Jump to content

Recommended Posts

For anyone who hasn't seen the painterly effect, but as I say I can't reproduce it anymore!

painterly-effect.PNG

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just took pictures of a half-grown cornfield that are sharp as a pin. I think I saw the watercolor effect on a very few images early on 3 + years ago when the X-T1 came out and for a while. Just long enough to make some people leave the system.  I think Adobe had done some things under the hood that seems (to me) to have fixed it.  Whether LR or PS. Long before I got the T2. A shame people didn't hang in there.

On the Fuji forum, other programs have been discussed, but I never had any desire to learn a new software program, let alone pay for one. I've stuck with CC and am happy with the results. I'm not saying Irident and Capture one can't do better, they may. My results don't make me feel the need to change.

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DDoug said:

Yes, DHill, I've noticed that also. In this case, they were both taken from the same RAF file, the only difference being the raw converter. I didn't mean take the thread off on a tangent, only to say that X-Trans files give widely varying results depending on how they're processed.

 

Yep, appreciate they're the same image processed with different RAW converters. There are numerous comparisons on the web with opinions on which does best with Fuji RAF files; this one is just an example: http://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2017/1/one-fuji-x-pro-2-image-7-different-raw-converters Incidentally, the auther acknowledges that his sample image shows 'mushiness' - look for instance at the left side of the buiding in the 100% crops, and the railings. This is the kind of thing I sometimes get with the OIS zooms, and to me is unacceptable - I wouldn't send it to Alamy. If however, you find this just fine for your purposes, you'll probably be fine with the X-T2 or any of the other current-generation Fujis as your main camera. Most of the Fuji primes give much better image quality, as do the zooms much of the time. Disclaimer: I am a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to image quality :-)

David. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,
I'm cautious about what I send to Alamy, as I want to keep the 3-star QC rating. Also, I'm fairly fickle about cameras, having owned Cambo, Hasselblad, Pentax MF and digital, Fuji MF, Canon, Nikon, etc., in the past. The blurring caused by the OIS isn't something I've noticed, especially, but coincidentally I've started shooting with primes on a monopod when I don't want to lug the tripod. The question of sticking with Fuji in the future will depend in part on how good the lenses remain now that production is apparently being moved to the Philippines.
Cheers,
Don

P.S., the image shown was not meant as an example of ultimate quality and may not be submitted to Alamy anyway. As I said in response to Allan, "My point was to draw a contrast between the two software approaches."

http://dondouglas.com/organic.jpg

Edited by DDoug
clarification, humor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone - very interesting and helpful. Particular thanks to Betty for her suggested settings, which will save a lot of time during the initial setting up.

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DDoug said:

David,
I'm cautious about what I send to Alamy, as I want to keep the 3-star QC rating. Also, I'm fairly fickle about cameras, having owned Cambo, Hasselblad, Pentax MF and digital, Fuji MF, Canon, Nikon, etc., in the past. The blurring caused by the OIS isn't something I've noticed, especially, but coincidentally I've started shooting with primes on a monopod when I don't want to lug the tripod. The question of sticking with Fuji in the future will depend in part on how good the lenses remain now that production is apparently being moved to the Philippines.
Cheers,
Don

P.S., the image shown was not meant as an example of ultimate quality and may not be submitted to Alamy anyway. As I said in response to Allan, "My point was to draw a contrast between the two software approaches."

http://dondouglas.com/organic.jpg

I'm with you Don in being cautious with Alamy submissions. That is why I ditched the Fuji, which gave me numerous fails, in favour of Nikon and Sony.

Love the "What the duck"

Allan

I suppose it is a case of horses for courses. What suits one photographer will not suit another by way of equipment and processing software.

ITMA

Edited by Allan Bell
Just added a rider. (ryder?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alex Ramsay said:

Thanks everyone - very interesting and helpful. Particular thanks to Betty for her suggested settings, which will save a lot of time during the initial setting up.

Alex

You're welcome. If you go Fuji, I suggest you join the Fuji-X forum.  There is much information available. These cameras can be quirky...if you turn on a particular feature, it might cause something else to not work. 

Just post a question with details of what's not working, or what you can't figure out...mention what model you're shooting and you'll get answers. Don't feel stupid for asking, everybody was new at it sometime. I asked for lots of help early on.

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have hundreds of pictures on Alamy taken with X-Pro1, X-T1 and since last summer X-Pro2 and X-T2 - all processed in Lightroom without any problems.  You just have to learn how to process Fuji files in Lightroom.  I use 16-55mm 2.8, 50-140 2.8, 100-400mm etc plus  zeiss 12mm and other Fuji primes.  Don't skimp on the glass - buy the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Betty,

In your list of recommended settings you have... SHADOW TONE -+4

Is that correct ? It doesn't go to +4 on the XT1

Or were these recommendations just for XT2 ?

 

Geoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now half of the images I uploaded to Alamy were taken with the X-T2. 100% approval rate. I have no issues with the images, colours or otherwise. I do not sharpen them in Lightroom or in any other software as I think the RAW files converted in Lightroom are sharp enough for Alamy. I was able to get sharper results with Iridient, but have not spent much time playing with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, geoff s said:

Betty,

In your list of recommended settings you have... SHADOW TONE -+4

Is that correct ? It doesn't go to +4 on the XT1

Or were these recommendations just for XT2 ?

 

Geoff

That's what my X-T2 is set at.  I have shadow tone on X-T1 at 0 Standard.

i really don't know what the difference is between the two camera's settings, but back when I first bought the T1, I used recommended settings then, also.  They seem to have worked.

on T1

dynamic range 100

film sim PROVIA standard 

WB auto

color, sharpness, highlight tone, shadow tone - all at 0

noise reduction -2

Long exposure NR OFF

LENS MODULATION OPTIMIZER ON

shoot without lens OFF you turn this on if you have an adapted lens

MF assist PEAK (red low)

AE/AF  LOCK MODE -on when pressing

AF LOCK MODE - AF LOCK ONLY

Flash composition -1

Red eye removal OFF

SHUTTER TYPE -MS

AF+MF ON

Interlock spot AE & focus area ON

My Aperture Setting is grayed out. Don't remember why. This is one of those settings that probably responds to another setting. I always have my cameras set on RAW only. I tried the RAW + JPEG but it seems I always have tweaks I want to make to my images and the jpegs only were something I ended up deleting.

I still use both cameras. The T1 not as much, but it's nice to have different lenses on them. In an ideal world, I'd have two T2s because I prefer the extra file size of the T2 among other improvements. But I have hundreds of great images in two years of shooting the T1.

Betty

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Betty.

The aperture setting is greyed out as you aren't using XC lenses.

Geoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/06/2017 at 6:04 PM, Allan Bell said:

Alex I used to use the XT1 with various Fuji lenses some time ago. After problems with some lenses and returning them to Fuji for service, one under guarantee and another out of guarantee, and receiving them back worse than when they left me. Then doing battle with Fuji to get them replaced. Well to much hassle.

 

Also I found their sensor to give peculiar results, as David above mentions, with images which contained trees and/ or grass taking on a distinctly painterly effect which could not be corrected in software. Possibly something to do with the sensor having a different pattern of photosites and extra green sites over the typical Bayer array.

 

In the end I sold all my Fuji gear and bought into Nikon and Sony.

 

I did like the arrangement of dials on the XT1 body though, more reminiscent of the old film SLR's.

 

Allan

+1. I used to love using my Fuji cameras but it was a constant fight to control the patterns. I used C1 and it was recognised as one of the best to use as it gave better control over sharpening and NR. In the end, I decided to compare it to an old A7r with one of their 16-35. The Fuji gear was up for sale not long after that. In the end I settled with a Sony A7rii. For general stock and everyday camera I use an Olympus OMD EM1 mkii with a Pro 12-100 lens. No problems with detail or NR anymore. Also have the 12-40 & 100-400 and they all provide excellent results

On 07/06/2017 at 8:24 AM, Callie said:

the problems with foliage seemed to me to be down to excess sharpening. It was certainly something I noted when I first got the camera - this is something also discussed at length on the fuji forum. The files need very little sharpening. In Lightroom the detail and amount sliders particularly need to be low - just checked one of my recent files which has a lot of foliage, my detail slider is down at 14, sometimes it is lower than this. No painterly effect in evidence at all.

It's not just excess sharpening. Fuji (even with the X-T2 & Pro2) carry out a lot of NR in camera that can't be fully turned off in software. They acknowledge this and gave a little extra in the menu to tone it down a touch but, still not switch it off entirely. Take excessive NR, smoothing (apparently this is favoured in Japan etc) and add sharp lenses with additional sharpening in software and it can be a recipe for disaster. The ones it effected most were landscape shooters.

I did have Pro1, XT1 (two of) and an XE1 with 23,35,56,60, 10-22, 16-55 & 55-140. The 55-140 was there best lens by far. But once I seen the light (detail) of other sensors it wasn't enough to keep me.

If anyone was looking for a great one lens stock solution at the moment, I'd recommend the Olympus OMD EM1 mkii with the 12-100 (24-200 ff). Being able to handhold for up to 4 secs (1-2 at 100mm) means I can take shots in dark cathedrals and still not be over iso 500. I mainly use my Sony gear for studio or landscape work but I prefer the ergonomics and shear speed of the Em1 mkii. It is also the first camera that not only handles weather but can take a dunking and a real beating and still survive... comfortably. 

Edited by Duncan_Andison
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.