Fuji Worm artifacts with LR

Bobby T

Out Of Nowhere
I recently read an article on Fujirumors.com about sharpening Fuji files. The article stated that LR still causes worm artifacts. Which I've heard about but never given any thought to. Due to me not shooting foliage and grass. And I did most of my post work in Capture One. Having recently reacquired LR I felt this could be an area of concern. So, I checked out some recent photos which I had run through LR. Sure enough, the wormy artifacting was there. Apparently directly affected more by the detail slider than the sharpening slider. I ran the same image through C1. The artifacts were not present in the C1 edit. Adobe still has some work to do with it's algorithms for Fuji files. Which they will have to do given Fuji's ever increasing presence in the market, including more and more professional shooters.

If you're still with me at this point and haven't already moved on or started typing your reply. This is the most important thing to remember. To see the worm artifacts in the images, they must be enlarged to 2:1 in LR. Or to 100-200% crop. While this is a real issue, it is an issue to pixel peepers and discovered by pixel. Of the images I have posted here, on social media, and other sites edited in LR. A total of 0 people have pointed out the artifacts. I haven't ordered any prints, but I'd bet the artifacts won't show up.
 
I tried to get the editing as close as possible in the two programs.
LR
i-4np2v22-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


crop
i-ZcRwPcM-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Capture One
i-Tt4SBrF-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


crop
i-wCtDtDN-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


For comparison, a straight out of camera jpg shot in 1:1 format, sharpening set to +2, using acros
i-JxBs93s-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


crop
i-qL2DtcP-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


In the C1 crop you can still see pores in the skin and detail in the glasses. In the LR crop the wormy artifacts covers the entire image. But you can see how much cropping/enlargement has to be done in order to see the artifacting compared to the full image. Not surprisingly, the sooc jpg looks the best and retains the best resolution at a huge crop.
 
This is why I’ve chosen a path to trying to utilise in camera settings as well as possible. Sooc jpegs are at best superbs. However at times also frustrating. But time saved in PP is a bonus :)
I agree with all of this. More and more I’ve been shooting just in jpg. When I shoot raw it is either for more latitude in shadows and highlights. Like for a landscape. For portrait work where it will need to go through that whole process of getting the skin right for the client. Or purely for the safety net of having the raw files when shooting something like an awesome event. It’s easier to capture the moment and get the light correct. Then think about B&W or or which film simulation to use later in post.
 
Yes, of course usage of RAW has benefits. I’m lucky to have photography as a hobby only and shooting for myself. It’s not so serious. Then challenging oneself with the settings and making decisions on the fly for soocs is a good therapy and keeps your thoughts away from day job (y)
 
I watched a Youtube video on this subject yesterday (by someone called Omar) and his conclusion matches yours @Bobby Tingle . I've read about this a few times on DPR as well, but every time this is discussed the tone gets very "shouty" and stops being objective.

This is the first proper explanation of this that I've seen. Like you, no one has ever pointed out worms in any of my pictures and I can't say that I have ever seen any - but I have my sharpening set to a default within LR and rarely go into that area. I shoot RAW+JPEG for the 1:1 screen preview but always process the RAWS in LR, though I do try to get everything correct in camera to avoid having to do heavy lifting in PP. I will start taking a look to see if I do get worms, for academic interest.
 
For people that like to stick to Lightroom (like me): you might be better off keeping the amount of sharpening low in Lightroom and apply additional sharpening in Photoshop. From what I've seen on the 'net, that seems to yield better results, but of course it's more work and you end up with an additional file alongside the raw.
 
I don't really use LR for my Fuji files, but in general I find many of LR's sliders to offer waaaaay more than anyone would ever want!

At some point in Fuji folklore, someone made popular the notion that Fuji RAFs needed 100% on the detail slider

lr-df.JPG


Personally I feel this is a mistake, well with the 24mp files at least.... YMMV

For my opinion...

In LR RAFs can look better using a large radius, little detail and a reasonable amount of sharpening

lr-0d.JPG


These are low res screen grabs, and I put very little effort into this :D

Both images have a degree of worminess to them... (do note zero NR and masking though) but the high detail one doesn't really offer much detail either!

I'm posting to show that a lot of LR sharpening can be applied it's just IMO the detail slider that care should be taken with...

Those of you using LR will no doubt have far better settings honed over many images of usage...

...not these quick and dirty ones cobbled together by a mildly hungover street photographer, who never really shoots anything with texture or foliage etc

For anyone madly in love with LR, and who gets sleepless nights over worminess

Then IMO bung $30 (or whatever it costs) to Brian at Iridient and get the transformer tool

lr-xid.JPG



(I went a bit far with this last one, but you get the idea)
 
With an X100T arriving this week and having not shot Fuji for at least 5 years can I ask what is the preferred RAW converter these days. I ditched Adobe 6 months ago and have DxO EditLab, On1 Photo RAW, Luminar and a few odds and ends. Yes I collect software as much or more than I collect cameras. :laugh1:
 
With an X100T arriving this week and having not shot Fuji for at least 5 years can I ask what is the preferred RAW converter these days. I ditched Adobe 6 months ago and have DxO EditLab, On1 Photo RAW, Luminar and a few odds and ends. Yes I collect software as much or more than I collect cameras. :laugh1:

You know you’re going to get 7 different opinions from 5 people on this right? :D
 
@AndyMcD That is why I started looking at this. For academic purposes. My intent here was not to bash on LR. Just to see if the artifacts were there. As I had not noticed them during the couple of weeks I have been using LR again.

@Adam Bonn I think that idea of cranking the detail slider to 100 started with the 16mp sensor and the interwebs spread it as gospel. It may have actually worked for the files from that sensor. But I agree with you that it is horrible for the files from the current 24mp sensor. You definitely have it correct with minimal use of the detail slider.

@bilzmale OnOne Raw does a good job with Fuji files. Capture One is one of the best. Along with Iridient Developer. Silky Pix is probably worth a look also.
 
I run everything through Lightroom with zero sharpening. If it's a keeper it goes to PS or a plugin.
That seems to be the general consensus of the internet. A bit of reading determined that PS handles sharpening of Fuji files better than LR. Also Iridient was a popular choice for sharpening Fuji files in LR.
 
One thing that I struggle with in all this is that LR sharpens the pics a second time when exporting/printing, so do we really need this pre-sharpening (especially given that there is no AA filter on the Fuji X sensors)?
 
One thing that I struggle with in all this is that LR sharpens the pics a second time when exporting/printing, so do we really need this pre-sharpening (especially given that there is no AA filter on the Fuji X sensors)?

You can turn that off!

This is one area of LR that I personally find to be half baked...

As what amounts to “small, medium or large” (in the output sharpening box) isn’t very user configurable

In SilkyPix (which is my raf go to) the output sharpening box has amount/radius/masking and each is completely user configurable

In LR (but not on fuji files, which I don’t use in lr) I tend to turn global sharpening right down (15) then use the brush/radial filter to sharpen the part(s) I want to stand out a bit (creative sharpening)
 
I do process my RAW files in Irridient Developer with no LR sharpening and my final sharpen is in PS smart sharpen , to taste. As I have not been very active lately I don't have files to try in Skylum, but usually my keepers don't need much. I try to crop when I shoot, and adjust EV on the fly.
 
I did some more tinkering with a different file. In the LR version I was able to get rid of the wormy look by dialing down the detail slider. Overall the sharpness is still a lot better in Capture One. But again, this is at the pixel peeping level of cropping.

LR
i-bcWTrxc-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


crop
i-QgKnx3t-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


C1
i-nTLt9S9-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


crop
i-nqs9Z3W-L.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
And more tinkering. The nose area retains a good bit of detail. The worm artifacts are lessened quite a bit. They are still there if you take this huge crop and magnify even further.
Clarity 15
Sharpness 75
Radius 2.3
Detail 10

DSCF0008-3.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

This is the original image for comparison
DSCF0008.jpg
 
Back
Top