Getting that film look

There have been a lot of people who say they just don't like the look
of digital photos, that they look flat or like plastic. There are
some people who will not care, they just don't like the idea of
digital. But for those people who might want to use a ditial camera
and get at least some of the look of film this might be valuable to
look at. Others my have better methods of getting that film look, I
would love to hear them.

Digital cameras try to get the most accurate capture of a scene that
they can. Whereas a digital capture might be very accurate it will not
be to everybody's taste. Film, particularly slide film, boosts the
contrast of a scene, this also makes the colors more vivid.

This is a scan of one of my Kodachrome slides that shows the kind of
look you get from Kodachrome.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746257

This is what is more typical out of a digital camera
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746256

So if I want to get a more film like look what can I do?
What I have done in this next image is to make a copy of background
layer and then boost the contrast of the copy way up, I then mix 50% of
each layer to get this photo
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746255
To my eye this now looks much closer to a kodachrome scan then the
original photo does.

It is important to note that a scan of a slide does not just have more
saturated colors, this is what I get if I just boost the saturation of
the digital photo.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746254
To my eye that is just ugly

So why start with a digital file that just needs to be adjusted when
you could shoot film? For some shooting film would be the right thing
to do. But for others the advantages of shooting digital would come
into play and doing some adjustments to the photo would not be a big
deal.

My point in all of this is that a digital photo starts out life as a
fairly neutral thing, we then can make of it what we wish. I should
also point out that most digital cameras allow a boost of contrast in
the camera setting, I don't like to shoot this way but if someone
really did not want to adjust photos afterwards this is an option.

The other options is to adjust the look of the photo when converting
from raw, this has limits but you can get a wide range of looks and
once you have the first file converted you can use the same setting for
the rest of the photos.

For me I like the digital look, perhaps because it is not what I am use
to, but I can see where other might like the film look more.

Scott

This would be much more valuable if you showed the same scene.


Scott W wrote:
There have been a lot of people who say they just don't like the look
of digital photos, that they look flat or like plastic. There are
some people who will not care, they just don't like the idea of
digital. But for those people who might want to use a ditial camera
and get at least some of the look of film this might be valuable to
look at. Others my have better methods of getting that film look, I
would love to hear them.

Digital cameras try to get the most accurate capture of a scene that
they can. Whereas a digital capture might be very accurate it will not
be to everybody's taste. Film, particularly slide film, boosts the
contrast of a scene, this also makes the colors more vivid.

This is a scan of one of my Kodachrome slides that shows the kind of
look you get from Kodachrome.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746257

This is what is more typical out of a digital camera
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746256

So if I want to get a more film like look what can I do?
What I have done in this next image is to make a copy of background
layer and then boost the contrast of the copy way up, I then mix 50% of
each layer to get this photo
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746255
To my eye this now looks much closer to a kodachrome scan then the
original photo does.

It is important to note that a scan of a slide does not just have more
saturated colors, this is what I get if I just boost the saturation of
the digital photo.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746254
To my eye that is just ugly

So why start with a digital file that just needs to be adjusted when
you could shoot film? For some shooting film would be the right thing
to do. But for others the advantages of shooting digital would come
into play and doing some adjustments to the photo would not be a big
deal.

My point in all of this is that a digital photo starts out life as a
fairly neutral thing, we then can make of it what we wish. I should
also point out that most digital cameras allow a boost of contrast in
the camera setting, I don't like to shoot this way but if someone
really did not want to adjust photos afterwards this is an option.

The other options is to adjust the look of the photo when converting
from raw, this has limits but you can get a wide range of looks and
once you have the first file converted you can use the same setting for
the rest of the photos.

For me I like the digital look, perhaps because it is not what I am use
to, but I can see where other might like the film look more.

Scott

Others my have better methods of getting that film look, I would love to
hear them.

Use film ?

"Scott W" wrote in message
oups.com...
There have been a lot of people who say they just don't like the look
of digital photos, that they look flat or like plastic. There are
some people who will not care, they just don't like the idea of
digital. But for those people who might want to use a ditial camera
and get at least some of the look of film this might be valuable to
look at. Others my have better methods of getting that film look, I
would love to hear them.

Digital cameras try to get the most accurate capture of a scene that
they can. Whereas a digital capture might be very accurate it will not
be to everybody's taste. Film, particularly slide film, boosts the
contrast of a scene, this also makes the colors more vivid.

This is a scan of one of my Kodachrome slides that shows the kind of
look you get from Kodachrome.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746257

This is what is more typical out of a digital camera
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746256

So if I want to get a more film like look what can I do?
What I have done in this next image is to make a copy of background
layer and then boost the contrast of the copy way up, I then mix 50% of
each layer to get this photo
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746255
To my eye this now looks much closer to a kodachrome scan then the
original photo does.

It is important to note that a scan of a slide does not just have more
saturated colors, this is what I get if I just boost the saturation of
the digital photo.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746254
To my eye that is just ugly

So why start with a digital file that just needs to be adjusted when
you could shoot film? For some shooting film would be the right thing
to do. But for others the advantages of shooting digital would come
into play and doing some adjustments to the photo would not be a big
deal.

My point in all of this is that a digital photo starts out life as a
fairly neutral thing, we then can make of it what we wish. I should
also point out that most digital cameras allow a boost of contrast in
the camera setting, I don't like to shoot this way but if someone
really did not want to adjust photos afterwards this is an option.

The other options is to adjust the look of the photo when converting
from raw, this has limits but you can get a wide range of looks and
once you have the first file converted you can use the same setting for
the rest of the photos.

For me I like the digital look, perhaps because it is not what I am use
to, but I can see where other might like the film look more.

Scott

UC wrote:
This would be much more valuable if you showed the same scene.

True, but then I don't shoot Kodachrome anymore.
I am sure that I have not duplicated the exact look of Kodachrome, or
any other slide film, but I believe it is much closer to the look of a
slide then the photo right out of the camera. The grass in particular
look much more like a slide scan in the processed image, at least to
my eye.

Scott

Joseph Kewfi wrote:
Others my have better methods of getting that film look, I would love to
hear them.

Use film ?

This is one options, but not for me. It takes me less time to adjust
the digital photo then it does to photoshop out the dust on a slide,
much less the scratches on a negative.

Scott

I use to hear this years ago when I did professional video production on
videotape, 1" and Beta SP for those of you familiar with the formats.
All I heard was lets soften the camera, or do this or that to get "the
film look." It is f'ing video not film. I told them if they want the so
called "film look" then shoot the damn stuff on film. Now it is
happening all over again with digital. If you want it to look like film
then, you guessed it, shoot it on film.

I have heard these kinds of comments and often find that they are sort of an
urban legend similar to some who insist tube amplifiers sound better than
solid-state amplifiers. Double-blind tests always do them in (they can't
consistently identify the type of amplifier).

Some photography folks are truly informed and prefer film, but they are not
always the ones making these kinds of comments.

As you pointed out, digital manipulation can produce various effects.

As you pointed out, digital manipulation can produce various effects.

One of these such effects is to make the corporations involved profits
fatter.

"Charles Schuler" wrote in message
...

I have heard these kinds of comments and often find that they are sort of
an
urban legend similar to some who insist tube amplifiers sound better than
solid-state amplifiers. Double-blind tests always do them in (they can't
consistently identify the type of amplifier).

Some photography folks are truly informed and prefer film, but they are
not
always the ones making these kinds of comments.

As you pointed out, digital manipulation can produce various effects.

Scott W wrote:

O.K., avoiding the great debate (for the moment).

Just, all your pictures have an American flag in them: Is it an article
of the Patriot Act that all photos need to have a US flag in them?

I've lived in seven different countries and, AFAIK, I have no pictures
of flags.

Oh well, de gustibus...

This is what is more typical out of a digital camera
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746256
So if I want to get a more film like look what can I do?
What I have done in this next image is to make a copy of background
layer and then boost the contrast of the copy way up, I then mix 50% of
each layer to get this photo
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746255
To my eye this now looks much closer to a kodachrome scan then the
original photo does.
It is important to note that a scan of a slide does not just have more
saturated colors, this is what I get if I just boost the saturation of
the digital photo.
http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53746254
To my eye that is just ugly


256 doesn't look particularly like sharp digital to me but I note shadow
detail and reasonable skin tone...

255 has lost the shadow detail...

254 has shadow detail but more extreme skin tone...