the dillema

With last night’s Camera Raw Update 3.7 came a most welcome addition: Aperture 3 support for the Fujifilm Finepix X100 camera. A nice surprise given Apple’s sometimes leisurely pace when it comes to supporting the latest cameras.

 

But strangely, I am now faced with a serious dilemma.

 

JPEG? SERIOUSLY?

 

I know. Why should I be racking my brains over this right? Native RAW support means I should now simply hit the Image Quality menu, switch to RAW and be done with it. I mean, when I first started looking for a compact walk-around camera my one criteria was RAW files — I dismissed everything that was JPEG only. That’s how much of a RAW shooter I am. So what has changed?

 

I’ve been shooting JPEG for 40 days, that’s what.

 

SPOILED

 

When I look at what I’ve shot so far I can’t say I feel cheated in any way. The images look damn good. They look good at 100%; They look good printed.

 

When I found the Adobe DNG Converter trick I did quite a few RAW vs JPEG tests and in the end decided to stick with JPEG. I wasn’t that impressed with the difference and generally thought the in-camera files had better overall noise control, one the X100’s strength.

 

So I’ve gotten used to dealing with those JPEGs and have found them to be surprisingly sturdy in post. Less headroom and control? That’s the big trade-off. But as I mentioned in this discussion I’ve been approaching the X100 like a film camera, making sure I get exposure and white balance spot on when shooting instead of relying on the fluidity of RAW. It’s a much more deliberate way of shooting that I feel fits in perfectly with how the camera works. This isn’t a machine gun with 3D tracking.

 

 

 

APERTURE 3

 

From my initial tests I can say Apple has done a great job with the RAF files, making the decision all the more difficult. Converted files are pretty close to in-cam JPEGs and the re-appearance of De-noise in RAW Fine Tuning (which wasn’t there with DNGs) is a godsend.

 

There is however a difference in the quality of noise: the grain isn’t as fine and looks more mottled. It’s still ok, but it IS different. There also seems to be a bit more vignetting which points to Fuji adding tweaks when processing for the lens.

 

There are also slight differences in tone (especially reds) and the obvious  shadow/highlight interpretation depending on how you’ve set the camera’s Dynamic Range settings (which don’t apply to RAW).

 

TRADE-OFF

 

That’s always the thing isn’t it? Compromise, compromise, compromise.  Obviously I can get the best of both worlds by shooting RAW+JPEG. But this — for me at least — adds a layer of confusion I’m not sure I’m prepared to deal with. The problem becomes one of self-editing: which version is the best one. Most of the time both will be perfectly fine... but different. There’s that word again.

 

 

 

THE BLANKET

 

In the end, with the X100 I don’t think I’d be choosing RAW for added file quality. The in-camera files are that good. I’d be doing it for peace of mind: the ability to tweak exposure and white balance after the fact, to recover highlights. RAW as my security blanket.

 

In a professional context, with my Nikons, this is a no-brainer. I want that peace of mind, that security. I also need to be able to change my mind in post, go with another interpretation I may not have thought of while shooting the scene. But I bought the X100 for personal use. We’re preparing our trip to France and I just don’t want to think about storage over there. If I shoot JPEG I’ll have more than enough cards on-hand and I’ll be able to backup to my iPad without even thinking about storage space.

 

I’ll also come back and edit what I shot, as is, no second guesses. Screwed up the exposure? Too bad. Next.

 

There’s a certain serenity that comes from knowing all the decisions have already been made. Am I discarding RAW entirely? Of course not. I also might flinch over there and hit that odd RAW button once in awhile. But for the most part I’m going to live on the edge. To hell with security.

 

This RAW shooter’s X100 will be bleeding JPEGs... for the foreseeable future at least.

 

More pics below.
Later.

 

 

 

 

X100 RAW in Aperture 3: get Adobe DNG Converter.



Itching to work with X100 RAW files I decided to — once again — download the latest Lightroom trial. Of course I — once again — found it unbearable to work with (it's a long story) but feeling the power of RAW on X100 files was still very satisfying. So I decided to use LR to export those files to DNG and see how Aperture would react: it works. For those who don't know the DNG format, here's Wikipedia's take:
"Digital Negative (DNG) is an open raw image format owned by Adobe used for digital photography. It was launched on September 27, 2004.[1]"

The big advantage of DNG in this case is that you essentially end up with a RAW file that Aperture can work with, complete with all the control you'd expect over exposure, black point and white balance. Here's a screenshot:

Aperture! X100! RAW!

What’s missing from that panel is Noise Reduction but so far I’m extremely impressed with the lack of and/or quality of noise from this camera; it doesn’t seem to just be good NR applied to in-camera JPEGs but actual sensor performance. Which bodes very well indeed.

Does this mean I have to buy Lightroom? Nope. In a rare generous move by Adobe (don’t get me started) they provide a free utility called Adobe DNG Converter that does batch conversions of entire folders. It’s always powered by the latest Camera RAW version so you get the same camera compatibility than the rest of the Photoshop family.

I never had any use for it — until now.

This means I’ll be saying goodbye to film modes and Dynamic Range settings to concentrate on the holy trinity of shutter speed, aperture and ISO. To be honest, that’s absolutely fine by me. Like getting air back into my lungs really. This post from Rhys of X100rumors sums up my feelings perfectly.

I’m AM going to need more SD cards though…There's always something ;)

It’s raining cats and dogs over here and I’m stuck in the studio, but below is my first Aperture processed RAW pic. Interestingly the DNG files come in at about 10MB each compared to 20MB for the original RAF. Not sure what the overhead is but 10MB makes a lot more sense for a 12MP photo. Hmm.

Later



And a couple more pics while I'm at it - JPEGS though: