Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Thoughts on raw vs jpg in Fuji X systems, and any jpg settings you like  (Read 3423 times)

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • Wild Photo Australia

I've just bought into the fujifilm x system (x100t and xpro2) and am starting to wrap my head around the issue of raw vs jpg.  Normally this wouldn't be a hard decision for me as I've always shot raw only.  But with the renown of the fuji jpegs, and the amount of customisation available, the jpg option looks enticing.  For the next 6 months or so I will be doing travel/street photography mainly, so arguably don't really need the highlight recovery and shadow boosting of raw in most cases.  Anyone got any thoughts on raw vs jpg in the fuji system?  And if you shoot jpgs any settings that you love that you'd like to share? 

I've also just discovered, just to make the decision a bit harder, that you can do jpg conversion of the raws in-camera.  But then, does anyone actually do this for anything other than the odd image?  I can't imagine wanting to do this for 100+ shots a day while travelling, say.
Logged

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • Wild Photo Australia

Just to add... I've given the Iridient X-Transformer beta raw converter a quick go and I'm really happy with it and being able to integrate into my LR workflow.  So that's a tick for raw.  I've also assigned a jpg<->raw switch on one of my function buttons, so I can shoot jpg as default and switch to jpg+raw if I think the scene is going to require the extra information.  So that's a tick for jpg only (predominantly).
Logged

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • Wild Photo Australia

So i just went out for a bit of a test shoot, and confirmed what I'd found on my first outing.  That LR fuji profiles don't seem to matchup to the fuji jpgs very well.  I assumed I made a mistake the first time, but got the same poor results just now.  Colours are pretty close, I guess, but the tonality is out by a fair bit.  Anyone else finding this?
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4024
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk

I find Lr's Camera Calibration Profiles do correspond pretty well to the in-camera JPEGs, especially colours - that's their job. But that customisation means many other in-camera settings can make the camera-generated JPEGs look very different from the raw files - the dynamic range setting is the most obvious one.

Personally, with my XT2 I always shoot Raw+JPEG onto different cards and rarely import or look at the JPEGs. Switching doesn't appeal to me - sooner or later I'll leave it on the wrong setting. The in-camera conversion strikes me as a triviality and I've never used it in a real world situation.

John
Logged
www.beardsworth.co.uk   www.lightroomsolutions.com
New Fuji-to-Lightroom plugin X-LR
Ignoring: AlterEgo, ButchM, deejjjaaaa, scyth

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • Wild Photo Australia

I had everything zero'ed for the in-camera jpgs, but perhaps not DR.  I haven't got to that part of the manual yet, so I don't know what it does or whether the setting I have it on (DR100) is normal unmanipulated dynamic range.  Perhaps that's the reason for the different tonality.
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4024
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk

There are many variables in producing "tonality", however you define it. Adobe's default sharpening, for instance, will be different from Fuji's default which is used in the JPEG. LR's various exposure sliders are "adaptive" too. You shouldn't expect the JPEGs' "tonality" to be the same as the raw files.
Logged
www.beardsworth.co.uk   www.lightroomsolutions.com
New Fuji-to-Lightroom plugin X-LR
Ignoring: AlterEgo, ButchM, deejjjaaaa, scyth

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2529

I'm going to agree with John.  I find the Lr (latest CC) does a reasonable job emulating the film simulations on my X-T2.

Also, like John, I like to shoot RAW+JPEG but for a different reason.  I like to see in the EVF and LCD what the various simulations look like before pressing the shutter, especially B&W films.  I have customized a number of the Q menus to reflect some very nice B&W recipes that others have shared online.  Seeing in B&W is a real boon for me.  It even informs how I shoot orchids in the nearby Botanical Garden's conservatory and street photography. 

Here's just one sample of a person sharing some tweaked simulations.

http://petetakespictures.com/blog/filmandvision
Logged
Regards,
Ron

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5949

The linked pictures are worth looking at. thx.

I still like my x100; Fuji jpegs are the modern equivalent of 35mm film.

E.

I'm going to agree with John.  I find the Lr (latest CC) does a reasonable job emulating the film simulations on my X-T2.

Also, like John, I like to shoot RAW+JPEG but for a different reason.  I like to see in the EVF and LCD what the various simulations look like before pressing the shutter, especially B&W films.  I have customized a number of the Q menus to reflect some very nice B&W recipes that others have shared online.  Seeing in B&W is a real boon for me.  It even informs how I shoot orchids in the nearby Botanical Garden's conservatory and street photography. 

Here's just one sample of a person sharing some tweaked simulations.

http://petetakespictures.com/blog/filmandvision
Logged

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • Wild Photo Australia

I'm going to agree with John.  I find the Lr (latest CC) does a reasonable job emulating the film simulations on my X-T2.

Also, like John, I like to shoot RAW+JPEG but for a different reason.  I like to see in the EVF and LCD what the various simulations look like before pressing the shutter, especially B&W films.  I have customized a number of the Q menus to reflect some very nice B&W recipes that others have shared online.  Seeing in B&W is a real boon for me.  It even informs how I shoot orchids in the nearby Botanical Garden's conservatory and street photography. 

Here's just one sample of a person sharing some tweaked simulations.

http://petetakespictures.com/blog/filmandvision

I think this is a great feature (being able to "see" in black and white while composing images).  I do produce some black and white, but predominantly work in colour.  It would be an interesting learning exercise to head out for a day on the street and shoot (and view) only in black and white.  I might try and do that one day.
Logged

David S

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 248

(B&W in viewfinder) I did that last summer by mistake and turned out I had a wonderful time. Totally different photographing experience.

Dave S
Logged

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1701
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com

Anyone got any thoughts on raw vs jpg in the fuji system?  And if you shoot jpgs any settings that you love that you'd like to share? 

I shoot both Raw+JPEG. Normally I process the raw files in Lightroom CC, but sometimes I just use the JPEG files. My settings are Astia color profile, -1 noise reduction, +1 sharpening, and then in general I shoot aperture priority with auto-ISO.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. Images: Work photos. Personal photos.

One Frame at a Time

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 229

Probably a dumb question but could someone explain why you delve into jpeg when you can shoot raw and then assign the film profile in Lightroom?  This lets you look at a myriad of effects non destructively.  What am I missing??  Thanks!
Logged

David S

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 248

Probably a dumb question but could someone explain why you delve into jpeg when you can shoot raw and then assign the film profile in Lightroom?  This lets you look at a myriad of effects non destructively.  What am I missing??  Thanks!

Try it and see.

Dave S
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2529

Probably a dumb question but could someone explain why you delve into jpeg when you can shoot raw and then assign the film profile in Lightroom?  This lets you look at a myriad of effects non destructively.  What am I missing??  Thanks!

When you set the camera to a film simulation you see the film simulation in the EVF and LCD. If you shoot B&W this most likely will be a revelation to actually see in B&W.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

One Frame at a Time

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 229

That makes sense.  I look at the profiles all the time but apply them to raw in LR

Thanks Ron!
Logged

David S

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 248

Sorry I wasn't clear when I said "try it and see" as I meant just that. Try it and see how the profile/effect will look before you shoot. The EVF does a very good job of showing what the jpeg effect will be like - especially for B&W. Quite a different experience for me.

Dave S
Logged

One Frame at a Time

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 229

I was wondering if the effect applied in LR on RAW was somehow different.  Or, if the in-camera demosaic was so much better - that it was worth locking in the effect at time of shooting.
I can understand how using the viewfinder in BW could be an advantage, but dont see why we would want to make a commitment to a specific film profile via jpeg - when its so easy to toggle them in LR and see the result on a big, calibrated, screen?
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2529

I was wondering if the effect applied in LR on RAW was somehow different.  Or, if the in-camera demosaic was so much better - that it was worth locking in the effect at time of shooting.
I can understand how using the viewfinder in BW could be an advantage, but dont see why we would want to make a commitment to a specific film profile via jpeg - when its so easy to toggle them in LR and see the result on a big, calibrated, screen?

There are sometimes differences.  If you shoot RAW+JPG and you like the tonalities of the JPG better you have the option of tweaking the RAW to match in LR.  If you don't shoot RAW+JPG then you only have Adobe's word that they did a good job on the film simulations in LR. 

You can also find a lot of recipes online for tweaks in camera to the film simulations.  Some of them are excellent.  I use some and when I do I always shoot RAW+JPG so I can season the RAW to what I got from the JPG if it turns out nice.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

opgr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1575

I was wondering if the effect applied in LR on RAW was somehow different.  Or, if the in-camera demosaic was so much better - that it was worth locking in the effect at time of shooting.
I can understand how using the viewfinder in BW could be an advantage, but dont see why we would want to make a commitment to a specific film profile via jpeg - when its so easy to toggle them in LR and see the result on a big, calibrated, screen?

It's a matter of previsualisation and workflow
You either shoot a 100 jpgs and 90 of them look pleasing out-of-the-box,
Or you shoot a 100 raw and you need to toggle 90 of them in an editor before even deciding to bin them.

And the fact that the viewfinder shows the result is perhaps helpful, but you still need to decide upfront whether a certain scene fits a certain preset. Otherwise you might still end up toggling 90 of those images in the field for testing the look, which obv is impossible during streetphotography.
Logged
Regards,
Oscar

One Frame at a Time

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 229

Thanks guys.  For my workflow I have Provia assigned to all my images from my XT-2 and XT20 but after I pic an image that deserves my attention in LR, I always toggle through a few profiles to see what the changes look like.  I don't have the skill or the memory to know accurately which one I will settle on before looking at the changes in post. 

I may try doing some B&W shooting with the viewfinder set to a BW profile.  That does seem really interesting!

Best,

Paul
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up