The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

I do not know what you are trying to show here. To mean anything at all both images would need to be at 100% and the subject shown at the same magnification
They were both at 100% size. I’m trying to show that t isn’t just Fuji files that have this worm effect when oversharpened. I think people forget that Fuji are sharper anyway so need less sharpening. That’s my take on it anyway.
 
DId you look at the stochasutic link..... you only see these patterns in fuji files if you over sharpen. In the same way you only see them in stochastic print if you over enlarge.
It was an interesting article yeah.
Tbh worms were never a major issue for me, although they still weren't a great trait imo.
 
I'm always happy to be proven wrong but I disagree, all software I've tried (which is A LOT including fujis own) can demonstrate the artefacts from my experience. I've even seen undesirable effects in jpegs.
That's exactly what I'm saying (and Terry too, I believe). You can always push far enough that you get artifacts. The question is whether you can get enough detail without doing so. X-Transformer seems to be able to extract more detail from at least some RAFs, even with Sharpening in the plugin set to zero. If you want the boring details, see my exceptionally dull post below where I stare at bits of stone in unflinching detail so others don't have to...
OK, so here's a small demo. It's not dramatic, the differences are pretty subtle. All shots are 100% crops of the same RAF file, which has had very little done to it.

I set X-Transformer to apply no sharpening, so that we can compare apples to apples.

One shot shows the RAF sharpened in LR at 40%. It's not horrible, but the X-transformer version shows noticeably more detail when sharpened to the same 40% in LR. The third shot is the original RAF sharpened to 80% in LR, which is my best estimate for a version that matches the X-Transformer version for detail. It's still not terrible, but if you look at the flatter stone surfaces, you can see the worms just starting to appear.

Again, it's all quite subtle, and would only be noticeable in large prints, if at all.

My conclusion is that X-Transformer, by pulling more detail out of the RAF, stops me from having to apply as much sharpening, thus reducing the likelihood of worms. Of course, this may be wrong. :) It's not so much an attempt to convince anyone that I'm right, more an explanation of why I have the opinions that I do.

And obviously, this is with the X-T10. With the X-T2, it may be quite a different story.



LR 40 sharpen
by dave.hallett on Talk Photography



X-transformer 40 sharpen
by dave.hallett on Talk Photography



LR 80 sharpen
by dave.hallett on Talk Photography
 
That's exactly what I'm saying (and Terry too, I believe). You can always push far enough that you get artifacts. The question is whether you can get enough detail without doing so. X-Transformer seems to be able to extract more detail from at least some RAFs, even with Sharpening in the plugin set to zero. If you want the boring details, see my exceptionally dull post below where I stare at bits of stone in unflinching detail so others don't have to...
Depends on what you're referring to. I can see some of the Fuji artefacts on unprocessed RAWs, and even the jpegs. Worms not so much.
 
Ok here are some tests I've just done , first three are Fuji XT10 and second the Nikon D7100. These are all 100% view. Obviously the Nikon are bigger as they are more resolution so in the next post after this will put them in at similar size to the Fuji so you can see what they would look like if printed at similar size.

Fuji XT10 Sharpening 300 - Threshold 1

on2ar.png


Fuji XT10 Sharpening 1000(max) - Threshold 0 - clearly showing worm

16i7bt2.png


Fuji XT10 Sharpening 1000(max) - Threshold 1

33yqasj.png


Nikon D7100 Sharpening 300 - Threshold 1

2n8rl2a.png


Nikon D7100 Sharpening 1000(max) - Threshold 0 - clearly showing worm

dvh8qf.png


Nikon D710 Sharpening 1000(max) - Threshold 1

2lvz1bs.png
Having now viewed these on the computer rather than phone these aren't worms like you see on Fuji, more just an exacerbation of noise imo. The worms on the Fuji are much more noticeable and harsh. From my experience they're very noticeable on rocks, which is not great when you live in the peak district. But, as already stated I only noticed them if I upped sharpening from the default LR setting (25 IIRC). Unfortunately my Mac dies last week and I'm still waiting for a replacement so I can't post examples.

But as with all these things beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the majority love the pics produced by Fuji, just like some folk prefer the colours of Canon over Nikon, and some think Leica beat everything ;) If you're happy with your images that's all that matters, whether you shoot FF, compact camera, or whatever (y)
 
Maximum detail is shown prior to "Worms" becoming visible when sharpening Fuji files using what ever software.
Some people can see more detail when using some software, than they can see when using others.
As yet there is no consensus which software will always produce the sharpest and most detailed result.
In the real world on screen or when printing there is even less difference.

There seems to be little advantage in chasing ghosts, and spending money on new software, until a clear advantage can be consistently demonstrated.

Apart from detail and sharpness, Different software also changes how colour and tonal values are presented. This is not always anything like advantageous.
 
There seems to be little advantage in chasing ghosts, and spending money on new software, until a clear advantage can be consistently demonstrated.

Apart from detail and sharpness, Different software also changes how colour and tonal values are presented. This is not always anything like advantageous.

:agree::plus1:
 
Maximum detail is shown prior to "Worms" becoming visible when sharpening Fuji files using what ever software.
Some people can see more detail when using some software, than they can see when using others.
As yet there is no consensus which software will always produce the sharpest and most detailed result.
In the real world on screen or when printing there is even less difference.

There seems to be little advantage in chasing ghosts, and spending money on new software, until a clear advantage can be consistently demonstrated.

Apart from detail and sharpness, Different software also changes how colour and tonal values are presented. This is not always anything like advantageous.


My thoughts exactly Sir, personally I'm getting a little tired of all this waffle about painterly effect/worms/creapy crawlies or whatever you want to call it or them.(y)

To me photography is all about taking photographs of the beauty of the world and the things in it, not putting everything under a microscope.

"THAT'S IT, MY FIRST EVER RANT OVER".:D

George.
 
Last edited:
To me photography is all about taking photographs of the beauty of the world and the things in it, not putting everything under a microscope.
But several of your recent excellent photos have been exactly that - putting things under the microscope and then photographing them :D
 
One word. Fantastic.

Liking this. Feels very energetic!

Really nice, love the colours.

Like this a lot. Industrials (of which I count this) often suit this treatment.

Very nice Fujigraph Sir, well composed, good colour, and caught with still a bit of light in the sky.(y)

George.
Many thanks for the comments, I'm pretty pleased with this one even the wife likes it as this is whete she is from. So may get it printed and framed.
 
My thoughts exactly Sir, personally I'm getting a little tired of all this waffle about painterly effect/worms/creapy crawlies or whatever you want to call it or them.(y)

To me photography is all about taking photographs of the beauty of the world and the things in it, not putting everything under a microscope.

THAT'S IT, MY FIRST EVER RANT OVER.:D

George.

100% Agree with you George (y)
 
But several of your recent excellent photos have been exactly that - putting things under the microscope and then photographing them :D


There's always one.:rolleyes:
 
Very nice set of Fujigraphs Sir, all well composed with beautiful colours.(y)

George.
As always, your comments are very much appreciated George.
 
On our walk earlier, 1st time I`ve had the camera in my hand for a while. Blowing in the breeze.




Red Admiral by David Ore, on Flickr


Very nice Fujigraph Sir, well positioned in the frame, some good detail, and nice colours.(y)

George.
 
Just a simple candid street style Fujigraph taken of an elderly lady who looked as if she was enjoying her hot dog.

X-T1, 55-200mm Lens, 1/480th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld.
Just The Job (3)-03065 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking., (y):fuji:

George.
 
Last edited:
Just a simple candid street style Fujigraph taken of an elderly lady who looked as if she was enjoying her hot dog.

X-T1, 55-200mm Lens, 1/480th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld.
Just The Job (3)-03065 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking., (y):fuji:

George.
If that was me there’d be sauce all down my front! Well captured.
 
I went for a bit of a cycle down the river Boyne [scene of the infamous battle!] - lovely walkway down there [so I did get off the bike, lock it up, and have a walk] - and got a few decent shots. I felt I was missing a few things while there - I had only brought my small messenger, the X-T1 the 35mm, a macro ring and an MF tele. This ended up a little frustrating because I didn't bring a second body - and my Xpro1 was sat at home. Because of this I missed a few shots, like a Heron in flight along the river, because I was of course trying a bit of macro. Also, I wished I had either a decent tripod, or stabilization. I'd actually prefer the latter, by far, as I hate carrying tripods. I have a mini pixi tripod but it's useless for the area I was in, nowhere to set it down atop. This just reinforces my urge to get a small M43 body and a couple of lenses to have as a side kit. Also, I didn't bring my flash, so the close ups were trickier, but manageable. Anyway, here's a few from my trek -

Microshrooms by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Microshrooms #2 by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Acorn by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Knurl by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Hang on by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr


The mushrooms are absoloutely teensy btw, the caps no bigger than your little fingernail. They're growing in the moss on the side of a tree, this is where I wished I had the flash, to get better DOF and less chance of blurring, also some some back light might have worked. But, they turned out ok.
 
Last edited:
If that was me there’d be sauce all down my front! Well captured.

Thank you kindly Sir, sure is appreciated.(y)

"Me too !! I'm not one of the most elegant when eating somethin' like that":D

George.
 
I went for a bit of a cycle down the river Boyne [scene of the infamous battle!] - lovely walkway down there [so I did get off the bike, lock it up, and have a walk] - and got a few decent shots. I felt I was missing a few things while there - I had only brought my small messenger, the X-T1 the 35mm, a macro ring and an MF tele. This ended up a little frustrating because I didn't bring a second body - and my Xpro1 was sat at home. Because of this I missed a few shots, like a Heron in flight along the river, because I was of course trying a bit of macro. Also, I wished I had either a decent tripod, or stabilization. I'd actually prefer the latter, by far, as I hate carrying tripods. I have a mini pixi tripod but it's useless for the area I was in, nowhere to set it down atop. This just reinforces my urge to get a small M43 body and a couple of lenses to have as a side kit. Also, I didn't bring my flash, so the close ups were trickier, but manageable. Anyway, here's a few from my trek -

Microshrooms by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Microshrooms #2 by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Acorn by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Knurl by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Hang on by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr


The mushrooms are absoloutely teensy btw, the caps no bigger than your little fingernail. They're growing in the moss on the side of a tree, this is where I wished I had the flash, to get better DOF and less chance of blurring, also some some back light might have worked. But, they turned out ok.


"Excellent" set of Fujigraphs Sir, with some fine detail, with lovely warm colours, particularly liking the two mushroom shots.(y)

George.
 
Back
Top