To me C1 has some positives, but so does LR and in no way do I see C1 as the end all to Fuji conversions.īut to my eyes, many times the LR conversion looks better and holds up for sure in a interpolation scheme for making a larger print. With the Fuji files, I personally don’t think you can make definite all or nothing statements, as C1 gets around the issues by applying too much blur in the demosaicing alogrithim, and LR seems to pull out the edges a bit more than necessary, neither of the tools seem able to get all the surface details that are there, (when you use Iridient developer for example). You can easily find out about the differences by a quick web search and since so much has been written already I am going to move on to the actual raw conversions. Due to the different layout on the CMOS chip, the Fuji raw file needs a different domosaicing algorithm than most Bayer pattern CMOS sensors.
One of the single largest issues that comes up with Fuji raw files is how to get the most detail out of the files. I prefer to do the majority of my work in either Lightroom (LR) or Capture One (C1). I have worked with all three and since Iridient chooses to only work on the MAC platform, I rarely use it. At present there are three main solutions:
Since the announcement of the Fuji X-Trans cameras, which now max out at 16MP in an APS-C format, there has been a lot written about which raw conversion software provides the best output. I realized once again that there is still no perfect raw conversion software for Fuji files however it does seem to me that Lightroom CC has made some improvements. Since 2014 was such a great year on the Buffalo National River for fall colors, I have been going back over some of my shots. There were some spots that held OK color, but they were the exception. Since July Arkansas has been short on rainfall and the month of September and first half of October no measurable rain fell in the state.
In 2015, Arkansas did not present a good color display really anywhere throughout the state.