Need help: OOC Jpg's stretched compared to raw files

[nickw]

Hey Guys,

Having a problem and hoping you can help. Here's the quick background:
I use Apple Aperture. I prefer it to LR or other workflows. But one problem is, I can't process the raw files from my Xpro1 right now, so I shoot and import jpg+raw. I use the jpg's as the master now, and then once raw support is added I can switch.

However, jpg's can only take so much, and when I push the file to far I get banding and other typical issues. So I've played around with converting the raw file via Adobe Camera raw and SilkyPix. I prefer Silkypix even though the file is flatter in colour, it seems to get more detail out. The files from both raw converters are different (even from each other and the ooh jpg). They shift a few pixels, and both stretch the photo differently (looks like a lens correction?).

So to recap: the files look different (besides colour), between:
Out of camera jpg
RAF converted via SilkyPix (then saved as 16bit tiff)
RAF converted via Camera Raw (then saved as 16bit tiff)

Now the problem:
I don't want to have to redo all my adjustments because the file shifts a few pixels (more towards the edges).
I take time clone, burn, dodge, paint in curves and other adjustments things with the spot brushes. I take great care to do so. I don't mind if I have to adjust the levels and curves slightly to deal with colour shifts later… but I don't want to have to go in and repaint and rebrush everything again because the file shifts a few pixels. It's a pain and takes hours.

Has anyone else noticed this? Any ideas?

If the converted raw files were the same as the jpg I'd feel more confident in taking the time to work on them. But how do I know Aperture won't do something different again?

Love some help.
Cheers,
Nick

 

[nickw]

I just did a test between Aperture and Camera raw with an old file from my GF1.
While each program renders color and detail different, there is no fundamental pixel shift.

 

[Shutterspark]

The thing with many compact and mirrorless cameras these days is, the lenses actually have pretty noticeable distortion; a compromise in design ultimately to keep the size of the outfit down.

The only thing you can do in your scenario is hope Aperture's geometric correction in the conversion process (if any) will perfectly match the in-camera correction done to the JPEGs, but this is pretty unlikely without something like a specific lens profile.

Which lens are you using? If it's a simple barrel distortion correction you might be able to manually tweak it enough to match your JPEGs later.

 

[icebear]

Can't help with Aperture, I use LR4.1 and have no issues. I always use the raw files, jpgs suck. Incidentally my camera settings were messed up and I didn't notice. All shots have been saved as "jpg fine" only, no raws and these files are just not at the detail level of the raw files, period.

 

[nickw]

The thing with many compact and mirrorless cameras these days is, the lenses actually have pretty noticeable distortion; a compromise in design ultimately to keep the size of the outfit down.

The only thing you can do in your scenario is hope Aperture's geometric correction in the conversion process (if any) will perfectly match the in-camera correction done to the JPEGs, but this is pretty unlikely without something like a specific lens profile.

Which lens are you using? If it's a simple barrel distortion correction you might be able to manually tweak it enough to match your JPEGs later.

It does look like a geometric thing. I'm now wondering if both OOC Jpg's and SilkyPix try and correct for it? But Camera Raw doesn't? If so, I don't mind none, I just don't want the shift!

 

[nickw]

Can't help with Aperture, I use LR4.1 and have no issues. I always use the raw files, jpgs suck. Incidentally my camera settings were messed up and I didn't notice. All shots have been saved as "jpg fine" only, no raws and these files are just not at the detail level of the raw files, period.

Ya, RAW is way better!
I've thought about moving to LR4, but I love the workflow of Aperture.

Curious, do you find this still happens with LR4?
http://www.ishootshows.com/2012/05/30/lightroom-4-1-raw-conversion-issues-with-fuji-x-pro1/

 

[nickw]

Hmm, interesting! It's only the 18mm lens that does it!
The 35mm & 60mm are fine.

 

[Shutterspark]

As you might expect from a wideangle, the 18mm has the most distortion out of the current XP1 lenses while the 35mm only has a little and the 60mm has virtually none. It'll always be corrected in-camera for JPEGs, you can't turn it off.

RAW files are only corrected when there is a lens profile for your lens, and this will depend on the software. I don't know about Aperture since I haven't used it in years, but there are plenty of Lightroom lens profiles (you can make them yourself) available.