Thread: Fujifilm X-Trans RAW (RAF) processed in Capture One 7.0.2 Beta vs Lightroom 4.2

right, 140 out of 1000. That is what I get for typing up something without checking first.

Thanks for the blog link, I need some reading up on C1's abilities.

Originally Posted by tdp

Images on page one were just in and out with the defaults from both programs. Yes mine has values of 50 and 50 and sharpening is something like 149? I think the two 50s are more like zero, if you drop them down the photos don't look like I would expect a baseline image to look. The 149 sharpening is out of 500 or something like that.

The other images I opened and edited as I wanted in C1 first then opened up the same RAW in LR and tried to get the same results. In C1 you can sharpen the file much more before you start to get bizarre artifacts.

I know LR rather well and know how to quickly edit an image as I like, in C1 I'm still learning. If Scott Kelby is listening, a book on C1 would be greatly appreciated!

-t

Thanks again for doing this.

I second your note to Kelby. Sadly unlikely since he is so deep into Adobe products. That's one of the advantages of LR - a very strong support and training base. I think it's one of the reasons for my reluctance to add another application. But, if the results are demonstrably better, then a move seems sensible. I wonder are Adobe working on on this?

Adobe may be, or maybe not. Fuji X-Trans is a niche market, and to be honest if Fuji wants to sell more hardware it would behove them to spoon feed Adobe whatever it needs to get the most out of their sensor. Right now Adobe can say "yes we can process RAF" and leave it at that. While on the surface that is a completely truthful statement, Adobe's rendering is not getting the most out of X-Trans RAF files.

Fuji's inclusion of Silkypix with the camera is a good intention but the software is difficult to work with.

Of course if you are in the jpg crowd you don't care about all this RAW/RAF mumbo-jumbo. I've tried to embrace SOOC jpgs (I even did a bunch of test shots with different settings located here http://flickr.com/gp/tdp_photos/Q114N7/ ), I always feel like shooting jpgs from a camera that can do RAW is like buying a sports car with an automatic transmission. Yes, I know this is (one of) my shortcoming.

I really appreciate C1's development work and results from this beta release. Also considering it is a beta release, I've had zero problems with it - it doesn't feel like unfinished software.

Thanks for the link to your SOOC shots at different settings. I think I will experiment a bit with those to see what I like best.

DSCF5528 - A Storm is Coming (Capture One version) by ricopress, on Flickr

C1 is a quite interesting alternative. For some images, it's pretty good and versatile, for others... not so much. In any case, it's a good thing to have another option, and I'm looking forward to the final version.

Another one:


DSCF5915 (Capture One version) by ricopress, on Flickr

I read a bit ago on DPR that Fuji had signed NDAs with C1 and Adobe, so hopefully Adobe will come out with something something better too.

Another set from this morning. RAF file imported and exported without any additional edits. Click images for larger viewing options.

LR output

lightroom 4.2 Fuji X-E1 RAW by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

C1 output

Capture One 4.2 Fuji X-E1 RAW by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

Side by side, full view. C1 left LR right:

Fuji X-E1 RAW Capture One Pro 7.0.2 vs Lightroom 4.2 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

100% crops

Fuji X-E1 RAW Capture One Pro 7.0.2 vs Lightroom 4.2 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


Fuji X-E1 RAW Capture One Pro 7.0.2 vs Lightroom 4.2 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr


Fuji X-E1 RAW Capture One Pro 7.0.2 vs Lightroom 4.2 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr

The difference is subtle when the files are just imported and exported. Once you start doing some image edits (sharpening, contrast and so forth) that at 100% crops the LR files start to show an orange peel like texture.

Thanks very much for the comparisons. You still can see a difference just from importing and exporting with no changes. I would be interested to see how well C1 does with the simple import/export (with no changes) compared to SOOC JPGs. Have you tried that comparison?

I find that, for the small amount of correction I'm applying to many photos, I'd rather just use the SOOC JPGs and apply some mild correction to them. For some images using LR with RAF files is okay but there are many more where I find that it just does a poor job.

Originally Posted by stu42

Thanks very much for the comparisons. You still can see a difference just from importing and exporting with no changes. I would be interested to see how well C1 does with the simple import/export (with no changes) compared to SOOC JPGs. Have you tried that comparison?

I find that, for the small amount of correction I'm applying to many photos, I'd rather just use the SOOC JPGs and apply some mild correction to them. For some images using LR with RAF files is okay but there are many more where I find that it just does a poor job.

I rarely do SOOC JPGs so no, I have not done that comparison.