Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Welcome to Fuji X Forum!

Welcome to the Fuji X Forum, the largest online community of Fujifilm X camera users!

Creating a forum account is FREE!

The primary benefit to registering is so you can post in the community, and be notified when discussions are updated.

Other benefits include uploading photos, creating a photo gallery, getting answers to technical questions and assistance with trouble-shooting, communicate with other members via private messages, elgibility for contests, and more!

Registering is a simple process that requires minimal information. Become a part of the forum by signing in or creating an account. For your convenience you can sign in using Facebook, Twitter or Google.

We take pride in being the friendliest photo forum on the net.

Come on in join the fun!
Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo

LightRoom RAW support by end of May


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Papa Lazarou

Papa Lazarou

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM
  • LocationManchester

Posted 17 May 2012 - 07:22 AM

Was chatting with a Fuji rep today about all things X Pro 1 and he tells me LightRoom RAW support for Fuji X Pro 1 will be here by end of the month.
It's a saga now

#2 SimonK

SimonK

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationReading, U.K.

Posted 17 May 2012 - 07:56 AM

Ossum. Can't wait, thanks for posting that.

#3 Roel

Roel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 64 posts
  • Local time: 12:56 PM
  • LocationCanada

Posted 17 May 2012 - 07:58 AM

that is good news if it is true
Roël

Please visit my website:

http://roel.me

#4 gDallasK

gDallasK

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM

Posted 17 May 2012 - 08:04 AM

I hope we get CS6 support at the same time. I've just paid £200 to upgrade from CS5 and I would prefer to avoid upgrading Lightroom - which I rarely use anyway. I've paid enough money to Adobe for one month.

#5 Borge

Borge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 480 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationNorway

Posted 17 May 2012 - 09:56 AM

I hope we get CS6 support at the same time. I've just paid £200 to upgrade from CS5 and I would prefer to avoid upgrading Lightroom - which I rarely use anyway. I've paid enough money to Adobe for one month.


Camera RAW is Camera RAW. Once it is updated with X-Pro1 support all Adobe products that uses ACR for RAW will read the files.

Correction: All Adobe products that are eligiable for the new version of ACR that is (Lightroom 4, Photoshop CS6, etc. Not CS5.5 or LR3).

#6 TropicalYankee

TropicalYankee

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Local time: 11:56 AM

Posted 17 May 2012 - 10:32 AM

Last month, I had a Fuji rep tell me ACR and LR support would come at the beginning of May. I don't think the Fuji reps really know. Adobe "officially" updates cameras for ACR and LR four times per year. The last "official" update was May 1. Based on the four per year schedule, I'd suspect the next "official" one will be around August 1. Hopefully, there will be a beta and/or release candidate before then but, I wouldn't count on it before the end of June or beginning of July.

#7 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 6,087 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 17 May 2012 - 11:42 AM

Beta or whatever it would be nice to have it.

Mind you I would rather have Capture One or Aftershot Pro with the RAW support since these are my preferred RAW processors.
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#8 Mark Hilliard

Mark Hilliard

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Local time: 11:56 AM
  • LocationPawleys Island, SC

Posted 17 May 2012 - 11:46 AM

Beta or whatever it would be nice to have it.

Mind you I would rather have Capture One or Aftershot Pro with the RAW support since these are my preferred RAW processors.


Do I ever agree with that! Capture one has been notified thousands of times via support requests for this! But, ACR will be fine until capture one is out!
Mark Hilliard, N2HHR

mark@thelensworkgallery.com
infraredatelier.wordpress.com
markhilliardatelier.wordpress.com

#9 Dick Quinn

Dick Quinn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Local time: 06:56 AM
  • LocationHonolulu, Hawaii USA

Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:02 PM

This is NOT good news:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content


  • flysurfer likes this

#10 Borge

Borge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 480 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationNorway

Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:28 PM

This is NOT good news:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content



That is the opinions of one software developer which develops a RAW converter that is largely unknown.
Software engineers need to be creative with the new sensor layout, and get away from the "everything has been 2x2, so WTF am I supposed to do to solve this. It is impossible!!" mindset.

It will take time, yes. But the X-Trans really shows that it is a sensor that is way above the regular Bayer 2x2 sensor design. Just look at the jpeg's... The jpeg's are processed from RAW data as well.

One of the negative points from that developer is even that the 6x6 sensor array will take more processing power (duh), and it won't be able to run on an iPad... Like anyone cares? The iPad raw application he develops is even very badly rated on the AppStore... I guess that says everything.

#11 Papa Lazarou

Papa Lazarou

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM
  • LocationManchester

Posted 17 May 2012 - 01:46 PM

BETA version of Adobe camera RAW is already out for Photoshop.
It's a saga now

#12 Arjay

Arjay

    Admin

  • Administrators
  • 8,954 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationMunich, Germany

Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:05 PM

This is NOT good news:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content


Interesting information - it explains some of the comments I've read elsewhere about Fuji not having provided enough support to RAW file converter programmers other than Silkypix...

OTOH, it doesn't really come as a surprise that a different filter pattern requires new, innovative demosaicing algorithms. Naturally, developing powerful, high-performance algorithms involves a lot of trial and error, which in turn takes time and probably several design iterations.

#13 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 6,087 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 17 May 2012 - 04:06 PM

I'm sure that Dave Coffin is available for consultancy if it is too difficult for them! Seems like a small price to pay for delivering the impossible. :lol:
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#14 Arjay

Arjay

    Admin

  • Administrators
  • 8,954 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationMunich, Germany

Posted 17 May 2012 - 05:26 PM

Just look at the jpeg's... The jpeg's are processed from RAW data as well.

This basically means that Fuji still has some edge over other software manufacturers, as their built-in RAW converter still seems to be a little better than that of the others (except for a slight loss in resolution).

I'm sure that Dave Coffin is available for consultancy if it is too difficult for them! Seems like a small price to pay for delivering the impossible. :lol:

If I have correctly understood part 2 of the Chromasoft blog (see link above), then Dave Coffin's DCRaw isn't the gold standard of X-Pro1 RAW converters either, and Dave's X-Pro1 demosaicing algorithm too could still use some tweaking...

#15 Liquid Stereo

Liquid Stereo

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Local time: 10:56 AM

Posted 17 May 2012 - 11:07 PM

Thanks Dave!

Was chatting with a Fuji rep today about all things X Pro 1 and he tells me LightRoom RAW support for Fuji X Pro 1 will be here by end of the month.



#16 Liquid Stereo

Liquid Stereo

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Local time: 10:56 AM

Posted 17 May 2012 - 11:10 PM

It is not good news. Some think this has to do with software, but really it has to do with interpolation. Specifically, interpolation of irregularly spaced data. You can call for all the innovation you want but looking at the literature it shows that such algorithms or mathematical techniques have not evolved much in the past 40 years.

This is NOT good news:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content




#17 Papa Lazarou

Papa Lazarou

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM
  • LocationManchester

Posted 18 May 2012 - 01:45 AM

Liquid Stereo Your welcome ITS A SAGA NOW DAVE.
It's a saga now

#18 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM

Posted 18 May 2012 - 03:50 AM

That is the opinions of one software developer which develops a RAW converter that is largely unknown.
Software engineers need to be creative with the new sensor layout, and get away from the "everything has been 2x2, so WTF am I supposed to do to solve this. It is impossible!!" mindset.

It will take time, yes. But the X-Trans really shows that it is a sensor that is way above the regular Bayer 2x2 sensor design. Just look at the jpeg's... The jpeg's are processed from RAW data as well.

One of the negative points from that developer is even that the 6x6 sensor array will take more processing power (duh), and it won't be able to run on an iPad... Like anyone cares? The iPad raw application he develops is even very badly rated on the AppStore... I guess that says everything.


I do agree with your comments. The purpose of a sensor is not to make the job of raw convertor developers "easy", or allow processing on low power devices. Frankly, Adobe already have "form" on rather lazy implementation of some raw formats. If the new Fuji sensor layout requires them to code new raw conversion routines, rather than just use the ones they wrote years ago, then frankly that is what we will all be paying for when we are forced to update our software versions to get the latest ACR engine. I only hope they do the job properly and that ACR will yield results better than out of camera, rather than some of their less-than-spectacular efforts on other raw files in the past.

#19 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 6,087 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 18 May 2012 - 06:57 AM

It is not good news. Some think this has to do with software, but really it has to do with interpolation. Specifically, interpolation of irregularly spaced data. You can call for all the innovation you want but looking at the literature it shows that such algorithms or mathematical techniques have not evolved much in the past 40 years.



That is because everyone apart from Sigma and Fuji have all plodded down the same Bayer route for sensor layout.
Fuji have demonstrated that a different layout has great potential and if some software engineers cant work out what to do its because they have a lack of knowledge and creativity with respect to sensor design and layout not a lack of coding ability.
Once you know the algorithm implementing the code is easy/easier.
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#20 Daremoshiranai

Daremoshiranai

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Local time: 08:56 AM

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:21 AM

I know better than to listen to fuji when they mention dates. :lol:

#21 Dick Quinn

Dick Quinn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Local time: 06:56 AM
  • LocationHonolulu, Hawaii USA

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:55 PM

CHROMASOFT: "Demosaicing the Fuji X-Pro1 Part 2"

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content



#22 markopa

markopa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM

Posted 18 May 2012 - 01:53 PM

It's also interesting when the author writes about resolution. In his opinion the sensor is comparable to a D7000 sensor and not better like Fuji states. What's your oppinion ?

Btw...I'm unable to get the same result with SILKYPIX Raw converter as out-of-camera JPEGS. Has anybody mastered the Fuji RAW converter ?

m.

#23 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM

Posted 19 May 2012 - 07:06 AM

It's also interesting when the author writes about resolution. In his opinion the sensor is comparable to a D7000 sensor and not better like Fuji states. What's your oppinion ?

Btw...I'm unable to get the same result with SILKYPIX Raw converter as out-of-camera JPEGS. Has anybody mastered the Fuji RAW converter ?

m.

For what it's worth, when Amateur Photographer magazine in the UK tested the X-Pro, their resolution tests (using the 60mm lens I think from what I remember) showed a greater ability to resolve detail on the test chart beyond other 16Mp camera. Their conclusion that it resolved similar detail to other 18Mp cameras.

I have used one alongside a Sony A850 (24mp full frame). It's difficult to comment if an APS-C camera can "match" a full frame since their resolutions are different. I haven't compared them side by side, since I use them for different things. My feeling is that in good conditions the A850 resolves more detail - but then you would expect it to, given it's higher resolution sensor.

The X-Pro handles higher ISO better out of the camera, although my *feeling* (without having done a lot of raw work with the Fuji) is that the Sony A850 raw files have greater dynamic range (easier to recover highlights etc) and probably process more easily. The A850 sensor is quite old, and has a relatively poor quantum efficiency and therefore a high-ish noise floor, although this is offset by the sensor size and large pixels.

It really depends what you define as "better", and you can only really compare the X Pro to other cameras in the 14-18Mp range (FF or APSC) I guess.

Edit: FWIW, when is saw some X-Pro and Sony NEX-7 comparisons, the Fui seemed to show better detail at moderate-to-high ISO since the per-pixel noise was lower, whereas the Sony jpeg engine applies quite aggressive NR which undermines the resolution of detail straight out of the camera.

#24 Mat McDermott

Mat McDermott

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Local time: 11:56 AM
  • LocationNew York City

Posted 19 May 2012 - 08:33 AM

I have to say that some of this discussion, or any discussion about which camera out-resolves another one, verges on how many angels can dance on a the head of a pin. The fact of the matter is that, while there very well may be differences in absolute terms while pixel peeping between cameras, at the mid point of 2012 both the X-Pro1 and all the cameras it's being compared to can easily print a satisfyingly sharp image filling up a 17x22" piece of paper. And most photographers probably don't even print that large that often, with fewer still printing larger. Which is to say, for me personally the fine differences in resolution and image noise aren't as important as the differences in ergonomics, available aspect ratios, available lenses and the quality of those, the viewfinder, etc. Not to denigrate these differences in resolution or all the work that goes into getting the most out of a given sensor, but from a creative photographic standpoint the tech is already there, for the most part across the board.

Now, back to the title of the thread, when the eff will LR support these RAW files?

#25 apsphoto

apsphoto

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 885 posts
  • Local time: 08:56 AM
  • LocationOrange county , CA

Posted 19 May 2012 - 09:13 AM

Last month, I had a Fuji rep tell me ACR and LR support would come at the beginning of May. I don't think the Fuji reps really know. Adobe "officially" updates cameras for ACR and LR four times per year. The last "official" update was May 1. Based on the four per year schedule, I'd suspect the next "official" one will be around August 1. Hopefully, there will be a beta and/or release candidate before then but, I wouldn't count on it before the end of June or beginning of July.



Actually the current release is still only a RC for Lightroom and not a final version so there is a very good chance of a new update very soon, before August 1. I also was told that by one of the Adobe developers.

#26 mikeci

mikeci

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Local time: 12:56 PM
  • Locationnear New York City

Posted 19 May 2012 - 09:48 AM

The raw converter couldn't come soon enough. After shooting about 250 shots 2 days ago and not looking at my settings going from the subway into the bright sun light of the streets and then accidentally rotating the exp comp dial +1 &1/3 stops hot (mea culpa) and yes I do that kinda stuff a lot. I would like to see if I can recover some of the shots.

#27 Knuck

Knuck

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 85 posts
  • Local time: 09:56 AM

Posted 19 May 2012 - 10:43 AM

I do agree with your comments. The purpose of a sensor is not to make the job of raw convertor developers "easy", or allow processing on low power devices. Frankly, Adobe already have "form" on rather lazy implementation of some raw formats. If the new Fuji sensor layout requires them to code new raw conversion routines, rather than just use the ones they wrote years ago, then frankly that is what we will all be paying for when we are forced to update our software versions to get the latest ACR engine. I only hope they do the job properly and that ACR will yield results better than out of camera, rather than some of their less-than-spectacular efforts on other raw files in the past.


The problem is that the Xpro1, and its sensor technology, has very small market share. Unless other manufacturers adopt this new technology there is no incentive for companies like Adobe to reinvent raw processing engines. At best, we can expect a "this is the best we could do given the limited resources we are prepared to spend on this problem" approach. Adobe will be more interested in providing a raw converter for the XPro1 so they can say their new versions support it rather than designing a revolutionary new engine.

I hope I am wrong but common business sense suggests that the new release will be less than stellar.

#28 markopa

markopa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Local time: 05:56 PM

Posted 19 May 2012 - 11:15 AM

The problem is that the Xpro1, and its sensor technology, has very small market share. Unless other manufacturers adopt this new technology there is no incentive for companies like Adobe to reinvent raw processing engines. At best, we can expect a "this is the best we could do given the limited resources we are prepared to spend on this problem" approach. Adobe will be more interested in providing a raw converter for the XPro1 so they can say their new versions support it rather than designing a revolutionary new engine.

I hope I am wrong but common business sense suggests that the new release will be less than stellar.


From a pure business point of view I agree with such scenario :(

#29 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM

Posted 19 May 2012 - 12:50 PM

The raw converter couldn't come soon enough. After shooting about 250 shots 2 days ago and not looking at my settings going from the subway into the bright sun light of the streets and then accidentally rotating the exp comp dial +1 &1/3 stops hot (mea culpa) and yes I do that kinda stuff a lot. I would like to see if I can recover some of the shots.


You can't use the supplied SilkyPix? I've finally got around to using to post process some photos taken a few weeks ago (where the in camera jpeg isn't as I want it), and it's really not a big deal. I does run rather slow on my laptop (but then so does Lightroom from time to time, and crashes / freezes), but it really only takes about a couple of minutes to load a raw file, adjust as necessary, and save it out. Worth trying?

#30 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 04:56 PM

Posted 19 May 2012 - 01:10 PM

The problem is that the Xpro1, and its sensor technology, has very small market share. Unless other manufacturers adopt this new technology there is no incentive for companies like Adobe to reinvent raw processing engines. At best, we can expect a "this is the best we could do given the limited resources we are prepared to spend on this problem" approach. Adobe will be more interested in providing a raw converter for the XPro1 so they can say their new versions support it rather than designing a revolutionary new engine.

I hope I am wrong but common business sense suggests that the new release will be less than stellar.


You have largely confirmed one of the points in my post - Adobe already has a track record of doing the minimum to implement raw conversions for new cameras, and sometimes doing it quite badly. If we are expected to pay for an upgrade to get that functionality, then their customers should expect they do a good job. Ultimately, we are only taking about de-mosaicing routines, of which there are already several well known approaches. DCRaw already offers the end user the choice - something Adobe does not, for example.

A sensor layout that allows the removal of the anti-aliasing filter has the potential to increase resolving power, and it has already been demonstrated by the in camera jpegs. Putting more pixels on APS-C sensors has already shown declining benefits on resolution across a range of ISOs, so the only alternative would be a larger sensor with an anti-aliasing filter and more pixels. There are several cameras already out there that provide that - but none of them have a body and lens range as small and light as the X Pro, so you take your money and you make a choice.

If we are going to get picky about the quality of Adobe's raw engine, then there is no point in discussing the installed user base of the X Pro sensor. Adobe use a single demosaicing approach AFAIK, just paramaterising it for different cameras files (colour profiles etc); if we want to talk about ultimately quality, then all the happy Adobe users should be pressuring them to do a rather better job than they have been doing.

Everyone wants the Adobe raw engine to support X Pro files because that's the tool they happen to use, and I understand that. However, I would put money on the likelihood that the Adobe raw conversion isn't going to be spectacular; and that's not Fuji's fault. If those same Adobe users cared about quality, rather than convenience, then they should probably be using another product for their raw conversion.

For information, I use Lightroom and Elements, because they are convenient. I also use Sony IDC software for Sony files, UFRaw (DCRaw) some times, and also SilkyPix. Increasingly I am just using Lightroom as a catalog and finishing tool, and although it may involve moving files between software as TIFs, it really has no negative impact on final image quality and only takes a little more time - though I know how I am prepared to work (as a hobbyist) is different from what may be acceptable to other people.




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users