In camera RAW conversion

[GiuseppeFuji]

While waiting for Santa bringing me the X-T5, I've started reading the manual and collecting info/tips around the web.

I have found out that raw conversion softwares are one of the maint point of discussion: Capture One vs Lightroom seems to be the epic fight. Purists favor C1 while casuals are open to Lightroom.

But I have also discovered that the "in camera" conversion possibility allows the change of quite a wide range of parameters, most likely with a lower level of precision than the PC softwares.

Workflow would also be quite inefficient but the advantage is to have a 100% Fujifilm styled picture.

Does anybody try it or even use it regularly? I would be curious to hear about the experience, its pros and cons 😉

[Greybeard]

I assume by "in camera" conversion you mean using X raw Studio on the computer which uses the camera as the back end for the actual raw conversion?

I use it occasionally - its useful for testing out different camera settings but a bit cumbersome for large scale conversion (and not as flexible as Adobe, Capture One, DxO etc).

You might annoy Adobe users by accusing them of being "casual".

[GiuseppeFuji]

Greybeard, thanks for the feedback.

I actually had in mind the camera itself because that would allow me to leave the personal laptop at home when travelling for work (company laptop nowadays is blocking every installation) and do not have a pile of pictures to process later.

Having said that, X raw studio sounds also an interesting option too bad there isn't a tablet version, especially considering that the camera is doing all the hard work.

I am sorry and I do apologise if "casual" has been interpreted as a negative or even as an offence. It was totally not my intention. Infact I am a lighroom user my self and casual in my mind has a positive meaning, like being open to whatever comes along, flexible,....

 

[SergePhoto]

I've used in-camera RAW conversion a few times, primarily to adjust exposure after the fact when I just wanted to transfer the JPEG straight from my camera to my phone and still have everything done SOOC. However, changing recipes, while certainly possible, is obviously a bit more cumbersome as you're updating many parameters at the same time. Keep in mind that one thing you can't always change is the DR setting, specifically you can't select a higher setting if the original shot was taken with an incompatible ISO value. This is also true of Fuji X RAW Studio. All things considered I love having the flexibility to alter the image in-camera after taking it, even if I don't use it very often. Just make sure you're set to F+RAW

[GiuseppeFuji]

SergePhoto, thank you for the information.

In fact I have been reading a bit around and I discover the SOOC concept which is something new for me but very interesting.

I have decided that my new "mission" with the coming X-T5 will be to commit to SOOC.

Being a RAW shooter, I will need quite some experimenting and practising but I think it will be a very enjoyable challenge.

Have a nice Xmas and great new year.

[HC-110]

I am primarily a JPG shooter, but store RAW's in parallel just for the case when I need them.

In camera conversion is interesting and as I don't use RAW converters or studios, it is interesting for me to tweak individual images. I was used to do so on my X-E1 and X-T1. It was cumbersome but working. I was very confident that more features would be available on the X-T5 but NO.

The in-camera RAW conversion would be perfect for me if Fuji would implement the following features (but they didn't do so in the last 10 years, so these upgrades will probably never come):

The generated JPG should have the same filename as the original image + a numbered addition to the original filename. If my original file is DSCF3005.RAF/JPG and if in the evening, after a day of shooting I tweak that image in the camera, I want that one to be named DSCF3005-2.JPG, or DSCF3005-A.JPG. It is absolute nonsense to name that image DSCF3356.JPG, just because it was generated after the last shot DSCF3357.RAF/JPG. In my file archive, on the computer I can then keep or just delete the original JPG. As it is now, I have a complete chaos when generating JPG's on the camera.

There is no possibility of a batch conversion ... . Why isn't it possible to define settings, and then to let the camera do the conversion on a selection of files? Or why can't I select predefined settings when I am in a conversion menu? If I want to change the parameters of 6 photos, I have to make all the settings 6-times inside the converter.

And there is no possibility to save the changes in the original RAF-file. WHY? I can revert to the original parameters, when playing in the converter but I cannot save the changed parameters. Complete nonsense. And we are in 2024 ... .

Again, some missing features. 

 

Edited February 25, 2024 by HC-110
typos

[jerryy]

18 minutes ago, HC-110 said:

...

And there is no possibility to save the changes in the original RAF-file. WHY? I can revert to the original parameters, when playing in the converter but I cannot save the changed parameters. Complete nonsense. And we are in 2024 ... .

Again, some missing features. 

 

Your last point does not make a lot of sense. It is similar to saying ‘take a raw file, run it through LightRoom or whichever raw convertor you are using to find a neat version but then overwrite the saved parameters in the original raw file instead of saving the new version as a separate image.’ Raw files store the image as shot. Using what you are suggesting, if someone needs to go back to the original ‘as shot’ image, it would be impossible.

[HC-110]

Hello.

If I shot in "Velvia", but decide later that "Provia" would have been better, why can't the camera switch the "Velvia" setting to "Provia" in the RAW file? It is just a setting within the RAW file. Overwriting the original parameters is easier for me because I don't have to bother with additional files on a computer. Just let me save those parameters. The image won't be altered, just the parameters used later by the converter to generate the image. For me that would make sense. I don't want to lose my time because I have to boot a computer where some software is running. It could be done within seconds in the camera.

[Greybeard]

47 minutes ago, HC-110 said:

I am primarily a JPG shooter, but store RAW's in parallel just for the case when I need them.

In camera conversion is interesting and as I don't use RAW converters or studios, it is interesting for me to tweak individual images. I was used to do so on my X-E1 and X-T1. It was cumbersome but working. I was very confident that more features would be available on the X-T5 but NO.

The in-camera RAW conversion would be perfect for me if Fuji would implement the following features (but they didn't do so in the last 10 years, so these upgrades will probably never come):

The generated JPG should have the same filename as the original image + a numbered addition to the original filename. If my original file is DSCF3005.RAF/JPG and if in the evening, after a day of shooting I tweak that image in the camera, I want that one to be named DSCF3005-2.JPG, or DSCF3005-A.JPG. It is absolute nonsense to name that image DSCF3356.JPG, just because it was generated after the last shot DSCF3357.RAF/JPG. In my file archive, on the computer I can then keep or just delete the original JPG. As it is now, I have a complete chaos when generating JPG's on the camera.

There is no possibility of a batch conversion ... . Why isn't it possible to define settings, and then to let the camera do the conversion on a selection of files? Or why can't I select predefined settings when I am in a conversion menu? If I want to change the parameters of 6 photos, I have to make all the settings 6-times inside the converter.

And there is no possibility to save the changes in the original RAF-file. WHY? I can revert to the original parameters, when playing in the converter but I cannot save the changed parameters. Complete nonsense. And we are in 2024 ... .

Again, some missing features. 

 

Have you tried using the Fujifilm X Raw Studio software on a computer? You can still use the camera for the actual conversion and it would solve most of your problems in naming and batch conversion.

[Greybeard]

2 minutes ago, HC-110 said:

Hello.

If I shot in "Velvia", but decide later that "Provia" would have been better, why can't the camera switch the "Velvia" setting to "Provia" in the RAW file? It is just a setting within the RAW file. Overwriting the original parameters is easier for me because I don't have to bother with additional files on a computer. Just let me save those parameters. The image won't be altered, just the parameters used later by the converter to generate the image. For me that would make sense. I don't want to lose my time because I have to boot a computer where some software is running. It could be done within seconds in the camera.

Its a little more than just the metadata - there is also a 13MP jpg stored in the RAF file - if the RAF file was to be updated I'd probably prefer another copy.

[HC-110]

24 minutes ago, Greybeard said:

Have you tried using the Fujifilm X Raw Studio software on a computer? You can still use the camera for the actual conversion and it would solve most of your problems in naming and batch conversion.

Yes I used that software years ago with an X100F, but  then it stopped working, because the new software no longer worked on my computer (32 vs 64 bit). At the moment I am a Linux user on a 10 year old machine. My most modern "computer" are my phone and tablet.

[HC-110]

28 minutes ago, Greybeard said:

Its a little more than just the metadata - there is also a 13MP jpg stored in the RAF file - if the RAF file was to be updated I'd probably prefer another copy.

I didn't know about that JPG. But for me it would be handy if the "RAW including that JPG" could be updated. I don't want to bother about editing photos on a computer. I just use the computer for archiving them and I "use" the photos on the tablet where I have my viewing archive.

Just ideas.

Digital photography could be so "easy" or "convenient" if all those things were possible. I want the pictures, good pictures. I don't want to bother with software. Sometimes it is a little detail which can make your experience so great, or which can spoil everything.

Edited February 25, 2024 by HC-110
typos

[jerryy]

23 minutes ago, HC-110 said:

Hello.

If I shot in "Velvia", but decide later that "Provia" would have been better, why can't the camera switch the "Velvia" setting to "Provia" in the RAW file? It is just a setting within the RAW file. Overwriting the original parameters is easier for me because I don't have to bother with additional files on a computer. Just let me save those parameters. The image won't be altered, just the parameters used later by the converter to generate the image. For me that would make sense. I don't want to lose my time because I have to boot a computer where some software is running. It could be done within seconds in the camera.

As @Greybeard wrote, there is more going on than just saving a changed setting. Even if it were only that, it would still be tricky. Different settings take up different size spaces in the file. Trying to overwrite that can easily wreck the file. Early computer based EXIF editors would not do more than report settings for the raw files they would allow users to read. Your Velvia image file may take 2MB more storage than the Provia one, but changing from one to the other seamlessly would be difficult to pull off without a massive amount of processing. All while doing other camera stuff. RAF is vastly different in what it does than JPEG or TIFF or ...