CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You cannot adjust directly the default actions in LR for RAW. The insides of LR are the same as Camera RAW where basic sharpening and noise reduction are applied when the RAW image is imported. These are minor changes and amount to nothing at all in terms of processing. But, if you inspected the imported version with a viewer that renders the RAW file rather than the embedded JPEG preview, you will see LR has done a small amount of something during the import.

To your question, no, you don't need to process the RAW file prior to import. But once in the LR editor, then it is your artistic and technical vision to complete the processing. Where your vision includes processing that is repetitive and / or standard changes you make to all images (keywords, sharpening, noise, saturation, lens corrections, clarify, vibrance, and so on), you can create Import and / or Develop presets that perform these actions automatically.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

OK, I found the section you are referring to. Yes, I should have posted there.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

The options to which I refer are:
-Copy as DNG
-Copy
-Move
-Add

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Should I choose "Copy as DNG" when transferring files from the SD card directly into Lr ?

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Good point. This never occurred to me. I need make sure "apples are being compared to apples"

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Yes, this is probably half my problem right here. Glad you mentioned this. Image 2 is half the resolution of the Image 1

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

It's really a personal preference issue, your preferred workflow may differ from mine. Personally I choose "Add", since I've already put them in named folders before importing. Others use LR to catalog their photos, which would lead to one of the other options.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

This kind of defeats the purpose of Lightroom's excellent catalog. The point is you don't have to create a subject-based folder system. You may find that a chronological system is best for organizational reasons. What do you do when a subject can be part of more than one folder in your system? Do you create multiple copies of the image? Here is an example - you go on a trip, you visit museums, a nature/landscape area, shoot some people, and you go to an outdoor concert. Do you put the images in a folder named descriptively for the place(s) you visited, do you put some of the images in a folder called museums, another called landscapes, another called street photography - etc etc etc.

Lightroom gives you a myriad of organizational tools to let you work with a single copy of each image, but you can have any image become part of a number of different collections - virtual groupings of images aggregated by subject. You also have keywords, which can be hierarchical, virtual copies in the event you have multiple editing approaches for a specific image like a color image and a black and white of the same image, etc etc etc.

It's best for you to explore the capabilities of the new software than to ignore them and continue to use a less efficient system because it is familiar to you.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You are not crazy, and the advice from other non-Fuji users, while well-intentioned, is completely wrong. The XTrans processor produces raw files that are known to cause problems with Lightroom, especially with details. They get clumped together - users sometimes refer to it as the "watercolor" effect.

Some have great success pre-processing raf files using Iridient's X-Transformer to convert the raf files to Lightroom-compliant dng files.

http://www.iridientdigital.com/products/xtransformer.html

These converted files will retain all the good things the Fuji camera records, and you can then edit the images to a better result in Lightroom. Without the converter, Xtrans raf files look like junk. So yes, it makes perfect sense to "pre-treat" your raf files before editing in LR.

Also, try exposing to the right -with the Fuji. You may notice that you can really push the highlights and still recover them - as much as 2-3 stops. You will get a sense of how much you can overexpose the highlights and still recover stuff - even from the jpegs. The Fuji is one of the few cameras I feel comfortable shooting just jpegs - despite the fact that I shoot everything else raw. The jpegs have lots of optical correction, loads of highlight detail and distortion correction, to make them as good if not better than editing the raw file.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If you're not already using DNG, I would recommend against making a switch to that format without first making a detailed investigation of this format and defining your own specific purpose(s) to make that change. This can quickly digress to a filter vs no filter expression of personal opinions. Your own investigation of the benefits against your personal processing needs, both the actual and theoretical, is needed to make your own decision.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

As it stands now, I use "Add" for the reason you mention - they are already in named folders before importing.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

But as stated previously by one or more of the others, it's really wasting one of Lightroom strongest features, that being the virtual limitless ability to catalog and cross-reference without duplicating files. I hope to change my workflow to take advantage of this element someday, but it will be an "off-season" project.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Actually, I should have all my images in my Lightroom Raw Images folder inside Lightroom - all 4,000+ images and then use key words to select the ones I want. I think this is how it is supposed to work. So by having at least 200 sub-folders inside my Lr Raw Images folder, I don't need to take advantage of Key words because my subject images are all in specific folders. But I set up the present system back in 2015 when I was just starting out in Lightroom and knew nothing about it. But I have picked up a few tips in the past 3+ years.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Gene, Inside my Lightroom Library, I have a folder I named: “Lightroom RAW Images” which has 4037 images. But inside this folder I must have 200 subject specific folders, such as Vacation 2015, Vacation 2018, Birds, Cats, Kitttery Maine Visit, etc….. But I think if I took advantage of key words, I would not need all these individual subject specific folders because a key word search would find what I want very quickly. I would just need the one folder in my Lightroom Library. Not sure if I have this correct.

I set up this system back in 2015 when I purchased the stand-alone disc version of Lightroom 5. So I have been using this version until last Monday when I upgraded to Lightroom Classic CC for $10 a month.
So, if I need to go back to “Christmas 2015”, I just arrow down in the Lr Library and pick out the image from that “Christmas 2015” folder. So I don’t need to use key words as I have all these specific folders. I presume this is not the best way to organize my images. But at the time it made sense.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Gene, you present some good advice - info that I am not aware of. I really need to take your advice. Yes, my Fuji X-T2 does spit out some really high quality JPEGS. I set up both the Fuji X-T2 and the D750 to record both RAW and JPEG with the same shutter release. Now that I have a current version of Lightroom Classic CC I now can process RAW(RAF) files from the Fuji. Could not do this prior to last Monday because my old, outdated Lr5 could not read Fuji RAF files. So I had no choice but to rely on the JPEGs. Any editing was done using the freebie photo editor that comes with Windows10. Of course the iMac users have no idea what I am talking about since obviously they are not using Windows.

About 2 weeks ago I had the option to switch to an iMac but instead I chose to stay with this new Dell 27-inch 4K computer with Windows10 only because I am too damn old to learn an entirely different OS. Not only that I would need to buy a lot Apple compatible software such as Quicken for Mac, etc. But I must say this new Dell is far better than the Dell that I had to retire (but I still have). ~FiddleMaker