Apple Transition to MacOS

Nighthawk

Nighthawk

Rookie
Name
Marcus
Choosing a new camera and the associated sensor type now raises the question for me how quickly newcomers can get to grips with the operating system if they have never had anything to do with Apple products?
 
Nighthawk said:
Choosing a new camera and the associated sensor type now raises the question for me how quickly newcomers can get to grips with the operating system if they have never had anything to do with Apple products?
Click to expand...
It shouldn't take you long Marcus. I soon became accustomed to IOS after many years with Windows, and I am quite old! Welcome to the forum.
 
Hello Charles, thank you for your encouragement. The problem addressed only arose from the need to develop raw format images. Otherwise I could work with any hardware and software, which would also be significantly cheaper. ;)
 
I made the change from a lifetime of Windows and Android to all Apple less than a year ago. I had a harder time getting comfortable with the mobile side than I did with the computer. Overall the transition was fairly easy and I have no regrets.
 
I gave up Windows a few years ago because I really don't like Microsoft's company policy. The technical level is a completely different story, too bloated and full of bugs. That's why I decided to use Linux for my HTPC. Actually, it was more like jumping into ice-cold water, but after several weeks of learning by doing I managed to set up and optimize my system completely according to my needs. Despite the enormous performance of the hardware, there were incompatibilities with the software (Capture One Pro Fujifilm) required for my camera, which cannot be solved easily. So I am now faced with the task of combining the necessary with the useful, since I need a laptop for travel purposes anyway, so the decision was forced to go to MacOS. That wasn't originally planned, but it came about through the choice of my camera (Fujifilm GFX 100S) and the intention to also develop negatives. Otherwise, the choice would have fallen on another laptop with Linux already installed.

Actually, I'm not a fan of Apple and the hardware dependency of the operating system, but sometimes you just have to bite the bullet. :sneaky:
 
Nighthawk said:
Hello Charles, thank you for your encouragement. The problem addressed only arose from the need to develop raw format images. Otherwise I could work with any hardware and software, which would also be significantly cheaper. ;)
Click to expand...
I am curious. Maybe I misunderstand, but it sounds like you believe you need MacOS to develop certain raw images. What camera are you using?
 
Bobitybob said:
There are a number of free PP alternatives that are supported by that OS a long with Windows and macOS, some of which support Fuji GFX 100.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip Bob, but I would be grateful if you could tell me which of the programs actually supports one or more models from the Fuji GFX series.

I am well aware of the most important programs for Linux, but not a single one of them supports the Fuji GFX system. For example, Darktabel and RawTherapee still lack the necessary camera profiles, but even if those profiles were available, they would be of little use to me. The fact is that apart from the original software from Fujifilm, there are only two programs that can render raw image files from a latest generation X-Trans sensor correctly, namely Capture One and Silkipix and nobody else. :geek:

All other programs work with more or less sub optimal results, all of which came about through reverse engineering methods. Fujifilm X-Trans sensors are not simple Bayer sensors, you should keep that in mind. So now the well-known question arises, what does it matter?
To make it short, that's my point of view:
People argue that you can't see the difference if you're only posting to social media, or if you print at a specific size. And sure, that may be true, but it depends on many factors. Such factors include the ISO of the image, the subject, the print size, the method of printing, and so on. But I would argue that whether or not you can notice on a print or a webpage isn't the point. When I process an image, I want to know it's the best it can be, not whether someone else will notice or not. I'll notice it. I want to know if I save an image to my archive, it's at the best quality I could have made it, not whether or not anyone will notice because I will know.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, and there's something else that doesn't quite add up. It would hardly make sense to buy an expensive medium format camera and then save on development environment! :giggle:
 
Nighthawk said:
I am well aware of the most important programs for Linux, but not a single one of them supports the Fuji GFX system. For example, Darktabel and RawTherapee still lack the necessary camera profiles, but even if those profiles were available, they would be of little use to me. The fact is that apart from the original software from Fujifilm, there are only two programs that can render raw image files from a latest generation X-Trans sensor correctly, namely Capture One and Silkipix and nobody else. :geek:
Click to expand...
I am assuming that the sampling rate coming from GFX100S users is still rather low and that's probably why you don't have that much software options yet. With proprietary software, you will have to wait for their developers to get the samples either from the camera manufacturers or from the GFX100S users themselves. With open-source software, they have the same issue with the sampling rate BUT you can, of course, contribute.

To get the Darktable developers to have better sampling and support for your camera, you can follow the instructions here on and then make sure you send them the best samples you can. At the moment, they have samples from the GFX100S in the repository but they may not be adequate to create a profile on or the samples submitted to them may not be the best.
1656294709708.png

There is a chance it's already in Darktable if you have the latest version.

Rawtherapee, which has good support for the X-Trans sensor, is a good alternative and if your camera is still not supported in their embedded dcraw, you can send them samples based on their instructions. Here is the link to the instructions/method:

Adding Support for New Raw Formats - RawPedia

rawpedia.rawtherapee.com rawpedia.rawtherapee.com
. You will only have to read the last section, Needed Photo Sets.
1656294775012.png


I would start with Rawtherapee because of its immediate support of the X-Trans sensor.

It can be tasking but sampling can be a bit low on newer medium format cameras. You will also contribute to the development of these software. Cheers.
 
Nighthawk said:
I am well aware of the most important programs for Linux, but not a single one of them supports the Fuji GFX system. For example, Darktabel and RawTherapee still lack the necessary camera profiles, but even if those profiles were available, they would be of little use to me. The fact is that apart from the original software from Fujifilm, there are only two programs that can render raw image files from a latest generation X-Trans sensor correctly, namely Capture One and Silkipix and nobody else.
Click to expand...

The GFX system doesn’t use a X-Trans sensor, it uses a Bayer sensor the same as virtually all other digital cameras. I don’t have a GFX 100 but I do have a 50S II and use Lightroom on a Mac which provides profiles for all GFX cameras and GF lenses and as far as I am concerned is worth the £10 a month payment.

If you prefer to use Linux as you said then the pay off is reduced support from the major suppliers, but as has been stated above by others the smaller suppliers and freeware are catching up fast.
 
Iron said:
With proprietary software, you will have to wait for their developers to get the samples either from the camera manufacturers or from the GFX100S users themselves. With open-source software, they have the same issue with the sampling rate BUT you can, of course, contribute.
Click to expand...
Thanks Timo, I'm pretty familiar with all that, and no, I don't have to wait for the developers. Why should I bother following a procedure if the end result is far less than I expected?! I made my decision for good reasons, so I don't have the bad experiences that countless users have had before me.
 
Bobitybob said:
The GFX system doesn’t use a X-Trans sensor, it uses a Bayer sensor the same as virtually all other digital cameras. I don’t have a GFX 100 but I do have a 50S II and use Lightroom on a Mac which provides profiles for all GFX cameras and GF lenses and as far as I am concerned is worth the £10 a month payment.
Click to expand...
It's true that in the case of the GFX 100S a Bayer sensor is actually used, but the fact is that nobody handles Fuji's image files better than the software I mentioned, even with Bayer sensors, the technical parameters mostly differ, so I went with it. If your work environment suits you, then that's fine. In any case, I don't use Adobe products, as there have always been problems with Adobe Lightroom in the past.

The freedom you usually have in Linux is amazing, but you should also know the limitations of free software (see post #3). As already mentioned at the beginning, my concern applies exclusively to MacOS and not to any "alternatives" that some here see as a solution. :giggle:
 
Last edited:
rayvonn said:
Iridient Developer does X Trans files wonderfully well fyi.
Click to expand...
This is finally a really interesting note, I was able to read about the features of the software here. I have to admit that I didn't know the program before, but the description of how this software works is at least impressive and therefore worth a try. ;)
 
Nighthawk said:
This is finally a really interesting note, I was able to read about the features of the software here. I have to admit that I didn't know the program before, but the description of how this software works is at least impressive and therefore worth a try. ;)
Click to expand...
It’s very simple and in no way has the “design” capabilities of the Adobe programs, we’re just talking about converting from raw to jpeg with basic adjustments so where PS/LR can easily dig you out of the hole of a badly taken shot, I would suggest that getting the camera settings right before the shot should take priority when using Iridient Developer. But I suppose we should all be doing that anyway and once you do that, the files churned out by the software are great. What’s more it’s not just Fuji, the program rendered my Nikon and Ricoh files really well too. As a side point of principle, I believe that one should never not buy a camera just because a certain program (ie PS) doesn’t work with the files well.
 
Last edited:
Nighthawk said:
Why should I bother following a procedure if the end result is far less than I expected?! I made my decision for good reasons, so I don't have the bad experiences that countless users have had before me.
Click to expand...
Understood completely. Such can be too much of a bother.
rayvonn said:
What’s more it’s not just Fuji, the program rendered my Nikon and Ricoh files really well too.
Click to expand...
It's the first time I've heard of Iridient Developer and it really looks like it handles Fuji files rather well, especially for Windows and MacOS users. It's also worth noting that licensing is perpetual!
 

Similar threads

John King
Advice Wanted Refurbished laptops - Thoughts?
2
Replies
32
Views
458
John King
John King
gwydionjhr
Converting MS WLPG People tags to something functional for MacOS users
Replies
0
Views
275
gwydionjhr
gwydionjhr
doobs
Monitor Calibration
Replies
0
Views
394
doobs
doobs
Back
Top