![]() ![]() As i have used the fuji system though, I have pretty much stopped sharpening raw files altogether. I didn't notice it as much when i tried an X-pro1 for some reason, but x-pro1 files to me looked better for some reason, not sure if it was because of the first generation x-trans sensor or what. I think the wider angle lenses for me produced the effect at a much higher level, i just don't think 16mp sensor was able to do a very good job of rendering those wide views. I also experienced it on the x-t1, I bought it three different times hoping that it was something that would be fixed with Adobe LR processing, and I couldn't get over it. I have grown used to it, i guess am aware of situations that may have the effect. Experienced it greens all the time on my x100s, especially in photos from Hawaii, with so much green vegetation. I have had that problem, a lot especially with shorter focal lengths. Here for example is a link to an X-Trans II RAF file that exhibits the problem: Edited Januby graflex If you want to make a raw file available for others to see and work with use Dropbox (free account). If maximum fine detail with no "watercolor appearance" is most important to you, you will avoid Adobe for the demosiacing task. You can get reasonable results from Adobe with careful handling. However that doesn't mean they do a better job processing X-Trans overall. Adobe has improved their handling of the X-Trans CFA but alternative raw converters do a better job of extracting fine detail from X-Trans raw files and avoiding the "watercolor effect." Iridient, Photo Ninja, SilkyPix, Capture One, Raw Therapee, ACDSee all do a better job demosaicing X-Trans. ![]() ![]() It is not a sharpening problem - sharpening exposes and exacerbates the problem. ![]() This problem is rooted in demosaicing the X-Trans color filter array. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |