Image Size Confusion

[RichyD]

I've just got an X-Pro1, couldn't resist the Fuji offer in UK of discount and free 18mm lens. Taken a few test shots set to Raw+Jpeg at L/3:2 the largest image size and the raw file size on my computer comes out as 2472x1640 pixels, it should be 4896x3264. A shot set at S/3:2 comes out at the same size which is the size, near enough of 2496x1664 in the Fuji documentation for that setting.

Am I doing something wrong or is the camera not setting the correct image size?

 

[Dwig]

...the largest image size and the raw file size on my computer comes out as 2472x1640 pixels, it should be 4896x3264. ...

How do you know the size is 2472x1640? What software are you using to detect the pixel size. It is quite possible that your software is mistaken (e.g. reading the RAW's embedded JPEG preview rather than decoding the RAW data itself, ...).

Post again letting us know what OS you are using (platform and version) along with the name and version of the software you are using to detect the file's pixel size.

 

[tbhv55]

How do you know the size is 2472x1640? What software are you using to detect the pixel size. It is quite possible that your software is mistaken (e.g. reading the RAW's embedded JPEG preview rather than decoding the RAW data itself, ...).

Post again letting us know what OS you are using (platform and version) along with the name and version of the software you are using to detect the file's pixel size.

Yes, agreed - this line of thought was my first reaction, when I read the OP.

I often use Faststone Image Viewer for the first editing/culling of my photographs, and it shows the files from my x100 as being 2176 x 1449px, because it initially reads the embedded JPEG. If I then press the "A" key to read the Raw file "proper", the image size is displayed as 4310 x 2870px - which is as it should be.

Let us know if any of this rings true.

 

[RichyD]

Thanks for the responses. I am using a Mac and the file size of the orginal Raw shown in a listing is 24.9Mb. I converted the Raw to Tiff using RPP, raw processing software reputed to be good and the file size was about the same and pixel dimensions in File Info, or Photoshop show as 2472x1640.

I have now loaded the Silkypix conversion software supplied and with this the Raw is converted to a 45.8Mb Tiff file of 4896x3264 pixels which is expected. Guess I'll have to use that.

 

[Lawrence Sheperd]

It seems to me that I read somewhere that RPP would downsize by 50% by default during conversion and you could choose to keep original dimensions as the default in the preferences menu.

 

[tbhv55]

I am using a Mac and the file size of the orginal Raw shown in a listing is 24.9Mb. I converted the Raw to Tiff using RPP, raw processing software reputed to be good and the file size was about the same and pixel dimensions in File Info, or Photoshop show as 2472x1640.

I have now loaded the Silkypix conversion software supplied and with this the Raw is converted to a 45.8Mb Tiff file of 4896x3264 pixels which is expected.

My suspicion is that this is related to the X-Trans sensor output. I'm not familiar with all aspects of this, but I do know that a number of processing applications have some difficulty with the X-Trans.

Others members on here - with much more knowledge - will probably be able to chime in with better information than I am able to offer on this.

 

[willie_901]

Not Possible

Not Possible

My suspicion is that this is related to the X-Trans sensor output. I'm not familiar with all aspects of this, but I do know that a number of processing applications have some difficulty with the X-Trans.

Others members on here - with much more knowledge - will probably be able to chime in with better information than I am able to offer on this.

I do not think this is physically possible.

The OP made some sort of unintended error.

XTrans is incompatible with Bayer rendering algorithms and some programs can not render an image. But XTrans raw is not susceptible to automatic, unintended or forced downsizing

 

[tbhv55]

I do not think this is physically possible.

The OP made some sort of unintended error.

XTrans is incompatible with Bayer rendering algorithms and some programs can not render an image. But XTrans raw is not susceptible to automatic, unintended or forced downsizing

Yep - sounds reasonable enough.

As I said, I don't have enough knowledge on the subject of X-Trans to make firm statements about any of this... i.e. I was really just guessing..! 😉

 

[geertvn]

It's because of the settings in RPP.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Apple's Aperture (current version) gives me the correct numbers. And it processes Fuji X RAW files splendidly.