Thread: Fuji X-Trans RAW Converter Comparison: Lightroom 4.3 and Capture One (C1) 7.0.2

Originally Posted by Amin Sabet

Stephen, I think he makes ACR/LR look poorer than it is by not processing "to taste" making use of all the tools in LR. As I tried to show in my example, the results are much closer if you use the available tools.

+1

I tend to also agree that he should have done more processing, just as a normal person would have...

Gary

Kind of coming into this late, but just noticed that Corel has added support for the X-E1 in the latest service pack for PaintShop Pro. Corel also has the old Bibble product under the name Aftershot Pro which I purchased last spring when the price was really right ($50). I'm hoping that the software folks hang in with Fuji and the new sensor.

I'm a card carrying "If I wanted a guru I wouldn't look in Silicon Valley"

Originally Posted by Luckypenguin

Not if you are a card-carrying member of the "Apple does it best" club

why use DNG? - Micro Four Thirds User Forum

Originally Posted by Archiver

Perhaps because the software is written for the in-camera hardware, and not for a specific operating system? Not sure how that would work, as programming is not my thing. And a standalone raw converter might be criticized for not having more features if it is just a barebones conversion program.

There is some truth in that, of course, but the most relevant part are the algorithms and not the implementation of the user interface. And these algorithms are the same on all platforms. However, Fuji would have to share their knowledge about the algorithms with Adobe (for example), in order to enable Adobe to interprete the Fuji files properly, and I guess that Fuji did not want to do that. I read that Fuji needed some years to develop those algorithms and it is not to be expected that all companies which produce raw converters would invest as much time and money in order to support a niche product as best as possible.

In my opinion Fuji has to be interested in the best support of their products by the most common raw converters, since they cannot expect photographers to change their workflows completely. They would be able to sell much more cameras, if they cooperated better. And if they did not want to share their algorithms, they should at least offer plugins for the most common raw converters, such that there is just one more step during the import which should be able to be done automatically.

They would be able to sell much more cameras, if they cooperated better.

Interesting perspective. Do we know that they have not cooperated. From my reading they claim to have cooperated in full. perhaps you have found additional information.

Originally Posted by Pelao

Do we know that they have not cooperated. From my reading they claim to have cooperated in full. perhaps you have found additional information.

Although I still think that I am right about the main points of my post, I should have been clearer about that. First, I have not written that they did not cooperate, I wrote that they should have cooperated better. This is one of the most important negatives mentioned in the reviews I have read (for example, Thom Hogan mentions that in his review). I cannot know how much they cooperated and I don't know how much Adobe and others were interested. Implementing the support of Fuji's new sensor design means, that the converter has to be able to cope with Fuji's 6x6 array instead of the usual 2x2 array. Since this essentially means writing a new converter in order to get the most out of the sensor, implementing the support of the Fuji sensors is rather costly. I cannot know exactly whose fault the long delay is, and I surely didn't write carefully enough, but I still think that it would have been very much better for Fuji, if their cameras were supported much earlier and as well as by Lightroom 4.4.

Originally Posted by pictor

Although I still think that I am right about the main points of my post, I should have been clearer about that. First, I have not written that they did not cooperate, I wrote that they should have cooperated better. This is one of the most important negatives mentioned in the reviews I have read (for example, Thom Hogan mentions that in his review). I cannot know how much they cooperated and I don't know how much Adobe and others were interested. Implementing the support of Fuji's new sensor design means, that the converter has to be able to cope with Fuji's 6x6 array instead of the usual 2x2 array. Since this essentially means writing a new converter in order to get the most out of the sensor, implementing the support of the Fuji sensors is rather costly. I cannot know exactly whose fault the long delay is, and I surely didn't write carefully enough, but I still think that it would have been very much better for Fuji, if their cameras were supported much earlier and as well as by Lightroom 4.4.

I don't think adobe or anyone else initially believed that the xtran based cameras were going to be as successful as they ended up, so they probably did not start serious work on it for a while. There are cameras that are much older than any of the Fuji's xtran types that still have no support from Adobe, such as the foveon based ones.

I think Fuji was also caught flat footed by the negative response from country's outside of Asia in terms of silky pix. It probably took them a while to put together the type of documentation that was really required for Adobe or Apple or Capture One for that matter.

At least Capture One and Adobe have stepped up to the plate... I wish Apple would get their act together:(.

Gary