Live data from Hacker News

Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

github.com

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#31
Great to see more Fuji X attention, their native software isn't great. Looking forward to trying it out with my older X-T20, which appears supported[1] surprisingly

I was about to mention the Fudge[2] app and its underlying library, but its already listed as a reference, nice!

[1] https://www.fujifilm-x.com/en-us/support/compatibility/softw...

[2] https://github.com/petabyt/fudge

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#32

While file format (RAF, DNG) often is an acronym, “raw” by itself simply references raw image data; it is not an acronym, not a trademark, and does not need all caps. The mistake of “shouting” raw is perpetuated in the wild even by serious companies, but let’s not let Apple degrade our literacy[0]. I’ll point to Adobe which does, in fact, use the correct spelling[1]. [0] It is fine when used as part of idiomatic spel…

RAW gets all caps the same way TXT, JPG, CMD, SH, BAT, and etc. get all caps. That is, you are also perfectly free to say raw files, text files, JPEG files, command files, shell scripts, and batch scripts, or .txt files, .jpg files, .cmd files, .sh scripts, and .bat scripts, and not everyone uses the same convention (or even consistently a single one).

I don't really see "SH" being used instead of "sh". JPG and JPEG get the uppercase treatment because it is actually an initialism (Joint Photographic Experts Group) unlike "raw".

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#34
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RAW gets all caps the same way TXT, JPG, CMD, SH, BAT, and etc. get all caps. That is, you are also perfectly free to say raw files, text files, JPEG files, command files, shell scripts, and batch scripts, or .txt files, .jpg files, .cmd files, .sh scripts, and .bat scripts, and not everyone uses the same convention (or even consistently a single one).

I don't really see "SH" being used instead of "sh". JPG and JPEG get the uppercase treatment because it is actually an initialism (Joint Photographic Experts Group) unlike "raw".

Some are more used than others, and indeed, JPEG is an initialism. My point is the uppercase treatment doesn't depend on initialism, i.e. RAW doesn't have to stand for something to be capitalized because uppercasing file extensions is just a thing that happens.

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#35

While file format (RAF, DNG) often is an acronym, “raw” by itself simply references raw image data; it is not an acronym, not a trademark, and does not need all caps. The mistake of “shouting” raw is perpetuated in the wild even by serious companies, but let’s not let Apple degrade our literacy[0]. I’ll point to Adobe which does, in fact, use the correct spelling[1]. [0] It is fine when used as part of idiomatic spel…

Funny, I've been shooting digitally since 2007 and I've never seen RAW spelled other than RAW. I guess we've been doing it all wrong :shrug:

I’ve been in the film industry since 2010 and yes I see RAW but any camera department will tell you it’s just “raw” unless you’re talking about a specific raw codec that has “RAW” in the name. The reason no one corrects anyone is that it’s such a common thing and it doesn’t have any major consequences. “We are shooting raw” vs. “REDCODE RAW” (most people just say “red raw” but just giving full name for clarity).

There’s no need to be lowkey rude about it either way.

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#36

While file format (RAF, DNG) often is an acronym, “raw” by itself simply references raw image data; it is not an acronym, not a trademark, and does not need all caps. The mistake of “shouting” raw is perpetuated in the wild even by serious companies, but let’s not let Apple degrade our literacy[0]. I’ll point to Adobe which does, in fact, use the correct spelling[1]. [0] It is fine when used as part of idiomatic spel…

This is one of those "well actuallys" battles that has been lost a long, long time ago my photographic friend.

Yes, "RAW" itself isn't a format like TXT or an acronym like JPEG, but in practice RAW appears alongside other all-caps names like JPG, DNG, TIFF, etc. in menus and documentation and so the industry has mostly converged on writing it RAW for consistency.

Fujifilm writes "RAW": https://fujifilm-dsc.com/en/manual/x100vi/connections/raw/

Nikon writes "RAW": https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/zf/en/raw_processing_59...

Canon writes "RAW": https://www.usa.canon.com/learning/training-articles/trainin...

Leica writes "RAW": https://leica-camera.com/sites/default/files/pm-73002-Leica-...

Even Adobe writes "RAW": https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/file-types/image/raw.htm...

Descriptively yours,

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#37
post #7
post #3

> FilmKit uses WebUSB to connect directly to your camera, your camera's own image processor handles the conversion. FilmKit is a static client-side app, hosted on Github Pages

Isn't that same as a jpeg then? Edit: There are some parameters: > FilmKit communicates PTP (Picture Transfer Protocol) over USB, the same protocol that X RAW STUDIO uses. The camera does all the heavy lifting: it receives the RAF file and conversion parameters, processes them, and returns a JPEG.

More like a WebGUI for your camera.

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always recommend RawTherapee for serious photography work. In addition to having been (at least originally) written by a complete colour theory geek and featuring a treasure trove of knowledge in the form of its companion RawPedia, it supports a whole host of raw formats, X-Trans RAFs among them (although Foveon X3Fs regrettably still an open issue).

I appreciate RawTherapee too and used it for a long time, but I started to notice that it really can’t match DPP for rendering Canon raw images. The denoising is nowhere near as good and it takes a lot of work to make the colors come out as good as DPP which has same processing profiles like “Faithful” that just look great out of the box.

What is DPP? I find it courteous in a conversation when the full name is provided before the first occurence of an acronym.

I had to look for it and for those who are as puzzled as I found Canon Digital Photo professional (RAW Image Processing, Viewing and Editing Software).

Pentax user here (hobby level), I am not aware of the other brands ecosystems.

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#39

While file format (RAF, DNG) often is an acronym, “raw” by itself simply references raw image data; it is not an acronym, not a trademark, and does not need all caps. The mistake of “shouting” raw is perpetuated in the wild even by serious companies, but let’s not let Apple degrade our literacy[0]. I’ll point to Adobe which does, in fact, use the correct spelling[1]. [0] It is fine when used as part of idiomatic spel…

I appreciate the breakdown.

But practically speaking, does it really matter? The goal of language is to communicate, and in this case we all understand what the author is referring to when they reference "RAW".

It's like chastisting someone for saying "Band-Aid" instead of "bandage". One refers to a specific company that makes small adhesive bandages and the other is the thing itself. But we all understand what you mean when you say "band-aid".

And isn't that the point?

Re: Fujifilm X RAW STUDIO webapp clone

#40

The only reliable raw converter that can handle Fuji color is Capture One. But they have collaboration with Fuji, I don't believe that conversion algorithm is open sourced. But it would be interesting if AI coding agent could potentially reverse engineer the algorithm.

Doesn't Adobe Lightroom these days also have proper RAW conversion and the Fuji film simulations?
Post reply on HN