#Iridient

Want Best Image Quality From Your Fuji ? Here´s How !

After my first try-out of Phase One´s new Capture One Pro v10 (here) I thought those of youse in constant search of getting the very best image quality might be interested in a re-comparison of latest available RAW development solutions ! For this I took a challenging high contrast image shot after dusk - quite scary how much achievable image quality still varies among contemporary RAW converters. Curious ? Please read on !

Great result: XF 18-135mm @18mm f/5.6 1/8" on X-Pro2, developed in Capture One Pro 10

Small side remark: I´m repeatedly amazed about what I can do with Fuji´s XF 18-135mm OIS (Optical Image Stabilization): Apart from replacing a full bag of lenses I´m getting sharp results down to 1/8 sec at any focal length (sometimes even 1/4 sec !) - Hello ... that´s 4-5 stops autonomy vs. non OIS lenses ! Means I could take the above image of a museum venue after dusk at ISO 3200, f5.6 and 1/8 sec hand held !

Ok, so before looking at the various RAW converters I´d first like to share the SOOC JPEG taken with Acros-R film profile - a bit too dark for my taste:

Original SOOC JPEG, using ACROS-R film profile - too dark IMO !

I compared following RAW converters (in order of preference):

Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with any of the above software providers, nor a "fan-boy" of any one of them - I just choose the best solution for my type of images and workflow. However I excluded some RAW developers (Raw Therapee, Silkypix, ACDSee, Aperture, ...) from this comparison as these either were not available to me, or not compatible with Mac OS Sierra, or having an IMO too complex user interface (eg. Silkypix). So, in case you don´t agree to my conclusions you´re most welcome to leave me a comment and/or suggestions below !

Basically I aimed for maximum highlight recovery and dynamic range, covering all zones from pure black to white with balanced gradations of grey in between. I further tried to prevent over sharpening (to which Fuji X-Trans files do not agree too well). Below you can see 200% crops of results achieved with each RAW converter (arranged in order of my personal preference):

My Conclusions:

  1. Overall Capture One Pro 10 delivers IMO the most balanced result, with good contrast and sharpness in the background billboard text and not too aggressive rendering of the grass and the hedge. Capture One now automatically corrects distortion (often prevalent on zooms) by straightening & cropping. However, left at 100% this correction effectively reduces the FF equ. widest angle of view of the XF 18-135 from 27mm to 28.5mm. So I reduce the auto-correction to around 60% allowing me to retain around 28mm FF equ. max. field of view while still getting reasonably straight lines
  2. Photo Ninja brings out more contrast in the text but IMO renders the tree, grass and hedge too aggressively. The image also seems to be overlaid by a visible grain structure. Unfortunately Photo Ninja doesn't´t offer lens correction based on embedded EXIF data and delivers somewhat strange colours (for those into colour imaging)
  3. Lightroom CC delivers reasonable results, albeit with subdued sharpness in the text (with optimal settings for Fuji X-Trans) and a hint of detail smearing artefacts in the foliage
  4. Iridient  (my previous favourite, before trying the newest version of Capture One) disappointed me on this image: I couldn't get sufficient contrast in the text and finest details in that text do not seem to be resolved well enough (lines in the letters break up). Also here IMO too aggressive rendering of the grass & foliage
  5. Affinity Photo delivers a similar balanced result to Capture One but clearly lacks contrast, sharpness and detail rendering in the fine details of the background text
  6. The SOOC JPEG is IMO the least attractive of these (apart from being too dark). This confirms that JPEG´s, while being good enough for sharing images on social media / web are insufficient for big fine-art enlargements - see how the fine details in the text are lost ...

Another aspect to consider is that from my point of view only 2 solutions of the above offer a complete all-in-one image management / RAW development solution: Capture One Pro and Lightroom CC. The others are usually applied as external RAW converters integrated into a Lightroom workflow, requiring exporting and re-importing of images & more complicated handling

Even Capture One is currently my preferred image management solution it has one big deficiency: It is the only software of the above NOT able to handle compressed Fuji RAW´s. This means each RAW file blocks approx. 50mB of your disk space vs. the approx. 25mB per compressed RAW !

Ok, this will be my last post of this year. I sincerely hope you enjoyed visiting my blog during the past year & will continue to follow me thru 2017 ! As always please leave me any comments and/or questions you may have in the comments area, many thanks for your continued support & for your interest / contributions !

Wishing y´all a wonderful, successful, fun new year 2017 & the best of luck for all your (photographic ;-) endeavours, 

Yours, 

Hendrik
 

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !

How to Get Best Image Quality Out of Fuji X-Trans III RAW´s

Hey I got something for those of youse who REALLY wanna get the very best possible image quality out of Fuji´s new X-Trans III image sensor (as currently used on Fuji´s X-Pro 2 and X-T2 mirrorless APS-C cameras). Yeah I know ... Said some posts ago that Lightroom´s all you´ll need ... Basically that still holds true but it all depends on what you expect from your photography, please read on to discover how:

Portrait of my lovely wife: Fuji X-Pro 2 with 35 mm f2 WR @f2.8 1/125 sec

Portraits seem to present quite a challenge regarding image quality (apart from the obvious challenge to capture the right facial expression reflecting persona & character of your model ;-) ! Working on a portrait series I discovered that different RAW developers produced subtle variations in the results. So I thought I´d share them here, starting off as baseline with Fuji´s very good SOOC JPEG rendering. This already delivers an overall pleasing result, however finest details are lost during in-camera conversion:

SOOC JPEG using Fuji X-Pro 2´s X-Trans III 24 mp sensor

Then I tried RAW conversion using Affinity Photo, a relatively new kid on the block (many thanks to The Lightweight Photographer for pointing me to it !). With this one I do get a very nice contrast, which I initially liked a lot (for me nearly the most pleasing off the bat). But on closer scrutiny I discovered it dissolves finer details even more than the JPEG and also produces some unwanted artefacts (see the line between the cornea and the lower eyelid):

RAW conversion using Affinity Photo

This is not the case with Adobe´s latest version of Lightroom CC. Better fine details than the JPEG´s and a fully integrated workflow to boot (no external RAW converter, so no additional exporting / importing needed). However ACR does seem to slightly exaggerate high contrast fine detail - the eyelashes seem to look a bit thicker / heavier than perceived (I learnt a lot from Thomas Fitzgerald´s excellent X-Trans guides & used one of his sharpening presets, they´re really good !). To further optimize this I may need to experiment a bit more in detail with the sharpening settings:

RAW conversion using Adobe Camera RAW in Lightroom CC

Last but not least the most balanced high quality result came out of Iridient Developer: Extremely fine details are retained and beautifully rendered (using default "Iridient Reveal" sharpening). No artefacts, no exaggeration, IMO the very best result I could achieve (with a reasonable effort - I really want to minimize the time spent in front of my Mac, of course ;-)

RAW conversion using Iridient Developer

Concluding I have to say that Fuji shooters have a lot of choices nowadays: Need a fast result w/o hassle ? You can use the SOOC JPEG´s without any problem, they´re amazing ! Want to go RAW for a really good result with an integrated workflow ? Lightroom CC ain´t gonna disappoint you ! But if you want the very best image quality & don't shy away from some extra workflow integration ? Use Lightroom CC for image management and Iridient for RAW conversion (it can be easily integrated into your workflow - excellent "how to" advice available here)

Hope y´all liked today´s post & could find some guidance & information for your own work ? If you´ve any questions, comments or ideas - please leave me a note in the comments section or on my "Contact" page ! Many thanks for reading, for your continued interest & support, and hope to see you here again soon !

Good luck & best regards,

Hendrik

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !

Good news for Fuji Fans: Lightroom is all you need !

Until recently X-Photographers were forced to either use only Fuji´s (very good) JPEG´s or 3rd party RAW converters coz Adobe´s Camera RAW didn't really cooperate with the non-Bayer demosaicing layout of Fuji´s X-Trans sensors. Now here´s the good news for Fuji shooters: With Adobe´s latest Creative Cloud update there´s no more need to stray from Lightroom & fuss with needing to export & re-import images. And no more need to split your post processing over 2 pieces of software !

I stumbled over this after viewing images in Lightroom, see previous posts here and here but just wanted to double-check if the improvement is also visible in portraiture (skin & hair), see here an image (thanks to my lovely wife !) developed in Lightroom (no external RAW converter !):

The Lady with the Umbrella, Fuji X-Pro2 with f2/35mm WR, processed in Lightroom CC

Here a 100% enlargement of this image:

Crop of above image processed in Lightroom CC

And here the same image developed in the best-of-class external RAW converter Iridient:

The Lady with the Umbrella, Fuji X-Pro2 with f2/35mm WR, processed in Iridient Developer

Here again the 100% enlargement for your reference:

Crop of above image processed with Iridient Developer

As you can see there is not much difference, from my point of view the image developed in Lightroom is even a bit more natural looking !

I hope this little post helps X-Photographers to simplify their workflow by not needing to fuss with additional bits of software, please let me know your experience or if you have any comments, I look forward to hearing from you !

Many thanks for visiting & for your interest, wish y´all a good Sunday & best regards

Hendrik

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !

Adobe´s got the best RAW converter for Fuji X-Trans, Part 2 & Conclusion

Last week I shared with y´all how various RAW converters render the Fuji X-Pro2´s new X-Trans III sensor´s hi-lights & shadows, see here. Now for the second (and last) part, I´m looking at details & sharpening - I must say, very interesting ! Please read on if curious - again I start with the SOOC JPEG, showing how the camera interpreted the scene:

 Park with Lake - Fuji X-Pro2, WR 35mm/f2, JPEG SOOC: not bad at all, but a bit too dark !

Here an enlarged portion of this SOOC image:

Crop of above SOOC JPEG, observe some "watercolor" artifacts in the background bushes !

Serves me right, at this extreme magnification level (300-400%) I managed to identify the famous "watercolor" effect in some areas of finest low contrast foliage detail ! Now this is a special feature of Fuji´s X-Trans sensors, developed to punish "pixel peepers" ;-)

Believe me, if you focus your photography on developing the best image content, rather than searching for artifacts at crazy magnifications you'll never need to bother about it. This effect is definitely NOT visible at normal viewing magnifications, nor in print ! As this "watercolor" effect remained visible with all RAW converters, I believe it´s caused on pixel level by interference between finest details and Fuji´s proprietary demosaicing pattern (designed to maximize sharpness by not needing an AA filter for moiré prevention). I also get the impression that it´s less evident on Fuji´s new 24 mp sensor compared to the previous 16 mp sensors (where i could make it visible already at lower magnifications)

Having said that now let´s look at how the different RAW converters perform on details & sharpness:

1. Photo Ninja:

Apart from the missing lens correction the "watercolor" effect is less prominent as it´s masked by a kind of "smearing":

Park with Lake - Fuji X-Pro2, WR 35mm/f2, RAW developed in Photo Ninja

Here the enlargement, showing quite good details & sharpening, but for my taste too harsh micro-contrast ...

Crop of the above Photo Ninja rendering, less visible "watercolor" but harsh micro-contrast

2. Iridient Developer:

From my point of view detail & sharpening are better balanced here (less "smearing") & better sharpening in contrasty details:

Park with Lake - Fuji X-Pro2, WR 35mm/f2, RAW developed in Iridient Developer

See here the enlargement:

Crop of the above Iridient rendering, excellent details & more balanced sharpening

3. Adobe Camera RAW (included in Lightroom & Photoshop):

Last but not least here the rendering of Adobe Camera Raw, with some tweaking of sharpening in Lightroom nearly as good as Iridient !

Park with Lake - Fuji X-Pro2, WR 35mm/f2, RAW developed in Adobe Camera Raw

Details, see here:

Crop of the above Adobe Camera Raw rendering, nearly as good as Iridient !

Conclusion:

From my point of view based on detail & sharpening alone Iridient wins, but with some tweaking Adobe Camera Raw can come quite close !

So, overall combing this with last week´s conclusion I´m gonna try "survive" ;-) without an external RAW developer (i.e. see if I can limit myself to just Lightroom) !

Will keep y´all posted, please feel free to visit me here soon & see how it "develops" (pun intended !)

Many thanks for looking by & for your interest, please feel free to contact me via my contact page & drop me a message, I´ll be most happy to answer your questions as good as I can !

Best regards & wish great imagin(in)g !

Hendrik

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !

Adobe´s got the best RAW converter for Fuji X-Trans now, or what ? Part 1

Recently I got this pop-up on my MAC informing on new Creative Cloud App updates, so I downloaded ´em & was looking at some high contrast images after import using Lightroom´s ACR (Adobe Camera RAW). Here FYI the JPEG SOOC, with totally jacked highlights & shadows:

Dogging the Fountain - Fuji X-Pro2, WR 35mm/f2, JPEG SOOC: Jacked highlights & shadows !

But when opening the RAW´s with ACR - what the ... ??? ;-) Hey, could it be that Adobe´s now finally gotten their Fuji X-Trans rendering act together ? Intrigued by this performance I decided to (again ... yawn ;-) compare Adobe´s Camera RAW (included in Lightroom & Photoshop CC) with the best external RAW converters out there (Iridient & Photo Ninja) - ya just gotta keep on your toes here ;-) please read on if interested !

I´ve been using Photo Mechanic for culling / key-wording & Lightroom for (mobile) image management / processing since way back, so obviously a built in RAW converter would have major advantages for my workflow compared to an external one (no more needing to export & copy back in, nor splitting image processing over 2 bits of software, etc.)

I´m posting this in 2 instalments: 1. Highlights & Shadows Performance (this post), and 2. Detail & Sharpening (coming up soon !)

Let´s start with Highlights & Shadows Performance. Although aesthetically the SOOC JPEG quite faithfully rendered what I´d originally visualised at time of capture the highlights & shadows are like totally blown out. So I was interested how much detail I could pull back into the image during post processing:

To do this I basically first maxed out the highlights recovery and then pushed the shadows by slightly increasing exposure until just before the highlights started blowing out again (thereby keeping an eye on not losing too much contrast). See below the comparison & results !

1. Adobe Camera RAW in Photoshop CC:

This one I liked the most:

Highlight & Shadows compression using Photoshop CC´s built in ACR RAW converter

Dunno why, but i seemed to get a slightly better rendering outta Photoshop´s built in version of ACR than LR´s (maybe the PS ACR interface is better, or I was too dumb or lazy to get 100% the same result with Lightroom´s built in ACR ...). Here a 100% crop view showing vastly improved shadows & highlights areas vs. the JPEG:

100% Crop of Photoshop´s ACR rendering

2. Adobe Canera RAW in Lightroom CC:

Nearly as good (yeah, right - both platforms use the same Adobe Camera RAW built in RAW converter):

Highlight & Shadows compression using Lightroom CC´s built in ACR RAW converter

Here a 100% crop view showing the improved shadows & highlights areas, with slightly less contrast in the shadows whereas highlights seem to have a bit more detail ...

100% Crop of Lightroom´s ACR rendering

3. Iridient Developer:

Iridient is amazing in its ability to bring out detail with a unique & careful sharpening of Fuji X-Pro2´s files, but I was quite shocked to see that its highlight & shadows detail recovery seems to be limited:

Highlight & Shadows compression using Iridient´s external RAW converter

Compared to ACR the highlight head room is quite limited, meaning I have less "foot" room available for pushing the shadows, before the highlights blow (compare the crack between the tiles on bottom right with the ACR versions):

100% Crop of Iridient´s rendering

4. Photo Ninja:

This one I liked the least - highlight head room seems a bit better than Iridient, but didn't matter what I did, i just couldn't manage to bring out more shadow detail (it always kinda remained a dark soup). Also Photo Ninja does not react on EXIF lens correction parameters, you get the total image (see the additional details at the image borders), but the image is still distorted:

Highlight & Shadows compression using Photo Ninja´s external RAW converter

And here the details - highlights OK´ish but the black dog just remains a black silhouette:

100% Crop of Photo Ninja´s rendering

Sorry, did´t have no more access to Capture One & never used Raw Therapee so those two are not covered here ...

Interim Conclusion: Adobe´s ACR wins the dynamic range battle !
(please also check out part 2 soon for details & sharpness comparison and for the final conclusion)

From a highlights & shadows recovery point of view the benefit of not needing to use external RAW converters seems to be an achievable target, Adobe´s ACR is doing an excellent job here ! OK I´d not push it that far for a fine art print to preserve the visual impression of the original situation, but good to know there is room for manoeuvring !

I hope this was an interesting read for all you Fuji fans out there - please leave me a comment in case you´ve any questions and/or suggestions ! Many thanks for looking by & wish y´all good light !

Best regards

Hendrik

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !

WOW ! Combining X-Pro2´s X-Trans III and Iridient

Finally I dunnit - after reading lotsa reviews and years of frustration with windows OS (jeezus, I needed to become more of an IT expert than focussing on improving my photography ...) I jumped ship to Mac. This now opened the door to using Iridient RAW developer (which unfortunately don´t exist for Win users ...). Well to put it mildly, I was completely blown away with the results !!!

Spring coming to Hofgarten in Bayreuth

Gone the issues with smearing foliage or fine details artefacts i´d experienced with various windows based RAW converters off Fuji X-Trans sensors ! Using Iridient´s R-L deconvolution setting with radius 0.5 and 30 iterations I get a clear but subtle sharpening effect w/o visible artefacts, demonstrating the amazing details Fuji´s new 24 MP X-Trans III sensor is capable of rendering. I still use Lightroom for my image management (yeah, some old habits die hard ;-) but using LR proprietary RAW converter just don´t cut it, see below:

Iridient RAW development - nice & crisp !

LR RAW development - still a bit mushy ...

To integrate Iridient RAW developer into Lightroom I set up:

  1. LR to use Iridient as external RAW editor: LR export menu > export to same folder as original, add to catalog & stack, TIFF, after export open in Iridient ...
  2. Iridient to open the original RAW image (not the TIFF copy !): Preferences > tick "Find & Load RAW for TIFF, JPEG, ... open events"

White fence in the last afternoon sun ...

When exporting an image from LR to Iridient (right click > export to Iridient) LR creates a "place-holder" TIFF from the RAW image but Iridient opens and develops the original RAW file related to it. When done in Iridient the developed RAW overwrites the TIFF "place-holder" in LR by using file > process image and overwrite option. Then back in LR just apply some finishing touches (B&W conversion, curves, exposure, contrast, highlight / shadow recovery, etc) and you´re done !

Candlelight dinner with my lovely wife (no flash !)

I hope y´all liked this post & could get some inspiration off it - my apologies to my readers & followers that I´ve neglected my blog for a several months: moving house & starting up new job and all ...

Please let me know if you got questions or need any support in how to set up the various bits of software so this works smoothly and/or which settings to apply for  best results (but on that one I´m still on a learning curve m´self, so please bear with me a little while ;-)

Many thanks for reading & look forward to hearing from you, appreciate if you´d leave your comments or constructive critique in the comments window below or drop me a mail !

Thanks in advance & warm regards

Hendrik

I hope you enjoyed reading this post - If you like you can support me by sending me a small donation via PayPal.me/hendriximages ! Helps me run this site & keeps the information coming, many thanks in advance !