Jump to content

UK Newbie, with questions re Downloading images & RAW processing


Pathpix

Recommended Posts

Hello Fufi X Forum users,

 

After years of Canon dslr use I've made the switch to Mirrorless and Fuji (X-Pro 2) so like many others I have a sharpish learning curve to tackle.

 

Here's a pretty basic enquiry that I hope someone can help me with to set me on my way :

 

Can anyone tell me whether Fuji has its own proprietary software:  1) for Downloading images from camera to Mac (equivalent to EOS Utility)

and 2) for initial processing of RAW files (equvalent to Digital Photo Professional).

 

If not, any pointers / advice on this would be very welcome.

 

Many Thanks

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need software to download the images, you can just put the SD card in a USB SD card reader and transfer them to your computer.

 

In terms of processing the Fuji provided software (in the box with the camera or download from there website) is Sikypix I have never used it and the general consensus is that the image quality and colour profiles/film simulations are well done but that the software is clunky and the UI is terrible. Still its free so probably a good place to start.

 

The alternatives are

 

Lightroom - Built in film simulations and lens correction, some issues with sharpening, a lot better with the latest generation sensor. I am still not convinced, but I need to work more on the input settings

Capture One - Great software, no lens corrections although on most Fuji lenses they are not neccessary as they are optically corrected. Very good home brewed film simulations availalble in a thread in this very forum. Sharpening is great.

Iridient - Supposedly the best of the bunch for sharpening, but no cateloguing features.

 

There are others such as photo ninja, but the above are the main 3 really. Iridient is MAC only the others are system agnostic.

 

I use Capture One by preference, although right now for X-T2 I am experimenting with LR again as Capture one doesnot recognize X-T2 yet.

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need software to download the images, you can just put the SD card in a USB SD card reader and transfer them to your computer.

 

In terms of processing the Fuji provided software (in the box with the camera or download from there website) is Sikypix I have never used it and the general consensus is that the image quality and colour profiles/film simulations are well done but that the software is clunky and the UI is terrible. Still its free so probably a good place to start.

 

The alternatives are

 

Lightroom - Built in film simulations and lens correction, some issues with sharpening, a lot better with the latest generation sensor. I am still not convinced, but I need to work more on the input settings

Capture One - Great software, no lens corrections although on most Fuji lenses they are not neccessary as they are optically corrected. Very good home brewed film simulations availalble in a thread in this very forum. Sharpening is great.

Iridient - Supposedly the best of the bunch for sharpening, but no cateloguing features.

 

There are others such as photo ninja, but the above are the main 3 really. Iridient is MAC only the others are system agnostic.

 

I use Capture One by preference, although right now for X-T2 I am experimenting with LR again as Capture one doesnot recognize X-T2 yet.

 

G

 

Many thanks Gordon for the detailed reply.

 

I note that you did not include Photoshop in your software list.  I have always used PS ( the 'Elements' version at that ! ) as well as DPP  for post processing ( including RAW ). Is PS not an option ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathpix, by a mile the best way to get your file on to a Mac is as Gordon says via a card reader or depending of the age of your Mac then use its SD card slot! I download mine in that way to my hard disk to a folder called surprisingly "Photographs".

 

After all that(which is easier than it sounds) you can then load them into your chosen editor, I personally have three editors Aperture, Lightroom and lately PhotoNinja.

 

I have no experience of Fuji's software, but have heard that it isn't much good, in my experience bundled software is usually not very good. Apple has not yet caught up with the X-T2 yet! And of course there is also Apples built in "Image Capture" app

 

Sorry that's a bit long winded!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathpix, by a mile the best way to get your file on to a Mac is as Gordon says via a card reader or depending of the age of your Mac then use its SD card slot! I download mine in that way to my hard disk to a folder called surprisingly "Photographs".

 

After all that(which is easier than it sounds) you can then load them into your chosen editor, I personally have three editors Aperture, Lightroom and lately PhotoNinja.

 

I have no experience of Fuji's software, but have heard that it isn't much good, in my experience bundled software is usually not very good. Apple has not yet caught up with the X-T2 yet! And of course there is also Apples built in "Image Capture" app

 

Sorry that's a bit long winded!

 

Thanks Mike. I will follow the advice re downloading. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Pathpix,

 

and welcome to the world of mirrorless cameras. I recently bought my first Fuji and I'm very happy with it.

 

I personally use Adobe Lightroom to both download and edit my images and I'm pleased with the results I obtain. I only look at photos at 100% to check focus; my opinion on image quality is then based on prints. I have to say that images printed on A3+ fine art paper look stunning.

 

Fuji own raw converter is absolutely terrible, in my opinion, not because of image rendition, but because the user interface looks like from the 80s...

 

I tried Iridient Developer and it is capable of extracting more details, but I can't justify spending more money on software to get a little bit more sharpness out of my raw files. Plus it also means I need to export the image in TIFF from LR, sharpen and import back. I'm happy with my workflow, so I'll keep it that way!

 

I can't comment on other raw converters because I haven't tried them and don't feel the need to do so.

 

Hope this is helpful!

 

Val

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Pathpix,

 

and welcome to the world of mirrorless cameras. I recently bought my first Fuji and I'm very happy with it.

 

I personally use Adobe Lightroom to both download and edit my images and I'm pleased with the results I obtain. I only look at photos at 100% to check focus; my opinion on image quality is then based on prints. I have to say that images printed on A3+ fine art paper look stunning.

 

Fuji own raw converter is absolutely terrible, in my opinion, not because of image rendition, but because the user interface looks like from the 80s...

 

I tried Iridient Developer and it is capable of extracting more details, but I can't justify spending more money on software to get a little bit more sharpness out of my raw files. Plus it also means I need to export the image in TIFF from LR, sharpen and import back. I'm happy with my workflow, so I'll keep it that way!

 

I can't comment on other raw converters because I haven't tried them and don't feel the need to do so.

 

Hope this is helpful!

 

Val

 

Val, Many thanks for your reply.

 

A few days in, having mastered the viewfinder and taken plenty of shots, I have established a workflow of sorts. I load the RAW images on to my Mac directly from the SD cards ( as suggested above ). Then using Fuji's Raw Converter  I save the files in TIF format ( I agree with you about the UI, but being optimistic I hope to learn better how to use it from the manual ! ). Then I'm back on home territory - opening them up with PS and editing accordingly ( I tend to do little more than crop and, sometimes, tinker with exposure and boost contrast ). I do very little sharpening - it doesn't appear necessary.

All in all, I'm really enjoying using the X-Pro2. I find it easy to handle, providing great definition and dynamic range. I'm impressed too with image quality with high ISO's. So far, though, I've just been using it with the 35mm f1.4 lens. One gripe - the battery life is shorter than I was used to with Canon dslr's. Still, overall I'm glad I made the purchase. Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pathpix, you're very welcome.

 

If I may suggest, try using Adobe Bridge instead of the Fuji Raw Converter. Bridge opens the raw files directly into Adobe Camera Raw, where you can apply all adjustments, as well as Fuji's profiles for their various films (I compared them with in-camera JPGs and there was virtually no difference). From Camera Raw you can then go directly into Photoshop. This will spare you the pain of using Fuji's terrible UI and converting to TIFF, which tend to be very large files.

 

If you any more questions, everyone here will be happy to answer them, or feel free to pop me a PM.

 

Val

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pathpix, you're very welcome.

 

If I may suggest, try using Adobe Bridge instead of the Fuji Raw Converter. Bridge opens the raw files directly into Adobe Camera Raw, where you can apply all adjustments, as well as Fuji's profiles for their various films (I compared them with in-camera JPGs and there was virtually no difference). From Camera Raw you can then go directly into Photoshop. This will spare you the pain of using Fuji's terrible UI and converting to TIFF, which tend to be very large files.

 

If you any more questions, everyone here will be happy to answer them, or feel free to pop me a PM.

 

Val

 

 

Hey Val

 

Thanks for the follow up. I've been digging around as a result of your suggestion and have now downloaded Adobe DNG Converter to convert folders into the appropriate RAW format for PS.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like only Folders can be specified for converting at any one time, not individual Files ! I can live with that anyway.

Converted files seem approx 50% larger ( though still half of the size of a corresponding TIFF). I'll test it out a bit more to determine whether disc space that would be saved specifying 'lossless compression' in the conversion leads to any significant detraction from image quality. I suspect not, but will pursue it nonetheless. 

 

Pat H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Val

 

Thanks for the follow up. I've been digging around as a result of your suggestion and have now downloaded Adobe DNG Converter to convert folders into the appropriate RAW format for PS.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like only Folders can be specified for converting at any one time, not individual Files ! I can live with that anyway.

Converted files seem approx 50% larger ( though still half of the size of a corresponding TIFF). I'll test it out a bit more to determine whether disc space that would be saved specifying 'lossless compression' in the conversion leads to any significant detraction from image quality. I suspect not, but will pursue it nonetheless. 

 

Pat H

 

There is no quality difference.  It is lossless compression.  Think of it like a zip file.  The files are the same after you uncompress them.

 

The DNGs are bigger than the compressed raf but smaller than uncompressed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Val

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like only Folders can be specified for converting at any one time, not individual Files ! 

 

Pat H

I'm on Windows, but this only happens when you open the converter first, then search for your images.

To convert just one image I click right on the RAF file and in the pop up menu choose Open with DNG converter. Then in the converter just click on Convert.

Voila!

 

 

Also, check that you have the latest version of DNG Converter. There has been an update recently. I have 9.4.0.548

Edited by Begi Nabara
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on Windows, but this only happens when you open the converter first, then search for your images.

To convert just one image I click right on the RAF file and in the pop up menu choose Open with DNG converter. Then in the converter just click on Convert.

Voila!

 

 

Also, check that you have the latest version of DNG Converter. There has been an update recently. I have 9.4.0.548

 

Hi Begi

 

Thanks for the input. Looks like I'm stuck with converting Folders as right clicking an individual File doesn't work for me  ( possibly because I'm using an oldish version of the DNG Conveter to retain compatibility with my dated OSX !). Its only a minor irritation until I finally upgrade everything … Thanks anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no quality difference.  It is lossless compression.  Think of it like a zip file.  The files are the same after you uncompress them.

 

The DNGs are bigger than the compressed raf but smaller than uncompressed.

 

Thanks Dalto - I'll certainly have to be more rigorous with housekeeping given the larger file sizes !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Thank you, Pathpix, for asking this. And thank you, gordonrussell76, for a thorough answer.

 

I was wondering this myself since I didn't really get into post processing when I dipped my toe into the world of digital photography several years ago (Photoshop confused me!). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry just checking back

 

To answer your question as to why I did not mention Photoshop. I think of photoshop as post post production. Essentially both PS and Lightroom use ACR to de-mosaic RAW files and if you have the latest versions of both the conversion will be the same. I think of LR as being more photographer specfic as it offers a raft of very useful cateloging functions and workflow. PS is more for post post production as some of its sharpening is better but its also a design software and has many many more bells and whistles. I am also old school and I am still in the old price paradigm where LR was significantly cheaper than full fat PS, and therefore for someone who is photographer only better value. In these days of the CC package where you get both PS and LR together for a monthly fee then its less of an issue. The point still stands that in terms of RAW conversion there is no difference between the two software's. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...