Fujifilm's new way to convert Raw files

[Peter_DL]

 
... sounds interesting:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/1600919737/fujifilm-japan-announces-x-raw-studio

--

[Jim Kasson]

... sounds interesting:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/1600919737/fujifilm-japan-announces-x-raw-studio

Let me get this straight. They're saying that the processor in the camera is faster for these operations than, say, a CUDA array?

jim

[Tim Lookingbill]

Let me get this straight. They're saying that the processor in the camera is faster for these operations than, say, a CUDA array?

jim

Yeah, same concern. And I'll add that the camera has to be tethered to the computer ONLY for batch processing where it uses the camera's processor because of the time it takes to process such huge image files? Am I getting that right? If so, then you better have good camera batteries and/or have the the camera's computer permanently connected to a power block converter.

It says to apply custom edits within the X Raw Studio system to each image at a time is only possible using the computer processor.

I'm trying to understand why the need for a new converter for batch processing off the camera since no edits can be applied anyway. Isn't this why we use Raw converters? To override the crappy rendering from the camera's internal software?

[Telecaster]

I don't know anything about existing Fuji software. Is there any (a version of SilkyPix maybe)? Might they be trying to keep their X-Trans demoasicing algorithms away from prying eyes? NIH taken to extremes?

-Dave-

[Dave Rosser]

Yeah, same concern. And I'll add that the camera has to be tethered to the computer ONLY for batch processing where it uses the camera's processor because of the time it takes to process such huge image files? Am I getting that right? If so, then you better have good camera batteries and/or have the the camera's computer permanently connected to a power block converter.

It says to apply custom edits within the X Raw Studio system to each image at a time is only possible using the computer processor.

I'm trying to understand why the need for a new converter for batch processing off the camera since no edits can be applied anyway. Isn't this why we use Raw converters? To override the crappy rendering from the camera's internal software?

I think it's because a lot of people think Fuji camera generated jpegs are superior to any independent RAW converter.  What this seems to do is make the use of the cameras RAW converter more convenient.  You can shoot RAW on Fuji X cameras and then use in camera processing to generate JPEG while being able to adjust tone curve, exposure correction etc. The trouble is doing this on the 3" screen on the back of the cameras is sub- optimal.

[rdonson]

If X Raw applied the Fuji film simulations to the RAW files and created DNGs on the computer it might make some sense.  Otherwise I'm not sure what it's about.  The press release doesn't seem to make a lot of sense unless the end goal is something like a tablet. 

[Alan Smallbone]

I think this will be a colossal waste but I may be wrong. I sure don't know what Fuji was thinking about this.....

Alan

[TommyWeir]

My understanding is that the in-camera Fuji simulations bake in other features that software to date does not. Some understanding of the particular grain of these stocks for example or the particular way highlights fall off. i.e. something that a slider or popup menu isn't going to deliver.  I have found that the approximations to these in Capture One have not matched what the camera puts out.   

I wonder if by tethering, they can harness that intelligence and whatever juju they've put in their camera bodies, and apply it to Fuji RAF files that exist on an attached computer, keeping one of their key selling points protected perhaps.

Using a 3" screen is indeed sub-optimal, and I for one would value being able to run through the simulations on a larger color-corrected monitor.

[BAB]

It would seem the RAW file is cooked already at capture and Fuji is passing the hidden recipe along via internal CPU. Would be interesting to note how the image copied from the card differs from the image passed thru the USB?


BAB

[Peter_DL]

For those who are interested:

http://fujifilm-x.com/de/x-stories/fujifilm-x-raw-studio-features-users-guide/

--

[TommyWeir]

What's very interesting is the same software is used on the GFX (I have an X-T2) and for the GFX they can bake in the simulations but in a TIFF rather than a JPEG.

That would be great.

[rdonson]

Yes, if it converts RAF to a 16 bit TIFF or DNG then it might be worth my effort to check it out. As it is the directions seem awfully vague to me.

[TommyWeir]

Well it's a one-trick pony in many ways, essentially play with the camera's raw processing engine but using your Mac.  There's not anything else to it.  It's free and I'm happy to have it, but would love the option of a 16-bit TIFF.

[rdonson]

I guess I’ll just continue with my current solution. When I want the Fuji film simulations then I’ll shoot RAW + jpg and if need be work to get the look I want by looking at the jpg while I edit the RAW. 

Yes, I understand that the Fuji film simulations are more than just color or B&W tonalities.

[Bestazyclick]

I said this in another blog, but people better wait for some independent testing on this one.
USB is slow as molasses, and it's hard to imagine using a camera CPU to process things faster when the bottleneck is USB. Perhaps when you are using a laptop without much processing power, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense either way.
It'd be a whole other story if the camera was using Thunderbolt 3 which is also used for external GPUs though.

[TommyWeir]

It's pretty instant actually.