quick for processing and very stable. It probably only seemed slow to you because you were throwing a huge vacation dump on it all at once.

If you aren't upgrading your bodies every year or two, I think the perpetual license is still a good deal. I tend to skip every other version - in fact I'm now in the process of upgrading from v. 20 to 22 - and waited until Capture One offered a deep discount for upgrading (they seem to do this roughly once a year) - 50% off.

-- hide signature --

JNR

 JNR's gear list:JNR's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm 50mm F2 R WR Phase One Capture One Pro Pentax K-01 Pentax K-3 +22 more
Batdude
Batdude Veteran Member • Posts: 6,391
Re: Lightroom sucks
2

5teveO wrote:

Batdude wrote:

Ysarex wrote:

Started teaching Adobe (PS) in 1992. Started teaching LR and using LR when it was released. Switched to C1 in 2012/13. PS/LR are free for me (paid for by employer). I pay for C1 and I'm not switching back. C1's image editing tools are better and the rendered image is better. A very high priority for me is a raw workflow that is 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable. C1 does a better job meeting that priority for me than does LR/PS and that is what initially drove my switch and a reason I won't switch back.

I’ve been using LR for several years and I didn’t notice this before, but since I started shooting with the 26MP XT3 I expected much better images, but the problem is not the camera, is just that for some reason LR doesn’t like newer Fujifilm cameras?

No matter what I do with the RAW files from the XT3 the sharpness and detail are simply not there, and the color output is not all there. It has become a real pain on the butt to have to spend way too much time in PP. Light Room is okay, but after upgrading to the XT3 LR is definitely screwing up by the way it handles Fuji RAW files. I’m really disappointed so I completely agree and believe what you said.

The few wedding photos I got recently I gave the RAW files to two different experienced photographers and they did NOT bloody liked the Fuji files and they both told me the same thing, that the images are lacking sharpness and detail. Guess what they are using? Lightroom 😭

I wasnt wanting to bash the softwares.. but I also asked for opinions so thank you for yours in general I'm happy with LR but I think images can be better and hope Adobe address it soon purely for my convenience haha

I feel the same way as you.

I do want to explore this a bit more though. I CAN get sharp images in LR with good detail. I'm going to post 4 images later of the comparisons I did. Main focus is around the eyes (you will see what I mean) C1 and on1 i could push and get sharp. LR any sharpening past 70 or 80 and worms appear at the edge of the pupils (i'll post an example of this too)

Yeah I too can get sharp images, but honestly it has become a hassle.  The images are simply "missing something".

If you really want to eliminate Fuji being the issue in LR - choose an image which is particularly bad for you, and do the enhance detail on it. This will create a large DNG file and any issues with the xtrans demosaic causing a perceived reduction in sharpness etc should go away. It should be detailed and sharp if indeed the image / lens was sharp. Alternatively just do a trial of one of the other softwares and try it (even the free C1 mentioned later)

The issue is LR, not Fuji why, because look at the jpegs.  The jpegs are AMAZINGLY good, color output, sharpness, detail, then look at the RAW file and after PP for several minutes there is still "something missing".  That's just the way I personally feel.  The RAW files should look even better than the jpegs, but I feel is vice versa, IMHO.

Anyway look out for my sample images in a bit

Steve

 Batdude's gear list:Batdude's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Nikon D4 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm GFX 50S +13 more
britcam
britcam Senior Member • Posts: 2,540
Re: Lightroom sucks

Batdude wrote:

5teveO wrote:

Batdude wrote:

Ysarex wrote:

Started teaching Adobe (PS) in 1992. Started teaching LR and using LR when it was released. Switched to C1 in 2012/13. PS/LR are free for me (paid for by employer). I pay for C1 and I'm not switching back. C1's image editing tools are better and the rendered image is better. A very high priority for me is a raw workflow that is 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable. C1 does a better job meeting that priority for me than does LR/PS and that is what initially drove my switch and a reason I won't switch back.

I’ve been using LR for several years and I didn’t notice this before, but since I started shooting with the 26MP XT3 I expected much better images, but the problem is not the camera, is just that for some reason LR doesn’t like newer Fujifilm cameras?

No matter what I do with the RAW files from the XT3 the sharpness and detail are simply not there, and the color output is not all there. It has become a real pain on the butt to have to spend way too much time in PP. Light Room is okay, but after upgrading to the XT3 LR is definitely screwing up by the way it handles Fuji RAW files. I’m really disappointed so I completely agree and believe what you said.

The few wedding photos I got recently I gave the RAW files to two different experienced photographers and they did NOT bloody liked the Fuji files and they both told me the same thing, that the images are lacking sharpness and detail. Guess what they are using? Lightroom 😭

I wasnt wanting to bash the softwares.. but I also asked for opinions so thank you for yours in general I'm happy with LR but I think images can be better and hope Adobe address it soon purely for my convenience haha

I feel the same way as you.

I do want to explore this a bit more though. I CAN get sharp images in LR with good detail. I'm going to post 4 images later of the comparisons I did. Main focus is around the eyes (you will see what I mean) C1 and on1 i could push and get sharp. LR any sharpening past 70 or 80 and worms appear at the edge of the pupils (i'll post an example of this too)

Yeah I too can get sharp images, but honestly it has become a hassle. The images are simply "missing something".

If you really want to eliminate Fuji being the issue in LR - choose an image which is particularly bad for you, and do the enhance detail on it. This will create a large DNG file and any issues with the xtrans demosaic causing a perceived reduction in sharpness etc should go away. It should be detailed and sharp if indeed the image / lens was sharp. Alternatively just do a trial of one of the other softwares and try it (even the free C1 mentioned later)

The issue is LR, not Fuji why, because look at the jpegs. The jpegs are AMAZINGLY good, color output, sharpness, detail, then look at the RAW file and after PP for several minutes there is still "something missing". That's just the way I personally feel. The RAW files should look even better than the jpegs, but I feel is vice versa, IMHO.

Anyway look out for my sample images in a bit

Steve

Exactly what I found too after trying LR many years ago ..

I thought I might see some major improvement but it was the reverse and once I tried ACDSee it seemed to me, after printing large (A3 & A2) for exhibitions, that it was pointless wasting time going anywhere else ...

-- hide signature --

Regards
Rich S

 britcam's gear list:britcam's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-M1 Fujifilm X-S10 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro +6 more
Ed_arizona Senior Member • Posts: 1,994
Re: Lightroom sucks

I dumped LR yrs ago when they went subscription, C1 is so better RAW processor and powerful tools, I buy it out right,  always wait for a sale and save money....no need to buy every year either if you dont buy new cameras every year...well worth it  FK adobe

-- hide signature --

Instagram Cactuskid77

 Ed_arizona's gear list:Ed_arizona's gear list
Fujifilm X-T30 Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR 7artisans 55mm F1.4 Fujifilm XF 16-80mm F4 +1 more
Batdude
Batdude Veteran Member • Posts: 6,391
Re: Lightroom sucks
2

britcam wrote:

Batdude wrote:

5teveO wrote:

Batdude wrote:

Ysarex wrote:

Started teaching Adobe (PS) in 1992. Started teaching LR and using LR when it was released. Switched to C1 in 2012/13. PS/LR are free for me (paid for by employer). I pay for C1 and I'm not switching back. C1's image editing tools are better and the rendered image is better. A very high priority for me is a raw workflow that is 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable. C1 does a better job meeting that priority for me than does LR/PS and that is what initially drove my switch and a reason I won't switch back.

I’ve been using LR for several years and I didn’t notice this before, but since I started shooting with the 26MP XT3 I expected much better images, but the problem is not the camera, is just that for some reason LR doesn’t like newer Fujifilm cameras?

No matter what I do with the RAW files from the XT3 the sharpness and detail are simply not there, and the color output is not all there. It has become a real pain on the butt to have to spend way too much time in PP. Light Room is okay, but after upgrading to the XT3 LR is definitely screwing up by the way it handles Fuji RAW files. I’m really disappointed so I completely agree and believe what you said.

The few wedding photos I got recently I gave the RAW files to two different experienced photographers and they did NOT bloody liked the Fuji files and they both told me the same thing, that the images are lacking sharpness and detail. Guess what they are using? Lightroom 😭

I wasnt wanting to bash the softwares.. but I also asked for opinions so thank you for yours in general I'm happy with LR but I think images can be better and hope Adobe address it soon purely for my convenience haha

I feel the same way as you.

I do want to explore this a bit more though. I CAN get sharp images in LR with good detail. I'm going to post 4 images later of the comparisons I did. Main focus is around the eyes (you will see what I mean) C1 and on1 i could push and get sharp. LR any sharpening past 70 or 80 and worms appear at the edge of the pupils (i'll post an example of this too)

Yeah I too can get sharp images, but honestly it has become a hassle. The images are simply "missing something".

If you really want to eliminate Fuji being the issue in LR - choose an image which is particularly bad for you, and do the enhance detail on it. This will create a large DNG file and any issues with the xtrans demosaic causing a perceived reduction in sharpness etc should go away. It should be detailed and sharp if indeed the image / lens was sharp. Alternatively just do a trial of one of the other softwares and try it (even the free C1 mentioned later)

The issue is LR, not Fuji why, because look at the jpegs. The jpegs are AMAZINGLY good, color output, sharpness, detail, then look at the RAW file and after PP for several minutes there is still "something missing". That's just the way I personally feel. The RAW files should look even better than the jpegs, but I feel is vice versa, IMHO.

Anyway look out for my sample images in a bit

Steve

Exactly what I found too after trying LR many years ago ..

I thought I might see some major improvement but it was the reverse and once I tried ACDSee it seemed to me, after printing large (A3 & A2) for exhibitions, that it was pointless wasting time going anywhere else ...

Someone is going to come back here and say to run the files thru Iridient, which I have been, for a little while, but then I gave up.  Having to do this for hundreds of photos is simply unrealistic and super inconvenient.  If I tell the wedding photographers that they should do that to get nicer images I can see them looking at me with big O eyes and then not hire me as a backup anymore because they'll think I'm crazy.  They sure as heck are not going to do that and they don't like the Fuji RAW files.  So yeah Lightroom has to get their act together and do something about this.

 Batdude's gear list:Batdude's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Nikon D4 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm GFX 50S +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads