Yet since moving to the Fujifilm system, I have come across the term 'worms' being mentioned in relation to Fuji images on many occasions. Mainly in regards to the post-processing of files from the x-trans sensor, in Adobe's Lightroom.
Rock the Boat. Fuji X-E1 with Fujinon XF 27mm f2.8 pancake. f/5.6 @ 1/480th, ISO 200. C1: Classic Chrome recipe |
This kind of talk is, not surprisingly, cause for some concern. And also, for someone like me, requires a little more investigation. I don't want photos that look like watercolour paintings (unless that's the specific look I'm going for), and would certainly like to avoid 'worms' in my images if at all possible - thank you very much!
Rock the Boat detail - 100% crop of central portion |
But then again, it hasn't been sharpened at all in Lightroom. It is a jpeg direct from camera, which LR does not apply any sharpening to on import. I even have sharpening set to -1 in-camera for the above image, which was taken using my C1: Classic Chrome recipe. And it's plenty sharp enough (btw, Lightroom does have a default sharpening for RAW files upon import; Amount: 40, Radius: 1, Detail: 25). I have found the Fuji x-trans files to be super sharp straight out of camera, even the RAW files, and have honestly not felt the need to sharpen them later on in post. But what if I did need to?
Beach Sculpture with Worms? Fuji X-E1 with XF 27mm f2.8 |
Worms galore! |
But hang on a minute. This is, as I said, after a heck of a lot of sharpening has been applied. Sharpening that, as I've already stated with my Fujifilm files, I didn't need to apply. How much sharpening has been applied you ask? How about 140% (close to Lightroom's maximum) with a 0.5 radius and 60 detail. That's a serious amount of sharpening! How would other files hold up to this amount of pixel punishment? How about a Nikon or Canon RAW file?
Motukeikei Beach Low Tide. Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens. f/11 @ 1/13th, ISO 200 |
Nikon NEF at 200% 'oversharpened' in Adobe Lightroom. Yep - it's got worms! |
Home Sweet Home. Canon 650D with Canon EF-S 18-135mm. f/8 @ 1/400th, ISO 200. |
Wormy worms everywhere! |
These examples are admittedly fairly extreme. What happens if we dial back on the aggressiveness?
With all the images re-processed at a less aggressive sharpening in Lightroom (Amount 120%, Radius 0.5, Detail 20 and Masking of 80), the results are much better - all the worms have gone, from all the files. So it would appear that the worm issue is not a Fujifilm issue at all, but is in fact an Adobe Lightroom sharpening algorithm issue.
Want further proof? Sharpen your Fuji RAW files in Capture One's Fuji-specific RAW processing software (Capture One Express for Fujifilm is free). Ramp that sucker up to 1000% sharpening and there will be nary a worm in site! Not one. Of course it will look terrible for other reasons (never sharpen at 1000%), but it certainly won't have a 'worm' issue. The worm issue is Adobe's, not Fuji's.
So I'm moving my workflow to Capture One for my Fuji files then - right? Well, I have certainly downloaded Capture One Express 12 for Fujifilm (the free version), and if I was going to do a lot of sharpening of my Fuji files then I would most definitely be doing it in Capture One Express.
But (there's that 'but' again...), as I said somewhere near the beginning of this post, I have never noticed worm artifacts in my Fujifilm files - all of which have been processed in Lightroom, and none of which have, as yet, needed any sharpening. So my 'need' to switch to Capture One to avoid worm artifacts doesn't actually exist. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke..."
I'm happy/thrilled/ecstatic with the final results I'm getting processing my Fuji files through Lightroom. Maybe I'm not all that picky? Maybe I don't know what the hell I'm on about (that's a possibility). Maybe I can't be bothered learning (and paying $240NZ or $20NZ per month) another software programme?
Don't get me wrong, Capture One Pro looks like an amazing RAW processing engine. In many ways superior to Adobe's Lightroom. But I'm already paying for Lightroom, which in itself is superior to Capture One Express - the free version (not surprisingly). And who knows, maybe one day Adobe will fix their sharpening algorithm?
I appreciate this probably isn't the most scientific of studies. If you're not sure about my findings, go ahead and go through this process with your own files. Be my guest. I think you'll probably come to similar conclusions?
Finally, I want to end by restating my claim about this worm issue. This is not a Fuji file problem. It's an Adobe problem. I'm also really not quite sure why it's only being associated with Fuji? Why is there no 'Nikon worm issue' or 'Canon worm issue' pervading the internet? All of these manufacturer's files exhibit 'worms' in Lightroom when pushed. So forget Fuji. It's Adobe that has worms. Ewww!
your posting style is very awesome thanx for sharing keep it up. You've made some good points there. I checked on the internet for more info about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your views on this website. You can download All the version from our website........ PatchSearch
ReplyDeleteI fully agree. I love the production of my raw files from my Fujifilm XT4 via Lightroom.
ReplyDeleteOther Pro photographers constantly comment on the incredible clarity of my shots compared to their own high end Canon / Minolta etc etc and enquire as to my set up. I honestly can’t see how I could improve the quality of my best images. Particularly very long ND10/15 full sunlight daytime exposures of the ocean. These have to be perfectly sharp on editing...and they are!
So I have zero complaints or concerns re ‘worms’
Sure, if there is an issue then lightroom need to sort it.
By far my biggest bugbear with lightroom is the ridiculous amount of ram it uses. Often 18gb on one image with all other windows / programs closed. Why so much? Photoshop never exceeds 4 gb or any other editing software.
Adobe’s customer service response is useless...they never answer why or suggest they might address this issue. You’d think with the amount of travel photographers etc travelling the world and needing to minimise kit size and weight they’d make sure a new generation MacBook Air with the standard 8gb could handle it easily. I ordered mine with 16gb purely for lightroom. It was an expensive upgrade added on purely for the sake of lightroom.
Admittedly I just massively digressed....point being, lightroom need to stop resting on laurels and sort out some important issues!!