Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Lightroom 4.1 and the Fuji X-Pro1 - oh dear.....

In my series of posts about demosaicing the Fuji X-Pro1's X-Trans sensor, I pointed out considerable chroma smearing in the the raw conversion from a beta version of Adobe Camera Raw. I also clearly pointed out that a beta is, well, a beta, and that hopefully the Camera Raw team would improve the situation in a final release. But I also pointed out that I very much doubted whether Adobe would have allowed DPReview access to a beta that wasn't a good representation of the final product.

Lightroom 4.1 final is now out, with support for the Fuji X-Pro1, so we can expect a final version of ACR with X-Pro1 support very soon as well. (For those that don't know, ACR and Lightroom share a common raw conversion engine, and releases track closely.)

Sadly, the Lightroom final release shows exactly the same chroma smearing as the ACR beta. A crop of the comparable area shown in the original posts is below.

BTW, Lightroom does an excellent job in many other respects - the diagonal edges of the paperclips are just amazingly clean - I very much doubt that any other raw converter could match them. But the chroma is a mess!!

Turns out that X-Trans sensor really wasn't a good idea.

Updated 7 June 2012 - also see this post

Lightroom 4.1 final, Fuji X-Pro1

11 comments:

Admin - SBNG said...

Well, that does it. I'm selling my rubbish X Pro 1 today.

If Adobe can't get it right, nobody can.

But hang on... how do Fuji manage such fabulous RAW conversion to jpeg in camera?

X-Trans sensor not a good idea? I agree. And the internal combustion engine, sliced bread and the mouse trap were also pretty off the mark.

Braeside said...

Its odd that SilkyPix and the out of camera JPGs are actually producing more detail and less watercolour painting effects on foliage than this super LR4.1 that everyone has been waiting for like the second coming.

imagefoundry said...

Hi Sandy -

I too was playing with the new ACR this morning, results are pretty gruesome in certain situations (have a look at this:
http://db.tt/k0qScmMa).
This boggles my mind somewhat; I would have thought that introducing a new RGB pattern means developing the math to process it but that does not appear to be the case.

To be fair, in the areas where colour smearing is not an issue, the amount of detail is pretty spectacular on X-Pro1 - this is undoubtedly due to lack of AA filter.

Sandy said...

Yes, gruesome is about the only way to describe some of the results(!)

The thing is, in many ways, the X-Pro1's sensor is actually pretty good - noise, especially at high ISO is really good, etc.

It's just a bit of a mystery why Fuji went with the non-standard pattern if the end results weren't going to be there. SILKYPIX arrears to be "best of breed", and certainly manages a better balance than LR 4.2, but it still doesn't show any major advantage across the board - it's good in some places, but not consistently so.

imagefoundry said...

I have a feeling, given the current state of the affairs with other raw converters, that if you were to make a PC and/or Mac version of PhotoRaw and stick a $49.99 price on it, you'll sell a lot of software.

You could also make a raw-to-grayscale conversion tool (green channel *does* look smooth) and call it a "Fuji Monochrom". Okay, that was a joke :)

Alex said...

What I don't get, is that overall the direct in camera JPG has the best output.
Maybe ACR is missing something in the algorithm so far, if the camera engine can pull it off, then computer algorithm ought to be able to replicate the results.

dev* said...

I'd say the end results are there, we see them in the in-camera processing. Adobe seems to have half-arsed its work so far on this camera. Diagonals may look good, but curves and straight lines don't. There are artifacts consistent with pixel smoothing effects, and major color artifacts showing up in other people's conversions. It is, quite simply, broken as-is. I don't think they've worked with fuji at all so far.

Nothing is wrong with the sensor concept, it's an experiment that has been a long time coming. We need adobe to take it seriously.

Gavin LISTER said...

I have a bad feeling this may turn into a Fujigate scandal.

Why would Adobe release something as bad as this unless they could not do better. There was a lot of discussion on the beta ACR and how below par it was and suddenly they release a final version like this. Maybe this sensor is simply not what it is cracked up to be and may never be with regard to RAW files. Sure we all love the jpegs but I for one didn’t spend a heap of money for a jpeg only camera.

I think Fuji needs to come clean and give some kind of statement as to why there is such a problem with RAW files and how or if this is being looked at. At the moment I feel very frustrated that we are being kept in the dark about possibly a monumental cover up!!

Denis Cheremisov said...

> But hang on... how do Fuji manage such fabulous RAW conversion to jpeg in camera?

Personally, I don't like their colors at all. They are dull. In each direct comparison at base ISO I've seen fuji xpro-1 shots had the worst colors.

Denis Cheremisov said...

> SILKYPIX arrears to be "best of breed"

Silky produces evident color artifacts. Still, colors are underwhelming.

Denis Cheremisov said...

> Nothing is wrong with the sensor concept

What? Color depth reduction is "nothing"?