X-T1 and Multiple Exposure

[methodphoto]

One of the frustrating things at the moment with the X-T1 is the Multiple Exposure feature.

Great that it has it, but you can only use 2 images, it outputs as JPEG, and there is little control of the blending.

 

It would be a great Kaizen feature for Firmware 5 to have:

 

1) up to 5 or 7 images (some manufacturers do 9)

2) Output as Raw

3) Blend control

 

No idea how you submit features for consideration, but I have tried a few tweets.

 

What is slightly frustrating is that the X-E1 had Raw output, but the flagship model doesn't. I guess too that this isn't restricted to the X-T1 as X-E2 owners would benefit.

[Guest Aripaj]

One of the frustrating things at the moment with the X-T1 is the Multiple Exposure feature.

Great that it has it, but you can only use 2 images, it outputs as JPEG, and there is little control of the blending.

 

It would be a great Kaizen feature for Firmware 5 to have:

 

1) up to 5 or 7 images (some manufacturers do 9)

2) Output as Raw

3) Blend control

 

No idea how you submit features for consideration, but I have tried a few tweets.

 

What is slightly frustrating is that the X-E1 had Raw output, but the flagship model doesn't. I guess too that this isn't restricted to the X-T1 as X-E2 owners would benefit.

Yes methodphoto, I agree completely!!!!

Aripaj

[Antony]

I think that the focus of the Fuji engineers is on features that the majority of users will use - the demand for multiple exposure is low, the demand for 5 and 7 exposure output is even lower. There are dozens of basic firmware improvements I would implement before messing with this.

[methodphoto]

I don't disagree, but it still seems odd to have gone from Raw to JPG output for a flagship model

[ryan]

I dunno, I think the randomness and permanence is part of the fun of a double exposure. For me anyway.

[x-tc]

Lost me when you said "output as raw". Raw is a recording of what the sensor saw. Are you wanting the original exposures in raw form? You can already do that. If not, please clarify what this is supposed to do.

[methodphoto]

The combined image as a Raw file (which other camera manufacturers manage so it isn't that outrageous a request).

And it was also what the X-E1 did.

[Maurice]

Sounds like you don't fully understand the nature of Raw. What you ask is impossible without developing some whole new technology specifically for it. That is not worth a silly feature.

It's possible for it to be lossless of course, but it would not be a true Raw file.

 

What other manufacturers do this? The X-E1 .. you positive ?

 

Please upload one of those.

[flysurfer]

Replacing the RAW composite with a JPEG composite adds the benefit that the 2 merged images can use different ISO settings, different DR settings and different JPEG parameters. So this was a deliberate choice. Personally, I found the RAW implementation of EXR I interesting, but EXR II's way of doing things is more flexible.

[mjh]

From a technical perspective, blending raw (i.e. non-demosaiced) data is a bad idea as interpolating between pixels potentially originating in different exposures could give rise to funny artifacts.

 

And frankly, if I wanted more control over a multiple exposure I would eschew the in-camera multiple exposure mode anyway. I would rather have the camera store individual raw files and use Photoshop to enjoy full control over composition and blending.

[flysurfer]

It's basically a creative effect mode like those Advanced Filters or the Motion Panorama mode. These are all JPEG-only. 

[methodphoto]

It's basically a creative effect mode like those Advanced Filters or the Motion Panorama mode. These are all JPEG-only. 

 

Except it has been done in Raw before, so there is unlikely to be a limitation,

[methodphoto]

From a technical perspective, blending raw (i.e. non-demosaiced) data is a bad idea as interpolating between pixels potentially originating in different exposures could give rise to funny artifacts.

 

And frankly, if I wanted more control over a multiple exposure I would eschew the in-camera multiple exposure mode anyway. I would rather have the camera store individual raw files and use Photoshop to enjoy full control over composition and blending.

 

Again, other manufacturers do it with no issues. It may be that X-Trans causes weirdness, but the choice would be nice.

 

Also there are plenty of photographers who actually like getting the shot in camera with less or minimal Photoshop work. Try the work of Chris Friel or Valda Bailey.

[mjh]

Also there are plenty of photographers who actually like getting the shot in camera with less or minimal Photoshop work.

And Fuji is catering for these with JPEG output. You, on the other hand, want raw output and more control over blending. No problem either but it requires a little more work. More power and more choices = more work.

[flysurfer]

Except it has been done in Raw before, so there is unlikely to be a limitation,

Of course there is no limitation, except for the ones I already mentioned in post #9.

[methodphoto]

Love the positivity!

[Norseman]

If you want double exposure and raw files, why not shoot two separate raw files and combine in the post processing editor? You have lots of options then. Even blending modes, for really unusual colors, etc.

[Fujixxx]

I've been using the multiple exposure mode alot more lately.  Loving it!!

I definitely think it should be in RAW. 

But don't think I would ever need more than 2 exposures though.

And maybe a tool to scale/rotate each exposure in camera before they get mashed together?

[citral]

 

Raf here : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7DueOZpEtAUMzhYUUpGODExaTg/view?usp=sharing

[methodphoto]

>Sounds like you don't fully understand the nature of Raw.

 

I do

 

>What you ask is impossible without developing some whole new technology specifically for it.

 

No it's not. See Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Fuji and probably Sony too

 

>That is not worth a silly feature.

 

In your opinion. You may not be interested in ME as a creative option, that doesn't preclude others being.

 

>It's possible for it to be lossless of course, but it would not be a true Raw file.

>What other manufacturers do this? The X-E1 .. you positive ?

>Please upload one of those.

 

See above. The X-E1, yes, removed since. 

 

Some basic internet searching proves it is possible, and some photographers use it as a creative tool http://dylandsara.com/canon-5d-mark-iii-double-exposure-tutorial/