X10 works really well with LR 4.4

Discussion in 'Fuji X10, X20, X30, XF1, and X-S1' started by flysurfer, May 20, 2013.

  1. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Adobe really did a good job improving EXR sensor support in Lightroom/ACR. It's now at a level that beats the internal converter in sharpness and detail.

    8759968138_d056b8891d_z.
    DSCF6626 by ricopress, on Flickr
     
  2. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    792
    Jan 31, 2013
    Boston, MA (USA)
    That first one is really impressive, Rico. Very Foveon-like in the amount of clean detail I'm seeing in the trees. I'm going to keep an eye out for a good deal on an X10.
     
  4. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    792
    Jan 31, 2013
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Now that EXR support has improved in LR, how would you compare the image quality you're getting out of the X10 with what you're setting from the X20?

    Sent from my SCH-I605 using FujiXspot mobile app
     
  5. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Like 6 MP vs. 12 MP. ;) X20 brings more resolution and pixels to the table, and it's a better camera to use featurewise, of course. Apart from that, the X10 is now better than it ever was, thanks to Adobe. ACR works much better than Silkypix and RFC EX. In even used my first X10 for this outing, the old one with the orbing sensor.
     
  6. theoldsmithy

    theoldsmithy FujiXspot Regular

    95
    Feb 4, 2013
    Herefordshire, England
    Martin Connolly
    How much effort is involved in getting the image to show that level of detail? I don't know LR but will try it out again based on this!
     
  7. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Depends on how you define detail. It takes me 10-15 seconds to adjust the sharpness sliders, but there's also microcontrast, curves and other stuff I change in Lightroom and Aperture. It's not entirely trivial, but that's why I'm using an external RAW workflow.

    Here's a OOC Velvia JPEG from the internal converter (including several in-camera adjustments):

    8769656984_085bfafbef_c.

    Add a few minor tweaks in Aperture, and you will get a pleasing and still natural result:

    8769661336_bbc842e065_c.

    I am confident that you could further process this JPEG to get a similar look, but you won't get the detail. I prefer working in 16 Bit for this kind of stuff, also because Lightroom is much better suited to recover highlights from RAWs than the internal converter.

    8759968138_d056b8891d_c.
    DSCF6626 by ricopress, on Flickr
     
  8. BBW

    BBW Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 8, 2013
    NW corner of CT
    BB
    Stunning!
     
  9. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    792
    Jan 31, 2013
    Boston, MA (USA)
    How about noise, tonal range, dynamic range, colors you're getting from Lightroom, etc? I rarely print big enough that the 6MP vs 12MP difference will be apparent - much more interested in everything else.
     
  10. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    I like LR for DR recovery. Colors are okay, too, but I use Aperture for serious color fine-tuning.

    Then again, I just put the Velvia JPEG from above into the new Topaz Clarity, and the result it not that bad, either:

    8795810717_81d352c4c1_c.
    DSCF6647 by ricopress, on Flickr
     
  11. theoldsmithy

    theoldsmithy FujiXspot Regular

    95
    Feb 4, 2013
    Herefordshire, England
    Martin Connolly
    Impressed with Topaz Clarity and DeNoise - I think I will invest in those rather than Lightroom
    Here's an original Provia JPEG from my X10:
    8720714734_7c7e57eec3_b.
    DSCF1329 by theoldsmithy, on Flickr

    and here's the same one after going through Clarity and DeNoise (necessary because Clarity introduces some noise)
    8812815194_51049a0aea_b.
    DSCF1329_tcdn by theoldsmithy, on Flickr
     
  12. pniev

    pniev FujiXspot Veteran

    489
    May 13, 2013
    Looks impressive. Thanks for sharing.
    Do you only apply on jpeg?
     
  13. keefeloke

    keefeloke FujiXspot Rookie

    23
    May 16, 2013
    I'm glad I picked one recently. Paid $350 and the set comes with extended warranty beyond 12 months. Better than buying a new set.
     
  14. theoldsmithy

    theoldsmithy FujiXspot Regular

    95
    Feb 4, 2013
    Herefordshire, England
    Martin Connolly
    So far I have but it works as a plugin to Aperture or LR so it should be fine on raw too.

    Sent from my U8815 using Tapatalk 2
     
  15. onreb

    onreb FujiXspot Regular

    40
    Mar 12, 2013
    Sometimes, with PS/LR I'm getting "double image" problems.
    In particular, in overexposed zones PS and LR aren't doing the best with the "double sensor", using M size.
    Surprise surprise! I have successfully developed those 2 separated images using dcraw command line on my mac.
    Surprise surprise, I found some of my critical files to be composed by one blurred and one crisp(er) image.
    Surprise surprise, the two images sometimes seem taken with a very slight lag between them...

    Those critical files are better developed by Fuji/silkypix Raw file converter.
    And I have saved an image using (for B&W conversion) one of the two images contained in the RAW. The underexposed one, to be precise.

    Of course, I'm not denying LR does a great job, but you have to have a good file to start with. For street shots taken in a hurry with a lot of technical issues (and errors...), it depends.

    Someone with a better english language than me should perhaps write an article about those TWO separate shots you get in one EXR raw file. Because LR and the like are not reading/demosaicing one strange file: they are actually MERGING two shots.
     
  16. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Of course they are, that's the purpose of supporting EXR-DR. Silkypix doesn't, neither does DCRAW, Aperture or Capture 1, so you'll only have half of the sensor information available. Which half depends on the RAW software (C1 and Aperture use the longer exposed half-image, Silkypix the shorter exposed image).

    If you don't want EXR-DR in an image (there are obvious reasons why you wouldn't want it in certain situations), simply don't use it in the first place (as in when you take the shot). Instead, use size L or set the camera to DR100%.

    So there's no surprise at all. Everything works just right (with the exception of most converters not supporting all sensor features).
     
  17. onreb

    onreb FujiXspot Regular

    40
    Mar 12, 2013
    Actually, Raw file converter ex (powered by silkypix) does. Don't know about other silkypix products, this is the only one working on my mac.
    It's free on the Fuji site, and funnily enough it doesn't support the X20 at the moment...

    Wait wait wait. You say Silkypix uses only the underexposed (if any) image? Maybe I'll have to check again. I didn't see signals of shadow lifting, cause that would be the case.

    I see a slight tendency to go defensive. No need, I'm not saying there's anything not working.
    I say that sensor is under-understood, and converters under-developed cause of the non-standard characteristics.
    At the moment, the only mistery for me is the difference between the two images, I don't understand where it comes from. The darker one, sometimes, looks as if it's been exposed "phisically" for a shorter time (less shake blur). As a reminder: I have extracted the two images with dcraw, overlapped in PS and compared.

    Sorry for the recursive editing of the post.
     
  18. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Nope. It's using the darker portion of the sensor and applies the classic DR correction to it. It's basically using classic DR expansion on half of the sensor information. And my RFC also supports the X20. It was included with the camera.
     
  19. onreb

    onreb FujiXspot Regular

    40
    Mar 12, 2013
    Yes sorry, I'd edited my post while you were answering. I only looked at the highlight recovery, didn't look at the shadows. This explains why I got a better image in my test, cause the underexposed one was the good one.
    Any explanation about the exposure of the underexposed image? It seems they can "cut" the exposure time, but that would suggest a sort of electronic shutter...
     
  20. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    Yep, I have explanations for almost everything, but since Fuji tells me nothing and I have to find out everything by means of "reverse engineering", I cannot warrant for them to be perfectly accurate or even true. ;)

    In this case, the camera is using a faster shutter speed for the underexposed sensor half – up to a certain higher ISO value. Starting from that higher ISO value (ISO 200/DR200% or ISO400/DR400%), the camera is using different ISO amplification with identical shutter speed. And starting with an even higher ISO value (ISO 400/800 with DR200%/DR400%), there's no EXR DR at all. Instead, the camera uses EXR SN and classic DR expansion.