Did Lightroom just dethrone Capture One and DxO as kings of FujiFilm RAW handling!?!?

Lightroom just added a denoise tool that's optimized for X-Trans RAW files and it is a GAME CHANGER. Can it outperform DxO PureRAW and Capture One for FujiFilm? SHOCKING results!

Chapters:
0:00 Welcome / Splash screen
0:40 A little backstory
1:47 Tl;dw
2:45 Detailed RAW vs Denoised RAW vs DxO comparisons
23:26 Conclusions / Wrap-up

__________
Products used:

Adobe Lightroom Classic 12.3
DxO PureRAW 2 & 3
__________
Production equipment

FujiFilm X-T30
FujiFilm XF 18-50mm f/2.8-4
Takstar SCG-598 microphone
Fifine K669B microphone
Viltrox VL-162T LED Panel
Ulanzi VL 49 RGB LED Panel (2)
Ulanzi L2 RGB COB
Neewer 33" White Soft Umbrella
Amazon Basics 7' Aluminum Light Stands
Tairoad Q555 Tripod
Amazon Kindle Fire HD 10+
Joby Gorillapod 500
BFollow HDMI adapter
Acer Swift X
Wondershare Filmora 12
Streamlabs Desktop

[leimleim]

very good results indeed, but Capture one quality is without creating a 4x-image file size, until LR be able to obtain those resulte without using enhance details there is no much sense in changing from capture one in my own usage.

[jonasfrey]

Just tried the new DxO Raw today and Lightroom doesn't stand a chance sadly... They updated again as it seems

[bobdrawbaugh]

This is so frustrating trying to find a Raw processor for Fuji RAF files. Maybe it time to move on from the xtrans senior rather than waste all this time trying to find a processor that works. The file size is a non starter for me.

[dungbeetle.]

As a fellow Fuji user, I thank you.
Great video, Ryan. 👍

[kennethleephotography]

I’ve been considering if high megapixel cameras will benefit more. My theory is that smartphones which are super pixel density have come so far with this formula of using AI noise reduction and sharpening

[cloive]

Hi Ryan. Really interesting and useful. Do you mind if I ask, elsewhere you suggest reducing Lr sharpening to nil on import. Would you still suggest this - given this denoise option? What effect does it have? Thank you

[fremandg]

A rare criticism! However I’ve noticed on two of your videos, that when showing side by side, you a) use a cursor that is barely visible & b) the info distinguishing between the two is difficult to follow with the white writing in top left corner. A simple coloured arrow above each would do it or A. B. As colours are universal then the message is easier to follow! Love the humour captions!

[fremandg]

Also the models eyes are clearer than the right less darkness!

[fremandg]

Yes you definitely need to change the cursor colour and size and distinguish A. & B. Your right, but I was struggling to follow, where you are pointing and flicking!

[PassionPete]

How would a Fujifilm image processed with LR Denoise or DxO PureRAW compare to Lightroom's handling of a RAW file from Sony or Canon?

[kennethleephotography]

Is there a way to convert tons of images at once?

[christopherziemacki]

Does it mean that it is good practice to push all Fujifilm RAWs through this LR process? If there is no noise should I at least use the enhance functionality? I am asking because DNG take a lot more of space to store.

[fvillami]

Excellent video and detailed comparison. Thanks for sharing. There’s hope for Fuji users on LR.

[Inky_Black]

Useful and pertinent community engagement.

[nicolacenni]

Not even near about time needed for image process with capture 1.

[KrunoslavStifter]

Can we please not use GAME CHANGER and SHOCKING for every video one is desporate for clicks, please? Thank you. This is not WWF. And not, Lr/ACR de-nosing AI technology is about similar or slightly better than DXO DeepPrimeXD, with some pretty hefty workflow penalty to pay. You have to use it in a way it creates large DNG file, that does not support other "enhance features" such as so called "super resolution". The DNG it creates is about 3.5x the size of original RAW file and it only works with original RAW files, no DNG and not JPEGs or TIFF's, making it similar to DXO limited to only original raw files. Meaning both DXO and Adobe are not a contenders in JPEG/TIFF category at all, Topaz Denoise AI is the only viable option. For now Topaz wins that by default. Also Adobe processing as good results it offers is the slowest of the competition with as I've said very hefty price to pay for the process. Comparing DXO PureRAW to Adobe NR AI is not the best method of comparing since PhotoLab version offers more flexibility over how noise is handled and offers better workflow. In the end, you have three competitors with strengths and weakness, and depending on specific needs one might be better for you than the other, but there is no clear winner that is best in everything at the moment. So far from Shocking results and game changer hyperbolic its really just another competitor on the market. Long over due by the way. I suggest you leave WWF analogies for something else, its not really applicable here.

P.S.

After comparing DXO PhotoLab 6 with its DeepPrime XD that has a slider for dialing in specific way if which noise is handled and with other options like lens correction sliders that can be fine tuned, you can get pretty much the same results as with Adobe NR AI. Virtually identical noise reduction in high and low frequency areas. DXO Pure RAW has no option but default noise reduction which is I think set to maximum, so you really have no control over it. And while good, its preferable to use PhotoLab because of its many sliders and fine tune control. So if you are comparing purely results and not workflow, that would be more appropriate comparison, especially if you are into WWF headlines. If on the other hand you are comparing whole workflow than you need a more comprehensive comparison methods since the workflow can make a big difference in storage space, speed of processing and ease of use.


The state at the end: What’s next?

"Denoise is our third Enhance feature. We’re proud of what it can do today, but we’re already looking ahead to make it even better. For instance, we have some ideas on how to use additional training data to improve resolution. We’d like to support additional file formats and combine Denoise with Super Resolution. We’re even looking into ways to speed up the workflow by not needing to make a new DNG file. It’s a very exciting time, and you can expect us to continue making big strides forward in AI-powered image editing."

So really, this is first step for Adobe and needs a lot more work for a mature workflow, which hopefully will come in the future. If they make good on their promise than we might revisit that WWF headlines. In the meantime, its just another competitor with some pros and many cons, waiting to mature as a feature set and be better integrated into worflow. For now, DXO PhotoLab is superior in day to day image processing, since it does not need separate DNG files that are large in size, and can be applied directly as part of other other adjustment, making it much more suitable for all images, not just high ISO files. Adobe for now really pays off when shooting high ISO or for chosen few shots, otherwise one pay a heavy penalty for simple noise reduction.

[humanelements]

I've been shooting Fujifilm for over 6 years now and would periodically test Lightroom to see where it stands vs Capture One. LR definitely has upped its game; not only with Enhance Details and AI NR but also its basic handling of the latest 40-megapixel sensors. The sharpening settings don't ruin X-Trans files anymore (it still does worm up the older sensors without using a workaround or setting Detail to 0). I'm tempted to finally switch over to LR but the time invested in mastering Capture One makes it less palatable. Especially when I could just add DxO Pure RAW plugin to my workflow and have comparable AI NR...

Glad to see LIghtroom is finally taking Fuji RAFs seriously, at least!