This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Don't know why I bother.

Discussion in 'Post Processing/Software Forum' started by Brian1940, Mar 12, 2018.

  1. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    I shoot JPEG with bracketed film simulation here is an example test, Straight out of camera nothing in LR except resize for web.

    Classis Chrome.

    untitled (3 of 3)-6.jpg

    Astia

    untitled (2 of 3)-7.jpg






    Quite honestly the quality of these JPEG files are to my mind perfectly acceptable for most purposes. Yes perhaps a little bit of tweaking for dramatic effect but really no more then that which was available in the wet darkroom.

    It's alright saying this but there is always the itch to scratch. Fuji have brought out a new raw processor and I am intrigued.

    Great first step download the software, in itself a challenge. got it loaded and showing on screen, take a picture in raw and plug the camera in. Blast......knew it was too good to be true Error message along the lines of " detach camera and select USB raw camera processor. Great, but where the hell is it? Utube shows that going down to the wrench, , select connection settings should bring up USB processor, but it doesn't. My connection setting only show four items and the USB thingy ain't one of them.


    Still it's no disaster, but it's a bit annoying. The rain is chucking it down, Leeds is a very gloomy place and I'm bored. :)

    I will post the Acros version separately because I think three snaps in a post is frownecd upon.......probably got that wrong but never mind.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2018
    Anymouse02 likes this.
  2. Woodworth

    Woodworth Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    Messages:
    723
    Likes Received:
    548
    Location:
    Cumbria, England

    -Return to Top-

    Lets face it, jpg files are perfectly acceptable for a lot of situations but if you want to have ultimate control, RAW is the way.

    For me, I shoot RAW as a matter of habit but then I drink ground coffee and not instant ... need I say more? ;)
     
    pszilard likes this.
  3. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    Here's the Acros version.

    untitled (1 of 3)-7.jpg

    And the error message.

    untitled (1 of 1).jpg

    Put me in complete control is a recipe for disaster. :)
     
    Anymouse02 likes this.
  4. Charzes44

    Charzes44 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,108
    Likes Received:
    1,356
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK.

    -Return to Top-

    I'm with you, Brian. Apart from a bit of cropping and the occasional tweak in Apple Photos, all my pics are SOOC! Am I too easily satisfied?
     
    kerrydeare likes this.
  5. pszilard

    pszilard RemektekMedia.com

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,808
    Likes Received:
    947
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia

    -Return to Top-

    I am with you Chris! I shoot RAW + JPG, and grind my own coffee beans for my Espresso machine! ;)
     
    Woodworth likes this.
  6. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    If you are Charzes you are in a very distinguished company.

    Just found the problem.......firmware upgrade.
     
    Charzes44 likes this.
  7. FORUM USER

    FORUM USER Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    England

    -Return to Top-

    Does this link help?
    Please login or register to view links

    It gives a screenshot part way down of the connection menu settings you'd expect.

    I downloaded it and used it with no problems, it works a treat.
     
  8. tijuana taxi

    tijuana taxi Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    1,059
    Likes Received:
    835
    Location:
    Cambridgeshire, UK

    -Return to Top-

    Thought the thread title applied to Coffeemate, was going to agree with you on that.

    Not with sticking to Jpegs though, why ignore so much additional potential?
    Personal choice, but its not for me and we are back to the powdered milk stuff again now :)
     
  9. GregWard

    GregWard Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2014
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    1,972
    Location:
    London

    -Return to Top-

    I've probably said this (or something similar) several times before. For me JPEG scores hugely for sheer convenience but RAW offers much more flexibility and MAY offer more quality. But that extra quality might be marginal and is really associated with the flexibility point (i.e. RAW can give you high quality in more situations).

    Occasionally we've had somebody post a RAW file and challenge any reader to "do their best". If - say - 20 people respond then you will probably get at least 30 different images - as some will not be able to resist a couple of versions!

    Now here's the important thing - those 30 images will all be totally different. They might be subtly different but some will be radically different. So which one is best? In my opinion there's no such thing. Even if you put it to a poll - and pick the one image chosen most often - that simply makes it the most popular. There is no "best" - it's all about different artistic interpretations.

    But when you shoot JPEG you end up with a single interpretation. The one chosen by the "automatic processing engine" of the camera (though potentially with the Photographer having tweaked various settings in advance). So how can the camera leap to a single perfect solution when our 20 experienced Photographers came up with 30 different interpretations? That's the point. It can't.

    So if your are happy with the defaults the camera chooses (or happy after you have tweaked the settings) and you want to spend more time shooting new images - then that's fantastic. Go for it and don't worry about anybody who says bad things about JPEG. They're simply out of date. However, if you enjoy creating images (meaning you enjoy/come to enjoy the post-processing of images as well). Well then RAW gives you a fuller file from which to start your exploration of squeezing the very best out of your image files.
     
    Pedro1948 and FORUM USER like this.
  10. Filmick28

    Filmick28 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2017
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    London UK (centre of the universe!)

    -Return to Top-

    I have a life, so JPEGs for me every time; I've never shot a RAW picture in my digital life! What's it all about? Is everyone shooting billboard size prints all the time or just pics for posting on Facebook?

    Remember the days of shooting FILM? You had to get it right in the camera (you also didn't see the results til the next day) so it was important to have an understanding of the films' characteristics (and reversal film only had 1/3rd stop exposure tolerance). A bit of dodging and burning in the darkroom when printing B&W was all you could do.

    Those were the days......
     
    Pedro1948, Charzes44 and Brian1940 like this.
  11. Charzes44

    Charzes44 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,108
    Likes Received:
    1,356
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK.

    -Return to Top-

    I think there is a lot of truth in the saying: if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
     
    Brian1940 likes this.
  12. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    Sorry folks this wasn't supposed to be a JPEG v raw debate......honest.

    It was merely me scratching an itch to try the new Fuji raw convertor, academic interest.

    I take Filmic 28 point re output. Many moons ago I got an FRPS for black and white printing, spent two years of my RAF service at the RAF School of Photography teaching B/W printing I have been around the block ,I love the B/W print. My late wife always reckoned I only took photographs to feed my printing addiction.

    However, I would say that I can produce technically better print now from a combination of Fuji JPEG and Epson SC 800 printer then I could with my M Leicas and Leitz V35 enlarger.....technically,

    In fact for digital output to approach analogue re filmic effect I find the digital file needs degrading by using stupid high ISO settings etc. Then under glass hanging on the wall side by side both have a great although slightly different appeal. Both have validity in their own way. Perhaps we should stop trying to get digital to emulate film, but many of us Dinosaurs find old habits hard to break.

    "But when you shoot JPEG you end up with a single interpretation. The one chosen by the "automatic processing engine" of the camera (though potentially with the Photographer having tweaked various settings in advance). So how can the camera leap to a single perfect solution when our 20 experienced Photographers came up with 30 different interpretations? That's the point. It can't."

    Greg, I did say " with a little bit of tweaking for dramatic effect".
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2018
    Charzes44 likes this.
  13. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    It's been a long dreary wet day in Leeds. However it hasn't been entirely entirely wasted , I have been playing.:)

    I started this thread by demonstrating, at least to my satisfaction, that JPEG files were the way to go. With JPEG you can fine-tune the output from the camera, with raw it's all done sweating over a keyboard. So my decision, get it right out of the camera and spend more time down the pub.

    But then I discovered that Fuji have introduced a raw convertor which produced out of camera raw files with all the in camera controls of JPEG. Some have reported at length that getting raw files to equal JPEG isn't easy. Well now we have a raw file that looks exactly like a JPEG , but has retained all the information that raw users harp on about, whilst having the same quality as SOOC JPEG. Not only that but all the in camera controls are still available.

    It works fine with my X Pro2 but I think the XT20 is still awaiting firmware update. :(

    O.K. early doors......as we say up North, but it certainly has me thinking.
     
    audiman90 likes this.
  14. FORUM USER

    FORUM USER Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    England

    -Return to Top-

    The new XRAW STUDIO software simply replicates the existing in-camera raw convertor that already exists on all X cameras. You take a raw image and can manupulate it in-camera to produce as many JPGs, each with different settings, as you like. The XT20 will do that now without firmware update.
    The new software allows you to do the same as the existing in-camera convertor does but utilising a keyboard and PC/MAC screen, rather than the small controls and LCD screen of the camera. You have to attach the camera to the computer as it is the camera that's actually doing the processing even though you are using your keyboard and computer screen to access the cameras settings.

    Try the existing in-camera function with your XT20, take a raw, enter playback, press Q, and take it from there.
     
  15. GregWard

    GregWard Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2014
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    1,972
    Location:
    London

    -Return to Top-

    So - in effect - you have "turned to the dark side"!!! :)

    You are now using (or considering using for the future anyway) RAW files and a RAW Converter - albeit the very simple one built into the camera. If you think about it this is what everybody does anyway. The very notion of "only using JPEG" is incorrect. Everyone uses RAW. They must do so because that's how all cameras work - they shoot in RAW and offer the option of creating a JPEG from that RAW file. The only real question is whether we wish to retain that RAW file in case we don't like the initial JPEG conversion?

    There's then a secondary issue which is around how easy it is to use the RAW processing software. In effect you are saying that you don't believe (for you) that the workload of using a traditional post-processing package (like Lightroom etc.) is worth it because you are happy with the camera doing most of the work and then only needing to do some minor tweaks. As the quality of JPEG files (particularly from Fuji) have got so good this strikes me as a perfectly good decision. It allows you to spend more time taking new photos (or going down the Pub) and there's nothing at all wrong with that. So now Fuji have made your life even better by allowing you to have the best of both worlds and an easy route to re-visit that initial JPEG creation and give you more flexibility but still be very easy to use.

    The missing bit here is that some of us don't regard the use of RAW processing software as a chore. Instead we see it as very much part of the creative process. We enjoy it. Clearly there's nothing at all wrong with that either.
     
  16. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    Well that was all fun. Passed a dull dreary day :)

    I have played with raw and the Fuji convertor, not bad. Only thing is the raw file has to be downloaded to the Mac then retrieved into Studio raw. Then it has to reexported into LR for anything like Clarity/Dehaze etc, all seems a bit of a faff for a standard MO. My recently adopted method of bracketing three film types in JPEG also seems a bit much, or rather a bit unnecessary. So the decision at the moment is, Fine JPEG and raw......now that's novel :). But then I will have the ability to set Studio raw to give me the option of a JPEG quality raw as a base for further tweaking.

    Although I have discovered that with the X Pro2 I can produce 3 bracketed film simulation in JPEG and raw on one card.........now ain't that just fun.

    Now where in the menu can I find next weeks Lottery winning numbers?

    Still it's been a good chat, thanks all.

    Brian.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2018
    Charzes44 likes this.
  17. FORUM USER

    FORUM USER Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    England

    -Return to Top-

    As I mentioned in my earlier post the studio raw doesn't give you anything different, apart from the ability to use your Mac screen and keyboard, than the current in-camera raw convertor already present in all your Fuji cameras. It cannot produce a jpg quality raw file. It produces JPGs. The JPGs are created from the raw file that you take with the camera.
     
  18. GregWard

    GregWard Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2014
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    1,972
    Location:
    London

    -Return to Top-

    I too am a bit puzzled by what you mean here? What you are using is simply a RAW file - it's "just" (although I accept this matters a lot) a simple way of processing the RAW file.
     
  19. Brian1940

    Brian1940 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    2,073
    Location:
    Leeds, West Yorkshire

    -Return to Top-

    I mean having a raw file which has been processed with the same in camera adjustments as a JPEG.

    Anyway I am beginning to realise that you end up with a JPEG out of Studio raw. Hence any further editing in LR is being done on a JPEG , one might just as well forget about the complication.

    Mind you this whole thing I find totally beyond my comprehension. I love photography and printing, I really should stop getting sucked in by stuff which I shall never understand.

    Hence the decision has been made. JPEG with in camera adjustments, small tweaks in LR. Shoot Fine and raw just in case colour is needed. Film simulation set to Acros and that's out it. Done and dusted.

    Now where have I heard that before. ;)
     
    Micky likes this.
  20. GregWard

    GregWard Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2014
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    1,972
    Location:
    London

    -Return to Top-

    Well now you've gone this far I wouldn't give up altogether. It strikes me as a useful option if you keep the RAW file "just in case". Then, maybe at a later date, you think "oh - I wonder what that image would like like as a 'classic chrome' image" (or whatever). With this software you have a very easy way of finding out. Most obviously - as you point out - a way of "back-tracking" if you thought you wanted B&W and then changed your mind.
     
    Brian1940 likes this.

Share This Page

  1. fujix-forum.com uses cookies to help personalize content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice