If Palle Schultz says so then it must be true and it is

I am a Fuji X pro owner and for those who follow me from time to time then you know how much I love their products.

When the Fuji X Pro 2 came out recently there was a lot of naysayers wringing their hands over how the iso gets set on the camera.  It really blew my mind just how childish photographers could be and how petty they could be over something which in reality was a non issue.  Palle has a great video expressing his feelings which I found enjoyable.  I hope you do.

 

He then goes into the raw or jpeg conversation and discusses how and why he shoots the way he does.

9 thoughts on “If Palle Schultz says so then it must be true and it is

  1. The paid for SilkyPix is a lot less clunky and has highlight/shadow recovery 🙂

    I think each SW has certain strengths… USPs if you like… and these should guide the one we chose to use… (YMMV)

    I like colour and contrast, and SP offers all the Fuji film sims + several of their own, and the contrast toolset has sliders for gamma as well as contrast centre (and also black and of course, contrast itself)

    I love this feature!

    SP also has a decent batch editing mode, let’s you make tiffs, let’s you control demosacing strength and has 4 store rooms, where you can store 4 sets of editing adjustments you’ve made and paste them with a click (this includes multiple images)

    It also has a pretty decent tilt/shift correction module, a fairly easy to use HSL tool and so many WB adjustments that I haven’t full grasped them all (luckily the X-Pro2 is pretty good with AWB)

    Yup it’s weird, it’s slow and it’s clunky… But it also does lots of cool stuff for free!

    I actually paid for the pro version, no silly ‘Tony Soprano’ subscription model, and they seem to update it with new cameras and bug features quite regularly

    I can see why people don’t gel with it, and I can see how (even the paid for pro version) is a bit cumbersome for a high volume professional work flow, but I’ve been really happy since switching to it…

    I also have C1, and LR.

    LR is pretty good – heaps better with X-Pro2 files than it ever was with X-Pro1 ones! But the USP of LR (warning possible contentious comment ahead) is the 2 things it’s great for, cataloguing and farming out files to 3rd party apps for the things it not good at (namely layering, cloning, brush work, output sharpening, printing) I don’t really need and prefer to get in something like C1!

    On my ‘to do’ list is write a tutorial for the free SP that ships with the Fuji cameras…

    1. Excellent information Adam and thanks. I know that Silky has been around for a very long time and there are many people who love it. I shall give it another shot. I am not an Adobe fan. It is more about their corporate model and arrogance than anything else. They are for the most part a non responsive company and while there is nothing wrong with their program like Lightroom I really do not make use of their catalog features as I find them a pain in the ass to work with. I know others just love it but I work with Macs file model and it works out just fine for me. I wrote in an email to you about On1 software. You should take a look at it, if only to take a look at it. https://www.on1.com/downloads/

  2. The first video is very funny 🙂

    I enjoyed them both…

    He’s not wrong about the Fuji jpegs either… I have to look very hard to see the advantages of my RAW WF compared to the SOOC output, (but they are there..)

    The only downside of the SOOC RAW convertor is that it’s a fiddly and repetitive process if you need to do a lot of images

    1. Adam you are right about the in camera processing of the raw file. In another dimension the in camera process probably exists as a stand alone piece of software. One can dream. 🙂

      1. SilkyPix is pretty close..

        Especially the paid one..

        It’s gets more complicated to match the SOOC output if your in camera settings are not standard though

      2. Adam you are probably correct about Silkypix but I cannot speak from experience because the interface is just way out there for me. I guess if one spends enough time with it it will get easier to move through the controls and the meanings they attach to them. But it just so different than almost every processor I have used. I back every once in a while to make sense of it but generally wind up with Lightroom and or On1 for post processing. Now because of you I shall make that journey back to see how it once again works for the X files. 🙂

      3. I work pretty standard. Mainly use either Acros or Classic Chrome ( just my preferences ) with – 3 noise reduction. Everything else is pretty much standard settings. I do mess around with HL and Shadow with Acros however. But not much.

      4. I might do a post on matching SOOC to my RAW WF… I can’t really beat Acros with RAW… My jpeg settings are all set around helping me make RAW images, so the SOOC ones come out pretty flat! But still Acros with a touch of contrast added back afterwards, beats what I get from my BW RAW methods! Colour’s a bit harder (to beat RAW) as I often tweak separate colour channels, (for example I like Astia, but red looks pink, so Astia plus a red tweak is my friend!) – I could probably do this with the Jpegs, but if I’m going to load a file and edit it, it might as well be the RAW.. after all the SOOC Jpeg’s (via in-camera conversion) still available if I need it

      5. I agree about Acros. Fuji really did an excellent job with this. I do not flatten out my Jpegs for a raw look. While I use a raw workflow for the most part, there are times that I rely on a finished in camera Jpeg for expediency so the SOOC saves me time depending what my final goals are.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s