Fujifilm Raw files

[Dickie43]

Can Affinity photo V2 process fujifilm RAW files as it does the DNG files? If not, how can fuji RAW files be processed? Please

Thanks,

 

[v_kyr]

Dependent on the underlayed used RAW engine (LibRaw and/or macOS RAW engine), APh v2 can process those Fujifilm RAW files which those engines do version or OS wise actually support!

• List of Supported Raw Formats (Cameras) for & Lens Correction list in Affinity 2.0.x

If your Fujifim cam is not supported by APh or macOS directly you have to reroute the RAW processing through the DNG RAW processor, or some other suitable higher end RAW processor (CaptureOne, Lightroom, Adobe CameraRAW, DxO, ... and so on) which supports your Fuji cam. - Further Fujifilm should usually bundle their own software with each sold Fuji cam, so that people can use their cams right out of the box without the need to buy any third-party RAW processor.

[NotMyFault]

55 minutes ago, Dickie43 said:

Can Affinity photo V2 process fujifilm RAW files as it does the DNG files? If not, how can fuji RAW files be processed? Please

Thanks,

 

Hi,

 

please review the lists found here:

 

The list will differ on Apple devices depending on the chosen RAW engine. Some newer camera models get support from Apple faster that from Serif.

DNG files are supported in principle, but it depends on the actualcamera model.

Edited September 6, 2023 by NotMyFault
Corrected link

[NotMyFault]

26 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

That will lead to lists for V1, not for V2 which has different supported cameras when using the Serif Engine (at least).

Now corrected

[v_kyr]

1 minute ago, NotMyFault said:

Now corrected ...

... to be just another redundant entry of one and the same link already provided!

[NotMyFault]

4 hours ago, v_kyr said:

... to be just another redundant entry of one and the same link already provided!

We posted at almost the exact time. My crystal ball cannot see if you have started to edit a new post before me. By chance you were a split second faster this time. No reason to call my answer redundant.

[v_kyr]

40 minutes ago, NotMyFault said:

We posted at almost the exact time. My crystal ball cannot see if you have started to edit a new post before me. By chance you were a split second faster this time. No reason to call my answer redundant.

You edited that (your initial v1 help link) later/afterwards (...some time after Walt's posting and one hour after your initial posting) to the already existed (and now redundant link), that's the reason I mentioned it. - So that has nothing to do with cristal ball viewing here, but instead more of recognizing if something has been already posted before by others.

[NotMyFault]

9 hours ago, v_kyr said:

You edited that (your initial v1 help link) later/afterwards (...some time after Walt's posting and one hour after your initial posting) to the already existed (and now redundant link), that's the reason I mentioned it. - So that has nothing to do with cristal ball viewing here, but instead more of recognizing if something has been already posted before by others.

Yes, absolutely. I corrected a outdated link to avoid some future reader using it. Our post began to be redundant at the time we started to write them (before hitting submit), not at the time I corrected the link. The only other option would be to hide my post. As Walt already answered incl quotation of the wrong link, it would be a bad move as Walters reply with the wrong link would stay.

It seems Walt has removed his replay in the meantime.

 

[v_kyr]

3 hours ago, NotMyFault said:

Yes, absolutely. I corrected a outdated link to avoid some future reader using it. ...

Ok, it's nothing to be talked/discussed any further and hopefully it will be for people (seeing the reference two times) then more clear here where to look after.

BTW and offtopic, one general thing I always dislike about the forum is, the repetitive/redundant questioning & answering about one and the same already handled themes. So peoples inability and laziness to search for something. - Meaning here, most questions have been over time already answered hundred times before, but people still tend to ask after the same ("...and always greets the groundhog" - like in that old movie with Bill Murray) things again and again. And best of all, if they begin their Q's pseudo-alibi wise with "...I've searched everywhere over the net and the forum here, but couldn't find any..." although the forum is full of postings about their question theme and one can find them easily in just one minute.

[NotMyFault]

1 hour ago, v_kyr said:

BTW and offtopic, one general thing I always dislike about the forum is, the repetitive/redundant questioning & answering about one and the same already handled themes.

I share this frustration in general. But on the other side, and this might be not understandable for you: some users less experienced with Affinity terms or forum software, might have actual difficulty to use use the search, or are in a desperate state looking for help. Affinity says all forum users should ignore posts which you simply don’t like (unless there are violating guidelines).

And don’t forget this forum is a social network for humans, not a „cold“ database. There are people posting here to have social contacts, and the technical/factual part is actually less or not important at all. Have mercy with them. 

[v_kyr]

1 hour ago, NotMyFault said:

I share this frustration in general. But on the other side, and this might be not understandable for you: some users less experienced with Affinity terms or forum software, might have actual difficulty to use use the search, or are in a desperate state looking for help. Affinity says all forum users should ignore posts which you simply don’t like (unless there are violating guidelines).

Fair points, though if it is that difficult in general for people to always find the right contents, then it's probably an indication for some needed overall better forum search capabilities. Maybe also certain things in the forum (like the FAQs and the like...) are also structure wise too much hidden, or not that much noticeable enough here (... can't really tell as I'am long time used to the overall forum structure, but many newbies are for sure not at all).

1 hour ago, NotMyFault said:

And don’t forget this forum is a social network for humans, not a „cold“ database. There are people posting here to have social contacts, and the technical/factual part is actually less or not important at all.

That's probably an interesting aspect to think more about, since more tech oriented people (like me here) are overall more oriented towards the technical software aspects and information exchange. So the usual purpose of such forums here.

1 hour ago, NotMyFault said:

Have mercy with them ...

I mostly have (up to some degree), since I am usually a patient and good-natured person. But there are certain threads in this forum where I can only shake my head with a moderately huge question marks in my eyes. 😉 - And to make it clear, I don't mean this thread here, which is theme wise pretty legitime to ask after for unexperienced people!

[walt.farrell]

5 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

Fair points, though if it is that difficult in general for people to always find the right contents, then it's probably an indication for some needed overall better forum search capabilities. Maybe also certain things in the forum (like the FAQs and the like...) are also structure wise too much hidden, or not that much noticeable enough here

Improvements have been made over time, for example, at the top of this forum you'll find the following: 

 

[v_kyr]

35 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

Improvements have been made over time, for example, at the top of this forum you'll find the following:

I know all this, ... but I don't see that these attempts are particularly fruitful so far, or that people do recognize or act after it at all.

[walt.farrell]

2 hours ago, v_kyr said:

I know all this, ... but I don't see that these attempts are particularly fruitful so far, or that people do recognize or act after it at all.

Unfortunately, there's no way to ensure that users even try to look for guidance on how to use the forums, before diving in and posting.