Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Is there any technical reason why Fuji can't update the other existing Fuji X camera models with a firmware update that includes the new Neopan Acros film simulation?
X-Pro2's "Acros" simulation in X-Pro1?
- Thread starter Jamie Pillers
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 16
- Views 7K
kshapero
South Florida Man
Yes there is a reason. If they do then you will keep your 1 and not get a 2.:bang:😀🙂
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
It should be relatively easy to simulate the RGB levels to duplicate the spectral response. It is adding the Acros grain structure that would be a bit of a challenge. So from a RAW file you should be able to do it in post. Once you get it dialled in, I would think you could automate it.
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
You would have to rewrite the firmware and validate it for all the old cameras, assuming it fits in their EPROMs. That's a lot of work. If you send out an update that has Acros but crashes all the time, that would be a PR disaster.
Dante
jarski
Veteran
hasn't Fuji done it already in past, add Classic Chrome etc. for their older models that didn't have them during release? sure it would mean new firmware update. guess Fuji is only camera company that could be hoped todo this, Canon being in opposite side of spectrum.
shawn
Veteran
"hasn't Fuji done it already in past, add Classic Chrome etc. for their older models that didn't have them during release?"
They added it to some but not all of their older models. I think it was for just the models that used the newer processor.
Shawn
They added it to some but not all of their older models. I think it was for just the models that used the newer processor.
Shawn
willie_901
Veteran
Based on past releases of Films Simulations, there will be no backwards compatibility. The X-pro 2 starts a new generation of X-Series sensor assemblies (including the IR filter and color-filter array).
However, Classic Chrome was added to the XE-2 in firmware release 3.0 (December 2013).
It turns out the X100S raw can be processed with the Classic Chrome Camera Profile co-developed by Fujifilm and Adobe. There is a LR plugin called ExifMeta (OS X only) that edits the EXIF meta data changing camera type from X100T to X100S. No doubt other third-party EXIF meta data editors would do the same job. However implementing this change for a large number of raw files could be inconvenient and tedious unless the process was automated.
Besides the ever-popular suspicion Fujifilm intentionally holds back new Film Simulations to manipulate its customers, there could be an alternate explanation.
Fujifilm Holdings Corporation has a Semiconductor Materials division. Among other things Semiconductor Materials engineers and manufactures Color Mosaic materials... or color filter arrays.
Is it unrealistic to assume the color filter arrays of new camera models have different (or even improved) light-frequnecy bandpass characteristics compared to previous models? The raw demosaicing interpolation algorithms take into account the properties of the CFA. This means a identical Classic Chrome and, or Across rendering might be difficult or even impossible for different generations of CFAs.
Given what happened with the X100S and X100T (no Classic Chrome for seemingly no reason other than marketing) and the XE-2 (Classic Chrome eventually supported with new firmware) it seems both technical and marketing decisions are at play.
However, Classic Chrome was added to the XE-2 in firmware release 3.0 (December 2013).
It turns out the X100S raw can be processed with the Classic Chrome Camera Profile co-developed by Fujifilm and Adobe. There is a LR plugin called ExifMeta (OS X only) that edits the EXIF meta data changing camera type from X100T to X100S. No doubt other third-party EXIF meta data editors would do the same job. However implementing this change for a large number of raw files could be inconvenient and tedious unless the process was automated.
Besides the ever-popular suspicion Fujifilm intentionally holds back new Film Simulations to manipulate its customers, there could be an alternate explanation.
Fujifilm Holdings Corporation has a Semiconductor Materials division. Among other things Semiconductor Materials engineers and manufactures Color Mosaic materials... or color filter arrays.
Is it unrealistic to assume the color filter arrays of new camera models have different (or even improved) light-frequnecy bandpass characteristics compared to previous models? The raw demosaicing interpolation algorithms take into account the properties of the CFA. This means a identical Classic Chrome and, or Across rendering might be difficult or even impossible for different generations of CFAs.
Given what happened with the X100S and X100T (no Classic Chrome for seemingly no reason other than marketing) and the XE-2 (Classic Chrome eventually supported with new firmware) it seems both technical and marketing decisions are at play.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
That's what I'm thinking/hoping. It would be great to have this new b&w simulation in my X-Pro1. And I'm hoping that Fuji doesn't think that the Acros simulation is the big draw toward selling X-Pro2. It seems that the big-deal upgrades are the 24Mp sensor, the faster AF, bigger buffer, and improved OV/EVF.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
shawn
Veteran
Instead of changing the EXIF on the picture I wonder if you could alter the adobe camera raw profile for the X100T and change it to the X100S EXIF?
Shawn
GaryLH
Veteran
+1
From a general embedded firmware perspective
If they got the room to fit the code..it will be a product management call.. Typically this would go to sustaining engineering to handle the older cameras. There is only so much allocated in the sustaining budget. It tends to be evaluated on a case for case basis... Which would then govern which older cameras needed retesting and a priority given to getting it fixed.
There is enough differences in the digital process path and the CPU evolved in the older models, that this would most likely not be an easy change.
Gary
gavinlg
Veteran
Really hope it comes to the x100t. Love the idea.
jloden
Established
Exactly. I work for a software company and while we're not doing embedded systems/firmware, the same basic process applies. People are quick to assume the worst or most machiavellian motivations (sell more camera upgrades) but there's often also technical ones as well.
Sometimes it's even as simple as it not being a cost effective use of a engineer's time. Doubly so if you don't have dedicated sustaining resources, and it means taking away from their work on the next generation product. It also requires Q.A. to validate and do full regression testing, which is non-trivial. In many cases the effort to validate a release can be many times the amount that went into the patch or code update in the first place.
I'm not defending Fuji necessarily since I honestly have no inside info of their processes or organizational structure. I just know it's also not a simple drag and drop of code created for the X-Pro2 to provide backwards compatible functionality to other models.
I agree! Selfishly, since I already own the X100T I'd love to play with the Acros simulations. Especially for use with in-camera conversions and printing JPGs direct to the SP-1, which is one of the main reasons I still have my X100T.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
D**n, I TOTALLY misread your original post! :bang:
