# Sharpening X-Trans files in LR



## raybark (Apr 20, 2017)

Having recently bought a Fujifilm X-T20 camera and just seen an article about sharpening I wonder if changes in sharpening settings are needed for Raw files? I note the article is dated 2014 and mentions version 5 of LR so perhaps is no longer applicable.  See:  
SHARPENING X-TRANS FILES IN ADOBE LIGHTROOM


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 20, 2017)

It seems important to treat each generation of XTrans files differently. 6 months ago my X-T2 was my first Fuji camera but I knew of Pete Bridgwood's article and tried his settings which he developed using the smaller X-T1 files and before Adobe and Fuji worked on optimising XTrans conversion. I thought they produced horrid artifacts with my X-T2 and concluded that they were indeed outdated.

I still haven't settled on a single recipe like Bridgwood's high detail method, and it does surprise me that I am still trying alternatives, but my feeling is that Lightroom produces the best results with 24mp Fuji raw files by whacking up the Luminance noise reduction and the sharpening, and a high masking value to help target the sharpening. I have been comparing results with CaptureOne v10 and also with Iridient's XTransformer, and in fact my working sharpening preset is called "Sharpening - C1 style". See xt2sharpening.jpg


----------



## raybark (Apr 20, 2017)

Thanks for your comments. It is surprising that alternatives are still being tried. I was hoping that a general 'recipe' would have been established by this time. Whacking up the noise reduction and the sharpening plus a high masking value really does surprise me. May I ask if this is for portrait type images? For landscapes/townscapes/architecture I was happy using the 'Sharpen-Scenic' preset on images from my previous Olympus camera but it seems I may have to make my own preset for Raw images from the X-T20. However, so far I have processed around 10 Fuji images using the usual preset and I can't see anything  wrong in those images. Am I heading for trouble I wonder?


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 20, 2017)

That combination of settings was most recently used with a set of portrait-style photos, many with quite high ISO (3200), and with Nikon files I have always gone for high but targeted sharpening. The oddity for me is the high noise reduction.

I would suggest plenty of experimentation, and not taking anything for granted. These raw files are very different from others.


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 20, 2017)

That combination of settings was most recently used with a set of portrait-style photos, many with quite high ISO (3200), and with Nikon files I have always gone for high but targeted sharpening. The oddity for me is the high noise reduction.

I would suggest plenty of experimentation, and not taking anything for granted. These raw files are very different from others.


----------



## raybark (Apr 29, 2017)

I have recently had very poor results from a shoot in gardens with lots of foliage showing what I have seen described as the 'worm effect'. This article mentions the problem: Review - Fujifilm X-T2 For Landscape Photography. An extract: "Developing raw files from the X-Trans sensor can be difficult at times, especially with Adobe's software. Lightroom and camera raw struggle with sharpening on these files, there are other options to get the sharpest file possible, one is using Iridient X-Transformer in conjunction with Lightroom, this is the best option if you are committed to Lightroom.
Am considering getting ' X-Transformer' and wonder if members can offer advice on it, including how to handle it in the Lightroom workflow.


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 29, 2017)

I tried X-Transformer while coming up with the above suggestions. The trial version works perfectly - except it leaves a watermark. So you can test it yourself.

My guess is that you could set it up as an external editor, but I simply ran a folder through XTr and imported the DNGs into Lr. Keep the RAFs, for when Adobe next improve their demosaicing (my Syncomatic plugin can automatically copy adjustments from the Xtr DNGs to RAFs).

Lightroom processes X-Trans files more slowly than Bayer sensor files, because of slower demosaicing, but the X-Transformer's DNGs are demosaiced. So adjustment work is noticeably quicker. 

As I said before, I concluded that I could get equally good prints without adulterating my workflow. But thanks for the URL. I'll read it later.

John


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 29, 2017)

From that article, an interesting comment is "It is the detail slider that quickly gives you worms unfortunately". Yes, and a problem is that the received wisdom - the Bridgwood XT1 method - is that one should whack up detail. I just don't think that applies to the XT2.


----------



## raybark (Apr 29, 2017)

Thanks John. Having already imported a folder of raw images into Lightroom, can I export them to a folder on the desktop and then import them to X-Transformer to try it? Then take them back into LR for finishing?


----------



## raybark (Apr 29, 2017)

PS. I use a Mac and see that you are on a PC. Not sure if the two OS s produce different results.


----------



## johnbeardy (Apr 29, 2017)

No, it doesn't. In any case, I use both PC and Mac.


----------

