9
Nov
2012

Firmware update ACR 7.3 and Lightroom 4.3 / X-Trans RAW: Adobe & Co. vs JPG out-of camera

codyhatch: “Come on, Adobe, help us unlock the potential of the X-Trans sensor.

ACR 7.3 beta and lightroom 4.3 release candidate are now available, but no luck also this time for Fuji owners. You have to be patient. There is still no native X-TRANS RAW support for ACR 7.3 and lightroom 4.3 so that the support for X-PRO1 and X-E1 is not optimal. So take a look at the two comparisons in this post, and you’ll understand why Fuji owners are really hoping for this support to come soon.

First comparison

Take a look at this comparison on codyhatch.com. Same exposure, same subject, same camera (X-PRO1), two different results. If you want, before you read the review, take a look at the 2 images here and guess: which one is an out-of-cam JPG, and which an output after processing in Lightroom 4.2?

Here the solution: “The first one is the output after processing in Lightroom 4.2, while the second one is the output of an out-of-camera JPG utilizing the Velvia film simulation.” The second image looks much better than the first one! “The difference between those two photographs is shocking and demonstrates how far Adobe has to go before properly handling output from the X-Trans sensor. There is far more sharpness, contrast, and dynamic range in the out-of-camera JPG“. Therefore “the best RAW converter for X-Pro1 images is the camera itself.

Second comparison

From dmcgaughey.com: He says that JPEGs are excellent with the Fuji X Pro1, but he needs to go to the RAW in two common situations: 1. Poorly exposed photos (usually when blowing the highlights) 2. Bad white balance is selected (often indoors, like most cameras)… “Unfortunately Adobe has done a … poor job in implementing their algorithmthey slap something together so they can check “Fuji X Pro1″ off  their list.” He tried to work with RAW-files with the following programs: Silkypix, Adobe Camera Raw 7.2, Raw Photo Processor. You can see in this image his 100% Crops!  (go directly to the review here)

image courtesy: dmcgaughey.com

Okay. Clearly Adobe su….s! It renders the leaves as indistinct strokes of color. It gets far worse if you try and sharpen even semi-aggressively, leaving jagged edges around color blobs. RPP does a nice job, but there’s always a smattering of colored pixels dotting the scene. These can be removed with a touch of color noise reduction in Bridge. But still, edges tend to be jagged. SilkyPix very closely matches the X Pro1 rendered JPEG. It looks a bit less sharp, but that’s more likely due to the lower contrast.

If you want to see more comparisons click here do read the whole post of dmcgaughey.

And so maybe you can understand why, at the end of his post, codyhatch says: “Come on, Adobe, help us unlock the potential of the X-Trans sensor.

As you know, rumors we got (read the post) say that something is moving. According to the rumors, Fuji is now working with Adobe, Apple and DXO towards tweaking the RAW file processing from the new Fuji X-Trans sensor. Could we soon have the potential of the X-Trans sensor unlocked?

For everyone out there who has further information or rumors, write us an email.

bye

  • Lelle

    According to Adobe “Supported cameras for the Camera Raw plug-in and Lightroom” include Fujifilm X-Pro1 and X-E1 from 4.2… is that a lie?

    • ozbaz

      It is not a lie as such. The issue is that there are problems with the adobe implementation of fuji x-pro 1 support. The camera ships with raw conversion software which people don’t like because it is different to light room which they are used to and and they consider the program inferior. Corel’s photo editing program also support’s x-pro 1 raw files so it can be done. We are waiting on better adobe support and aperture support.

  • Chad

    Lelle – Adobe already “supports” the X-Pro and X-E1. What this article refers to is the current poor state of the Adobe conversion algorithms (and lack of any support in Aperture). The X-Trans sensor requires a unique form of mathematics to process optimally and the word is that Fuji is working with Adobe and Apple to assist them in providing excellent output.

    Coincidently, I was doing my own JPEG vs. RAW tests on the X-Pro one this afternoon. I can mirror some of what is reported here. Amazingly, the RAW files seem to have less Dynamic Range and detail than the in-camera jpegs. But the JPEGs will blow highlights much easier than the RAW files, as counter intuitive to the previous statement as that sounds.

    All in all though, the RAW files aren’t that bad, and depending on the scene, may be preferable to in-camera jpeg.

  • Will

    Supported yes . But read the article , it’s all about quality .

  • TomR

    Wow, I am surprised how much better the out of the camera is compared to SilkyPix, we really are stuck with camera JPEG’s.
    Mind you what is coming out of the camera is excellent for my eyes. Amazed when I saw that the first image was a 100% crop!
    I agree that there can be problems that need to be fixed some times, however if these are only a few they can be done in camera.

  • jean pierre

    Of course adobe has fount a way to allow developing raf-files from xpro1 and x-e1!!!
    But it isn’t the right algorithm!
    Much user thinks, that is it ok so! No!!
    Fuji gave silkypix the order to develop a stand alone software for the X-Trans Sensor!!
    SILKYPIX confirmed to me that RAW FILE CONVERTER EX HAS a different algorithm, as the usual silkypix software!!!!!

    By using raw file converter ex I am not so happy with the result. I think, the algorithm is not in perfection, and have to be improved!!!!

    Fuji give us a stand alone Software from the camera inside software, as Nikon has done it with Capture NX!!!! I am ready to buy for it!!!

    We all waiting for that – already yesterday!!!!

    JPEG out of cam are so awesome that I think RAF-File with a standalone version of the camera inside software, can be developed and improved for astonishing pictures!!!

  • Lelle

    Ok, thanks for the explanation.
    So I can confidently buy this camera in the certainty that it will be a real raw converter someday? I’ve already ordered it, but it made me unsure when I read all the criticism …

  • Indulis

    Lelle,
    I am in the same boat, I have lightroom and have an X-E1 on order, but this is another time Fuji just wants to “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory”. With the X10 it was the (they don’t really exist! Oh wait they do!) orbs, now it is the X-Pro1/X-E1 “we’ve got an amazing sensor, but noone else is allowed to know how to get good results out of it”.

    Anyone who thinks the current state of affairs is Adobe’s faulty should read http://chromasoft.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/demosaicing-fuji-x-pro1-and-its-x-trans.html and the followon posts, for a real insight into how little support camera makers give to 3rd party software developers. Or just search for “X-pro1 demosaicing”.