X Pro & E1 raw files

[Bill Pierce]

This is one of the most interesting, informative and useful articles on the issue of converting Fuji X Pro and E1 raw files.

http://www.dmcgaughey.com/2012/11/07/fuji-x-trans-raw-conversion/

 

[Pablito]

Thank you for posting.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Bill,
As I said in another thread here recently, I can imagine the possibility that Fuji will go no further in providing RAW support for their X cameras but instead continue to improve the ability to adjust jpeg output. Jpegs from my X-Pro1 are already very good.

Some years ago I began thinking about the 'perfect' digital camera... what it could do. One of the issues I thought possible is that the difference between in-camera adjustment of RAW data to produce a jpeg file, and RAW output would narrow to the point that eventually there would only be in-camera adjustment... no RAW output needed. And we'd eventually see RAW files as an old-fashioned idea from long ago.

 

[Pablito]

Currently, however, the very best jpgs from the very best cameras don't even come close to what you can get from a RAW file. The new X E1 is hugely tempting for its manual controls (shutter speed dial and aperture ring) but if I can't get good RAW conversion from ACR, then I really can't imagine buying it, at least for now...

 

[sol33]

RAW processors are getting better all the time. Just give the Engeneers some time to adjust their formulas to the new color pattern. One of the advantages of RAW is that if you develop a photo from a few years ago it will now look much better than it did back then, thanks to the improved programs and faster computers. Until RAW processors catch up, shooting JPEG+RAW is probably a good idea...

 

[Bike Tourist]

Bill,
As I said in another thread here recently, I can imagine the possibility that Fuji will go no further in providing RAW support for their X cameras but instead continue to improve the ability to adjust jpeg output. Jpegs from my X-Pro1 are already very good.

Some years ago I began thinking about the 'perfect' digital camera... what it could do. One of the issues I thought possible is that the difference between in-camera adjustment of RAW data to produce a jpeg file, and RAW output would narrow to the point that eventually there would only be in-camera adjustment... no RAW output needed. And we'd eventually see RAW files as an old-fashioned idea from long ago.

Jamie, I agree with everything you have said, adding that I believe that for most photographers RAW is already old-fashioned. There is much concern and gnashing of teeth on the internet about the necessity to shoot RAW and produce from that the technically perfect image. What goes unsaid is that, in most cases, the image doesn't warrant such meticulous handling since it will still be average, even though technically perfect.

The jpeg output of the X-Pro1 is far better than we ever had it with Leica cameras and glass, back when we thought the picture was important.

 

[kbb]

To abandon the development of raw in favor of the current camera generated jpeg is analogous of ditching monochrome silver negative film in favor of black and white reversal. Good luck with that...

 

[GaryLH]

Jamie, I agree with everything you have said, adding that I believe that for most photographers RAW is already old-fashioned. There is much concern and gnashing of teeth on the internet about the necessity to shoot RAW and produce from that the technically perfect image. What goes unsaid is that, in most cases, the image doesn't warrant such meticulous handling since it will still be average, even though technically perfect.

The jpeg output of the X-Pro1 is far better than we ever had it with Leica cameras and glass, back when we thought the picture was important.

As good as the Fuji jpg engine is... I still shoot raw w/ jpg (raw+jpg).. Here are some points to remember about jpg
- jpg is not lossless - it uses compression algo during save process
- every time u change something and save again to jpg, u have lost more info
-- unless u use a non-destructive photo editor such as Aperture or LR
-- or u save to a lossless format like tiff when using a normal photo editor
- harder to pull a good photo from a jpg if u accidentally moved the exposure compensation dial on the Fuji and u don't notice it in time compared to a raw file
- more info in a raw file, if the photo program can use it

W/ that said, I only go thru the trouble of using the raw file in RPP or silkypix for only the best of the keepers.

Gary

 

[Bill Pierce]

Almost two weeks ago, I emailed Fuji with a question about the X Pro/E 1. They seem to promise an answer in a few days at most in the following automated email that I received moments after each time I sent them my email.

"We appreciate you e-mailing FUJIFILM, USA and look forward to assisting you. Please be advised that you will be receiving a response from our Contact Center shortly."

I have yet to hear from them although the first copy of my email was sent almost two weeks ago. Here's the email I sent them.

I am sure I am not the only photographer who has contacted you about the inadequacy of the raw file processing programs available for the X Pro and X E1. As long as the in-camera jpegs are superior to the images produced by the few programs that will process the raw files, professionals, artists and serious amateur photographers are quite limited in what they can do with what is, in essence, potentially a very fine camera system.

I have contacted Fuji USA by phone. I have spoken to sales and marketing people at trade shows. I have yet to get a straight answer on when an adequate raw processing program will be available. In the 1970’s to 90’s , I was one of the photographers at Time/Life. I got used to working with a small camera, at that time a Leica, and still use small cameras when possible for the commercial work I do today. I have three Fuji bodies and a basic set of lenses. I'm hoping you can tell me specifically where and when I will be able to get a raw processing program that will give me at least the overall image quality of the current jpegs plus the ability to manipulate that is inherent in raw files.

I really do like the Fuji system. I don't want to go back to big DSLR's when they are not necessary. But, unless I know that in a relatively short period of time I can get better raw processing than what is currently available, I have no choice but to let go of the system. I do hope you can give me some specific information on the availability of better raw processing for the Pro and E1. I know I am not alone in wanting to be able to use the Fuji system to its full potential. I'm in touch with too many photographers who feel the same way. Please help us.

 

[stompyq]

Almost two weeks ago, I emailed Fuji with a question about the X Pro/E 1. They seem to promise an answer in a few days at most in the following automated email that I received moments after each time I sent them my email.

"We appreciate you e-mailing FUJIFILM, USA and look forward to assisting you. Please be advised that you will be receiving a response from our Contact Center shortly."

I have yet to hear from them although the first copy of my email was sent almost two weeks ago. Here's the email I sent them.

I am sure I am not the only photographer who has contacted you about the inadequacy of the raw file processing programs available for the X Pro and X E1. As long as the in-camera jpegs are superior to the images produced by the few programs that will process the raw files, professionals, artists and serious amateur photographers are quite limited in what they can do with what is, in essence, potentially a very fine camera system.

I have contacted Fuji USA by phone. I have spoken to sales and marketing people at trade shows. I have yet to get a straight answer on when an adequate raw processing program will be available. In the 1970’s to 90’s , I was one of the photographers at Time/Life. I got used to working with a small camera, at that time a Leica, and still use small cameras when possible for the commercial work I do today. I have three Fuji bodies and a basic set of lenses. I'm hoping you can tell me specifically where and when I will be able to get a raw processing program that will give me at least the overall image quality of the current jpegs plus the ability to manipulate that is inherent in raw files.

I really do like the Fuji system. I don't want to go back to big DSLR's when they are not necessary. But, unless I know that in a relatively short period of time I can get better raw processing than what is currently available, I have no choice but to let go of the system. I do hope you can give me some specific information on the availability of better raw processing for the Pro and E1. I know I am not alone in wanting to be able to use the Fuji system to its full potential. I'm in touch with too many photographers who feel the same way. Please help us.

I think maybe we should start a online petition to make them open there eyes.

 

[GaryLH]

I think maybe we should start a online petition to make them open there eyes.

Good idea... It is a amazing how well they listen to everything else...but are so different about this..

There was an article about how long Fuji took to develop the algo's for the raw to jpg engine (somewhere in the neighborhood of 3-5 years if I remember correctly). I wonder if silkypix had to sign a level of confidentiality agreement past the normal nda, and others don't want to sign that level or the lawyers are still in the middle of the final nda that will open the doors for aperture, LR and ps to have a good raw developer.

Gary

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Almost two weeks ago, I emailed Fuji with a question about the X Pro/E 1. They seem to promise an answer in a few days at most in the following automated email that I received moments after each time I sent them my email.

"We appreciate you e-mailing FUJIFILM, USA and look forward to assisting you. Please be advised that you will be receiving a response from our Contact Center shortly."

I have yet to hear from them although the first copy of my email was sent almost two weeks ago. Here's the email I sent them.

I am sure I am not the only photographer who has contacted you about the inadequacy of the raw file processing programs available for the X Pro and X E1. As long as the in-camera jpegs are superior to the images produced by the few programs that will process the raw files, professionals, artists and serious amateur photographers are quite limited in what they can do with what is, in essence, potentially a very fine camera system.

I have contacted Fuji USA by phone. I have spoken to sales and marketing people at trade shows. I have yet to get a straight answer on when an adequate raw processing program will be available. In the 1970’s to 90’s , I was one of the photographers at Time/Life. I got used to working with a small camera, at that time a Leica, and still use small cameras when possible for the commercial work I do today. I have three Fuji bodies and a basic set of lenses. I'm hoping you can tell me specifically where and when I will be able to get a raw processing program that will give me at least the overall image quality of the current jpegs plus the ability to manipulate that is inherent in raw files.

I really do like the Fuji system. I don't want to go back to big DSLR's when they are not necessary. But, unless I know that in a relatively short period of time I can get better raw processing than what is currently available, I have no choice but to let go of the system. I do hope you can give me some specific information on the availability of better raw processing for the Pro and E1. I know I am not alone in wanting to be able to use the Fuji system to its full potential. I'm in touch with too many photographers who feel the same way. Please help us.

I still say that we might be making too much of a commotion about this lack of RAW support. Bill, do you think you can't produce images acceptable to your commercial clients with the X-Pro1 jpegs? It seems to me that using a program like Aperture gives you more latitude for adjustment of the X-Pro1's jpegs than you had when using film. 🙂

 

[splitimageview]

Might want to try sending it to

Kayce Baker <kbaker@fujifilm.com>
Director of Marketing
Fujifilm North America Corporation
Electronic Imaging Division

 

[Pablito]

I still say that we might be making too much of a commotion about this lack of RAW support.

An 8 bit jpg, no matter how good, is just not suitable for many purposes. Bill states the case eloquently in his letter to Fuji. Personally, I cannot shoot jpg. I would buy an XE1 tomorrow if I could open the RAW files in ACR (and get good results). Meanwhile, I am using the NEX cameras with the Sigma lenses, and with Leica lenses, for quite a bit of professional work. The results are great, but I'd love a real shutter speed dial and aperture ring.

 

[Bill Pierce]

Might want to try sending it to

Kayce Baker <kbaker@fujifilm.com>
Director of Marketing
Fujifilm North America Corporation
Electronic Imaging Division

I spoke to her at Expo. She was gracious and pleasant, but did not supply any specifics.

 

[Bill Pierce]

I still say that we might be making too much of a commotion about this lack of RAW support. Bill, do you think you can't produce images acceptable to your commercial clients with the X-Pro1 jpegs? It seems to me that using a program like Aperture gives you more latitude for adjustment of the X-Pro1's jpegs than you had when using film. 🙂

There are cases where I can't produce images that are acceptable to me from the jpg's. By running raw files through Lightroom, SilkyPix and RPP in a variety of ways I can usually come up with something acceptable. If I had to do that on a professional shoot with a large batch of images, I'd never get done. I need a single program that will give me the good sharpness inherent in the Fuji jpg's and the color and tonal controls I can get from raw files.

 

[stompyq]

Here is a interesting link if your willing to go the extra mile. Particularly important since some of us are not apple uses and can't use RPP.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/fuji-x-pro1/discuss/72157631913173508/

 

[DtheG]

I think it is necessary to distinquish two things here.
1. The availability of a specification of te RAW format. If the RAW file is encypted or obfuscated so that a great deal of reverse engineering is required to read the RAW data then is clearly an obstacle to third party processing and a good reason to not buy a product that restricts access to data you have created.
2. If Fuji know better than anyone else how to get the best out of that RAW file then that is their trade secret and in my opinion they are entitled to keep it.

 

[mrmeadows]

2. If Fuji know better than anyone else how to get the best out of that RAW file then that is their trade secret and in my opinion they are entitled to keep it.

Certainly entitled to keep trade secrets, but that route may not coincide with business interests. Licenses and NDAs are how companies usually serve both interests, and Fuji easily can go this route, but appear disinclined to do so. That's a shame.

--- Mike

 

[DtheG]

Certainly entitled to keep trade secrets, but that route may not coincide with business interests. Licenses and NDAs are how companies usually serve both interests, and Fuji easily can go this route, but appear disinclined to do so. That's a shame.

Does it serve Fuji's interest? Perhaps noboddy is willing to pay what Fuji require for a licence? If Adobe's raw processing was better than Fuji's own do you think Adobe should be obliged to license the technology to Fuji?