X-Trans conversion still bad according to this site

[Kneops]

Good of ASP to start providing support for X-Trans sensors, but the results at this moment are very poor according to a test by this website: https://translate.google.com/translate? ... edit-text=

I hope we will see some improvements soon.

[nipponichi]

I think it was a severe mistake by Corel to release Fuji support in this beta (alpha?) state and without marking it explicitly as beta.
Providing such image quality more than two years after X-Trans appeared and much later than other raw converters (including freeware) is a shame.
Who reads e.g. this feedback will never have a look at ASP again ...
For me the first image showed that there is absolutely not reason to test the trial now.

[stefanve]

to be fair good to see that they are finally regularly updating ASP

[tchetche]

Hope to see an update soon, because the result is bad with x-e2 RAW files

Here's a 100% crop showing clearly the pixelisation (or whatever it is called) on the edges:

[jknights]

Corel team have promised an update in November but the RAW conversion especially demosaicing of X-Trans RAW files is not as easy as the older Bayer stuff. Adobe still struggle with this and they have considerably more resources than Corel. That said there are many small developers and independent computer consultants who have been successful.

I hope there will be an update to ASP v2.1.0.40 that will fix the horrible problems with X-Trans conversions.
Not only is the demosaicing wrong but also the Chromatic Aberration control and White Balance.

[Dutchmm]

Corel have promised an update in November

Thanksgiving has come and gone, but if this is true, we non-Americans will have something for which to be grateful

[tchetche]

Good news: Looks better using v2.1.1.9

[Kneops]

Good news: Looks better using v2.1.1.9

I have no Fuji yet (but soon) and I only downloaded some sample raf files for testing.
Have you even been able to reproduce the result of a jpg straight from the camera with a raf file you edited in ASP?
I'm not talking about the artifacts you mention, but things like color, noise, contrast.

[tchetche]

I have no Fuji yet (but soon) and I only downloaded some sample raf files for testing.
Have you even been able to reproduce the result of a jpg straight from the camera with a raf file you edited in ASP?
I'm not talking about the artifacts you mention, but things like color, noise, contrast.

No, and to be honnest I'm not interrested to do so. The camera produce very nice and sharp jpg, so I mostly use it with the in-camera settings. I need to use raw file for studio shoot only.

But maybe starting with the Nostalgia plugin can help...

[nipponichi]

Quality of out-of-cam JPEGs (X-E1) and also of converted JPEGs by DarkTable is still much (!) better.