Is anyone using Iridient Developer, or Iridient X-Transformer for Fuji X files?
More generally, do you try to evaluate raw converters for use with your specific camera or for comparative performance (i.e., judging one converter against others) in general? If so, what kinds of standards do you apply?
Original contents copyright 2017 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Stephen Kennedy: "Hi Mike, Long time reader, first time poster…I tested the X-Transformer beta on Mac El Capitan on Saturday and found it to be too good to ignore. Actually, it's great.
"I already had a license to Iridient Developer, but rarely used it because I found the back and forth between Lightroom to be too burdensome, notwithstanding the integration as an external editor. Iridient Developer renders great results, but for me the workflow in Lightroom was better for my needs. Like a lot of people who have used Lightroom from the beginning, it's hard to start over. In my case I often used the out of camera jpeg instead of the .raf files mostly because Lightroom's Fuji simulations still cannot achieve the "look" that I can get from the X-T2 jpegs, and that doesn't even address Lightroom's relatively poor handling of .raf detail and resolution.
"But now, for a mere $30, I have the best of both worlds. Finally!
"In my brief testing and use, I simply 'process' the .raf files in X-Transformer using the default settings and then begin my 'normal' finishing in Lightroom. Since Saturday I have re-processed six shooting sessions to get the feel of the app and have it systemized/optimized so that this added step only adds about 90 seconds per session of finals. Each session being a selection of about 15 files of .raf selects.
"The detail that X-Transformer pulls out of the files is superior to anything that I've been able to achieve in Lightroom natively. I'm not a Capture One user but I was testing that app last month and compared a few of the .raf conversions that I saved from that evaluation. I found C1 to be excellent at rendering .raf files but in this case X-Transformer is still better in the area of detail and resolution, though not by much. As an aside, I declined to proceed with C1 because I have such a sunk cost of experience with Lightroom and I had hoped that the Iridient DNG Mac beta would arrive, which it did. I also didn't want to start from scratch with C1 and I'm not keen on the fact that Phase doesn't support non-Phase medium format cameras like Fuji. I don't want to find myself in a situation where an expensive software will work for one of my cameras but maybe not for another, though I’m not yet a Fuji MF owner.
"Iridient touts this as beta software but in my opinion it's as complete as I need it to be. I don't what future releases will address, but it does seem to have high resource demands as even a folder of 15 images has my computer fans on high. I have a mid-2015 MacBook Pro 2.8 Ghz with 16GB RAM and a 1TB SSD and it looks and sounds like the app uses all the processing power that I have.
"For me there are no downside to this app/workflow, but I could see that if a user has a production environment where there is a need to convert hundreds of images how this 'intermediate' step might not be appealing. But for me, working with ten to 20 'select' images at a time, it's really a huge enhancement and really makes the X cameras shine for .raf files.
"The fact that it's only $30 is really astounding too. I think everyone should give it a try."
Dennis Mook: "Just started testing it over the weekend. It is still in beta, as far as I can find. Preliminary observations are that, with default settings, excellent detail and resolution, accurate color rendition and smooth tonalities in the raw conversion but does generate a little bit of digital noise. Tradeoff, I suspect. However, the noise is so minimal and unobtrusive that it is easily tamed if desired. This converter is worthy of more exploration.
"However, the latest version of Lightroom CC is not now very far behind so if you don't want to add to or change your editing process, you might just want to stick with Lightroom.
"Take a look at Thomas Fitzgerald's site. He has worked with it on a Mac and has some interesting comments.
"I use Lightroom as a baseline and go from there. I've experimented with DxO and Capture One. Previously, I've been happy with Lightroom's raw conversions with every camera except the Fuji. Each converter has its pros and cons. As I mentioned above, Adobe has stepped up its game considerably since Fuji first introduced the X-Trans sensor. It is not the absolute best converter, but it is pretty good converting the Fuji raw images now. Only the most critical pixel peepers may not be happy, in my opinion. In the end, Lightroom will be good enough for those who don't like to, or want to, change the way they edit their images."
scott kirkpatrick: "Avoiding serious artifacts in X-Trans files was a big deal at first, but there have been fewer complaints this year as the new 24-MP products have rolled out. When I looked at files at 100% to see what the problems were, AccuRaw (Sandy McGuffog) seemed best, and there was a series of blog posts on his website to describe how he went about it. Capture One picked up what seem to be his techniques. Iridient now has loyal adherents that say it could be the best at X-Trans, but I don't own a copy. And Adobe does OK by now. The three-slider sharpening stage in Capture One and AccuRaw seems to be a part of managing the more complex demosaicing."
BERND REINHARDT: "I used to switch between Capture One and Lightroom, but these days I just stick to Lightroom. A couple of years ago I decided to stop adjusting my workflow to new cameras. My workflow is based on Lightroom and if a new camera doesn't perform well in my workflow, it fails my most important requirement."
Mark Kinsman: "I use Irridient Developer (IR) for most of my image processsing. I start in Lightroom 6.9 (stand alone version), do a quick review of the images for composition, etc., then edit in IR to make initial edits to tonality, color, sharpening and noise reduction (if needed), then save the file or batch if I'm processing several images at once. This opens the import image process in LR to bring them back in for further refining. I like the development sliders in LR for doing the final tweaks for output to print or screen. More often than not, the default settings in IR are all that's needed to bring out the best in Fuji files. Irridient Developer is noticeably better for Fuji files. This whole process only adds a little time to the total time for processing an image."
Marcelo Guarini: "I use Iridient for my Sigma dp2 Merrill. Is almost the only raw developer that support the Merrill cameras. Wonderful results."