Topic: Lightroom and X-Trans Fine Detail (Read 10140 times)

Chris Kern · « **on:** February 03, 2016, 04:43:48 pm »

When I read that Lightroom 6.4 (ACR 9.4) had added support for the Fuji X-Pro2, X-E2s and X70 cameras, I was optimistic it might also include improved rendering of fine detail from the Fuji X-Trans sensor, per the comment in the bug-fixes section of the release notes for ACR 9.1: "In collaboration with Fujifilm, we are still investigating methods to improve fine detail rendering and overall edge definition."

If it does—and I really don't have the skill or patience to arrive at a definitive judgment—LR still seems to lag behind the current rev of Iridient Developer (and presumably some other applications I haven't retested) in its ability to produce crisp detail.

I've attached an image of the U.S. Capitol Building with its dome under scaffolding that I made the other day with a Fuji X-T1 (18-55mm kit lens, which admittedly is not the sharpest in the Fuji universe), along with 1:1 crops of the LR and Iridient renderings. I sharpened the images with the respective sliders as much as I felt I could without introducing objectionably noticeable artifacts. Other than that, and using the corresponding camera color profile of the two raw processors, I defaulted all the other adjustments.

The Iridient version still produces finer detail to my eye. Both versions could clearly be improved by making other adjustments and, at the defaults, I'm not sure one is inherently superior to the other overall. But it seems to me Adobe still has a way to go to make good on its intention to eke as much detail as possible out of the X-Trans sensors.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2016, 07:00:11 pm »

Although many feel Capture One does a better job, I still find I most times get better results from LR. However I agree with your findings, net, no change to the processing in LR 6.4 and if you push the files too much you get the over done painterly effect as if LR is magnifying the harder lines in the files, and I still also feel that LR has a lot more trouble on greens, leaves, etc.

Iridient does give more details to me, but the lack of a toolset like in LR, to me makes using the software limited for a lot of my files.

What I have started doing is backing off the sharpening in LR and then following up with Piccure+, which I find can do an excellent job on the files. Piccure+ takes a long to to run, but the effort is worth it. Focus Magic also can do a good job at times and is much faster. The key to me is not to let LR go over board with the image. And as you pointed out it's shots like yours with a lot of fine details that LR has trouble on, not close ups or portraits with details in the hair. What clued me in to this is how well the in camera jpgs can look (there are some issues with skintones that reviewers of the X=Pro2 say are fixed), but on landscape shots, I will always take a fine jpg as that gives me a starting point.

I also started working this same method with C1 conversions, still I feel that they need a lot of sharpening. I am not a believer in working a raw file and exporting it without sharpening so I always use some in my conversions.

C1 can easily seemingly bloat up the finer details also, so it's a trade off at times, but I tend to give the lead to LR, since it has HDR and pano built in and both work very well.

Here is an article I wrote back in October on LR vs C1, (note before C1 9.0.3) but I don't think Phase did any tweaks to the raw conversion for Fuji in the vr 9 code.

I love the Fuji system, and look forward to their new 24MP chip in the X-T1 platform, but getting the finer details out landscape is very frustrating indeed. I would love to see Adobe just buy the rights to Iridient's process and be done with it.

http://photosofarkansas.com/2015/10/27/fuji-x-trans-raw-conversions-which-is-best-lightroom-or-capture-one/

And a pano from last December. LR and Piccure+

Lundberg02 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2016, 07:09:20 pm »

I think Iridient is superior to any of the others for Fuji. It does everything I need for my old X-Trans to produce a tiff I can fool with in Photoshop.

Denis de Gannes · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2016, 07:22:10 pm »

The latest version of Lightroom raw processing software is version 2012 which was developed prior to the release of Fujifilm x.Trans sensors so it no special surprise that it is not optimised to deal with raw files from this sensor, which is completely different from the sensors that have been available from earlier camera models.
I guess we will have to wait until Lightroom/ACR intrudes an new process version hopefully version 2016.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2016, 07:34:27 pm »

Actually, in June of last year the process in LR did have a update from Adobe, (this was when the statement of direction was also made to work closer with Fuji in the future). The main improvement was the issue of haloing around smaller objects like bare tree limbs and a blue sky and the worst offender, green against blue. These changes helped quite a bit, so the process is not the same as the original 2012 version.

You can still find the detailed information in the old release notes.

As far as I can tell, there has been no improvement since the changes in June of 2015.

Paul C

Chris Kern · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2016, 08:34:12 pm »

Quote from: Denis de Gannes on February 03, 2016, 07:22:10 pm

The latest version of Lightroom raw processing software is version 2012 which was developed prior to the release of Fujifilm x.Trans sensors so it no special surprise that it is not optimised to deal with raw files from this sensor, which is completely different from the sensors that have been available from earlier camera models.
I guess we will have to wait until Lightroom/ACR intrudes an new process version hopefully version 2016.

Adobe's help site defines the term process version as a collection of Lightroom controls:

Quote

The process version is the Camera Raw technology that Lightroom uses to adjust and render photos in the Develop module. Depending on which process version you use, different options and settings are available to you in the Develop module.

My understanding is that any version of Camera Raw may introduce under-the-hood changes that affect how those controls operate on raw files.

Perhaps Jeff Schewe or Eric Chan (does Eric still read these forum posts?) could clarify the distinction if I have it wrong.

rdonson · « **Reply #6 on:** February 04, 2016, 08:32:01 am »

X-Trans files in Lightroom require a different approach to sharpening that what you're used to for Bayer sensors.

Here is an excellent starting point for beginning to achieve better results with Lightroom.

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

From this I created my own set of presets for how I approach it and tweak according to taste.

Piccure+ is something I want to explore as well but given the cost and time required to run I think that it is something I might use only on occasion rather than on every photo.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 04, 2016, 09:00:55 am »

Hi Ron

I was thinking along the same line with Piccure+ as it is expensive for just a sharpening program. But I find the results really impressive. Especially on the Fuji files. The runtime on Fuji is not too bad, as most will improve dramatically with just the medium Quality setting.

They allow a fully functional trial on their software also.

One thing I learned quickly, don't click on preview as it takes as long to run the preview as the actual process. I just create a duplicate layer and then process out the file and then tweak the amount by fading the opacity of the sharpening layer.

Paul C

rdonson · « **Reply #8 on:** February 04, 2016, 10:14:29 am »

Thanks, Paul.

I've read the costs of Piccure+ on their website and it looks like it would cost me $119 to run on my iMac and on my MBP. Do I understand this correctly?

Paul2660 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 04, 2016, 11:01:17 am »

Hi Ron,

Yes that would be cost, 3 total activations. They went up in cost I guess 10.00 as I purchased it back in December for 109.00.

I agree it's a bit expensive, but the results seem worth it to me.

If you used Iridient a lot, then the cost may not be justified as Iridient has an excellent sharpening toolset for Fuji, but I prefer to work in LR or C1 due to the extremely powerful tools both of them offer.

Paul C

howardm · « **Reply #10 on:** February 04, 2016, 11:22:41 am »

This is quite timely. I just got on the Fuji train and am so far not too happy w/ LR rendering. Perhaps Piccure or Iridient but definitely check the Bridgwood document.

JRSmit · « **Reply #11 on:** February 04, 2016, 12:01:05 pm »

Last year was inolved into looking into similar problem. A college solved it by making a camera profile with color checker passport. No clue as to what it does. But it solved the issue.

David Sutton · « **Reply #12 on:** February 04, 2016, 02:23:40 pm »

The colour checker works nicely with Photo Ninja as well.
Before spending $109 on Piccure I'd look at Topaz Detail.
In LR I start with a variation of the Pete Bridgwood setting with amount about 25, or I go to PhotoNinja. It's image dependent. Then Topaz Detail (a moderate touch if coming from LR and a little from PN). Not very exact I know, but you have to use your eyes.
David

brianrybolt · « **Reply #13 on:** February 06, 2016, 09:50:20 am »

Quote from: rdonson on February 04, 2016, 08:32:01 am

X-Trans files in Lightroom require a different approach to sharpening that what you're used to for Bayer sensors.

Here is an excellent starting point for beginning to achieve better results with Lightroom.

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/

From this I created my own set of presets for how I approach it and tweak according to taste.

Piccure+ is something I want to explore as well but given the cost and time required to run I think that it is something I might use only on occasion rather than on every photo.

I've found Peter Bridgwood presets very good and handy. I occassionally tweak them. Peter's work 90% of the time.

Chris Kern · « **Reply #14 on:** February 06, 2016, 11:22:11 am »

Just to clarify, the Lightroom example in my original post was processed using the DETAIL=100 (deconvolution) setting recommended by Pete Bridgwood in his October, 2014, essay, Sharpening X-Trans Files in Adobe Lightroom.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 06, 2016, 11:36:27 am »

Quote from: Chris Kern on February 06, 2016, 11:22:11 am

Just to clarify, the Lightroom example in my original post was processed using the DETAIL=100 (deconvolution) setting recommended by Pete Bridgwood in his October, 2014, essay, Sharpening X-Trans Files in Adobe Lightroom.

I find that if you push the details slider to 100% you will most times enhance the issues of painterly details. LR, for some reason seems to pull up distinct parts of image more than others then the slider is at 100%. For example a cliff/limestone has a lot of layers in it and for sure 100% details will only push up the lines of the layers and not the finer grains. Or you can take a rock with lichen on it, most times LR will only get the pattern of the outside edge and not the insides. Multiply this over the entire image and you get the painterly look. And LR is weak on greens to me also, greens like distance leaves on trees.

This same issue does not seem to come out as much in macro or portrait work, from the examples I have seen.

By backing off on the details slider, and then using Focus Magic or now for me Piccure+, you can still get a very good image.

To me the trick is looking the in camera jpgs then working towards that look with the raws. it is so frustrating that the files have so much potential, but nothing can really get it out in one step. The other thing to remember is that the jpgs will have the lens optimization (pretty powerful stuff) details added to them, and no raw converter I know of can use these. It's interesting to note that Canon has added lens optimization to the 1Dx MK2, and I will be interested to see if LR or C1 can use this data.

Capture One to my eyes has just the opposite issue, it can't pull enough of the original details out. However I am making progress with it now also.

Paul C

biker · « **Reply #16 on:** February 06, 2016, 03:26:26 pm »

I've got just a pocket P&S X30 from FujiFilm but the principle of reading X-Trans sensor is probably the same, regardless on the sensor size.
The "0" camera jpeg sharpness is sorta kinda acceptable while "+1" looks already pretty unnatural.

My best experience with fine details is the 3-pass X-Trans demosaicing in the Raw Therapee. I'm quite impressed by the sharpness and don't see those "squareish" patterns on leaves or pebbles that are visible in camera jpegs. It adds a fine noise to the picture though.
I've tried the Piccure+ trial and couldn't get decent results. They were either blurry or exaggeratedly deconvolved (similar to overdoing sharpening in Focus Magic etc.) But I played with it just for half an hour or so...

David Sutton · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2016, 07:07:23 pm »

Just a quick follow-up for those using Lightroom. Try turning off noise reduction. I'm seeing a loss of detail and some odd effects in some images that weren't there in Canon files. Plus, unlike some cameras, the noise is not objectionable.
David

pluton · « **Reply #18 on:** February 08, 2016, 12:58:56 am »

I have found that setting the Radius to .6 for X files is almost always superior to any larger value, regardless of how you set the other sliders.
The thing is: It's pretty easy to play with the sliders and use your own eyes to se what you like.

kuau · « **Reply #19 on:** March 01, 2016, 08:15:04 pm »

I know longer own Fuji gear, yet I still have hundreds of landscape images I am still trying to figure out what is the best way to convert the RAF files.
I own LR, C1, Iridient Developer.

As of today can some one post the best sharpening starting points for each app.
Iridient Developer has many different sharpening algorythms. Which one to use??

Lastly I am interested in what is a good workflow to use when trying out piccure.

Thanks

Author Topic: Lightroom and X-Trans Fine Detail (Read 10140 times)