The shots of the drummer in the street really highlight the differences between the two. This is the most honest review of the X100V I’ve seen, everyone else makes it sound like the film simulations are spot on right out of the box
I've never seen peoples reviewing Fuji and saying Fuji can literally replace film or spot on film look, all I've seen is peoples always say Fuji digital camera is the "alternative" to someone wanted change to digital from film since film more expensive this day. Specially they camera that have hybrid viewfinder really gave the user feels like shot on film.
I've always loved the SOOC look I get out of my X100V, but I've never understood when folks say it looks just like film, because it doesn't. Personally, I've found that I can get much closer to the look of photos from my FM2 when I use my Z6 with the same lens that I use on the FM2 as compared to my X100V. I feel like half the look of film photos comes from glass and the X100V certainly doesn't have a vintage lens. The other half of the story for me is that digital handles shadows very good and film handles highlights very well. So you have to be very careful on the X100V to to not bring out too much shadow detail.
I use a G1 and X100F almost interchangeably and absolutely agree - once that light leaves the digital sensor looks.. well, like a digital sensor. I understand the subculture of film and when I post my digital renditions of film I am careful to tag it as such. Both are great ways to capture images and two things can be true at the same time.
Personally I can’t stand the JPEGS/film simulations but I developed a custom Lightroom preset for the RAW files based on side by sides with Portra 400 scans and now I adore my X100F!
For Portra 400 - change the following recipe settings: Colour Temp: Daylight with R +4 and Blue -6 DR: DR400 (with need to shoot at ISO 640 and over, but the x100V can handle it) Highlights: -2 Did heaps of trial and error with FUJIFILM X RAW STUDIO and found this warms it just a little and brings back the highlights
A couple of things you could have done. 1) bring in the raw image from your Fuji into Fuji RAW X Studio, and make your own film recipe. Have the RAW file, and the film photo version side by side, tweak the settings in Fuji RAW X Studio and save that as a custom preset. 2) For the sharpness... use vintage glass on your Fuji. I bought a Leica M to Fuji X adapter, and use my Leica Summericon lenses on my Fuji X-T5. That combined with turning down the clarity and sharpness setting in the Fuji film recipe gives you that smoothness you're looking for. It just seems like you focused on the colors, in post. Which is totally fine.. but you could tweak the settings in your Fujifilm camera, use vintage lenses and get way better results than you did here. Thanks for a great video though!
One thing I've found is Fuji jpegs change drastically with exposure comp. It seems like yours may have used that +2/3 bump and a lil more tweaking in camera. Fuji X Raw Studio lets you tweak and create presets so you can find your version of film stocks yourself and save them. And mist-style filters are AMAZING for creating a softer more analog feel. Lots of folks keep a 1/8 promist on their Fujis permanently.
Question about the JPGs +RAW for Fuji. Are the images in the camera/memory card JPGs? When I export I see both so just curious what do I see in the camera?
@@kristenbrasil You're seeing your jpeg settings. Even if you shoot raw only it's going to show you your image settings on the preview unt your editor rebuilds one with the RAW. There's no such thing as truly raw, there's always some sort of color profile on it in order to be properly viewable
The "softness" in the Across 100 II is the interpolation of the scanner. Across' resolution if exposed, developed, and scanned properly is at least twice that of the 26MPs of the Fuji x100v.
You would definitely need something like a pro-mist/ glimmer glass filter to replicate the melding of the night time highlights and the lifting of the shadows
I like these filters in moderation but they really don’t blend the light in the same way. I find the effect a bit harsh at night honestly, especially for direct light sources. Glimmerglass is SO much better imo though!
The pro mist filters just make the photos look glowy and washed. Yes it makes it softer but with the above unwanted consequences. Film photos aren’t really washed. The best way to soften photos is to lower clarity and sharpness and add the tinest amount of motion blur
I tend not to leave UA-cam comments but I just have to thank you for this, it helped me greatly as a Fuji user obsessed with the differences between these two mediums. You really nailed the process here & it was presented in the perfect way. 👍 Definitely subbing and would love to see more comparisons with other Fuji simulations. Cheers!
I think with some tweaks the Fuji is a great middle ground between the ease of use and cost of digital and the "experience" of shooting/editing film. Once you dial in the look with the simulations it's very easy to take the entire editing workflow out of the equation and just go shoot, which is what a lot of people strive for in film to begin with. You may want to try a very subtle diffusion filter on the X100V, as that will help bring back some of that softness you wanted out of the digital files.
Great comparison video. I've seen a lot of comment online, when comparing digital vs film, that will say something like "there's virtually no difference". There absolutely is a difference, in the shooting experience, the approach, and the end result of the photo. You perfectly illustrate why I like to jump back and forth between digital and film. I love my X100V and take it with me all the time, but there is just something about shooting film that I greatly enjoy and hope to never stop doing.
I like this experiment. Have you considered doing this with a Fujifilm X-E4 instead? Same sensor etc. as the X100V but using an adapter and using the same Voightlander 35mm 1.4 that you use on the M6?
@@JoeLopez field of view is one of the most relevant aspect in a photograph. Lens quality is not the point of this comparative, wich is digital and film aesthetic. Also, do not see the point of using a lens designed to cover full frame image circle in a much smaller aps-c area, in that case the new fuji 33mm 1.4, quality wise would greatly exceed the voigtlander wich is no designed for that use.
Would love to see you tweak the Portra recipe and see how close you can really get. It seems like some white balance adjustments and maybe dropping the highlights -1 would help? (This is the best comparison I've seen, btw)
I am doing photography for 20 years now and just recently got my hands on the x100v. I am heavily inspired. "Serr's 500T" is my fav simulation since it turns out spooky and moody what I like. Great video. Thank you
This is by far the best film vs digital comparison I've ever seen. Finally someone actually grades the digital to look on par with the film. I started shooting film seriously about 3 years ago and I've finally come to the conclusion that the beauty of the 'film look' or 'film colours' that analog delivers is for the most part a result of professional film labs knowing how to convert/balance scans to be very well white balanced and properly exposed. After scanning thousands of 35mm frames, my understanding of colour balance and curves has gotten to a point where my digital work achieves better 'film colour' than my actual film work. I do still miss the delay between shooting and seeing the shots, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.
I think you can get any photo from any digital camera to have the film look in Lightroom. I found that cheap point and shoots are actually the easiest to make look like film because they have low megapixel sensors and naturally have a softness to them. Having the film look is only half the reason to shot film though. The shooting experience of having a limited number of shots and the margin of error of not having a live viewfinder are part of what give film its appeal.
for now I'll stick to slowly draining my wallet with film over emptying it all in one go. there's just no replacing the feeling, the waiting for it, the being forced to be patient, the feel of winding film in an old metal camera. great video, loved the zoomed in comparisons!
Would love to see a video of you trying to zero in on the recipe specifics to get as close to the film look/feel as you can without having to do anything in post. Finding ways to preserve the look/feel that you and others value in a easily distributable/reproducible manner like a film recipe seems like a goal worth chasing.
Thank you for the well executed and objective video on your project. Excellent effort and I appreciate your detailed analysis. Especially the comments about how well the highlights and color roll off with film. I completely agree with the your observation of film that film has a certain pleasing softness and how the colors melt together. Your example images were amazing too. There are a few of things that i attempt in order to get more organic looking images with my X100V. First I try to get more dynamic range by shooting at the dual gain ISO setting of 640 as a minimum value. Then I adjust the Hightlights to -1 or -2 to get more hightlight rolloff. Geting the right exposure setting is critical with many recipes requiring +2/3 or more to get a film like look. Setting the clarity to a negative value or using a bloom filter will help soften the digital edge for a more analog feel. The last point I would like to make is that many recipes also suggest a whire balance shift. I view the recommended settings as merely a starting point that I will need to adjust on location to get the right amount of warmth into the colors that I am trying to achieve.
Thank you, wonderful Video. I was surprised how much more I react to the Film shots. It's like almost a bodily reaction, especially the night shots. Looks like I have to get into Film:) So expensive though.
That is an interesting experiment. My takeaway is that you love film and are trying to justify shooting it, but you found at the end of the day, if a print is the final use of the image, there's a negligible difference. I started shooting with Leicas in 1968 and have had my current M3 for 40 years. I was a full time pro for a number of years back in the film days. I've used everything from 8x10 to motion picture cameras. I found your comparison of the price of 93 rolls of film to the price of the X100 interesting. I once did an assignment and shot 100 rolls of film for it. It took me a week just to develop the black and white rolls! Go with what you enjoy and what provides the look you are after. Personally, I find Fuji digital a godsend and I'm having as much fun as I've ever had. I'm also achieving the results I want more quickly and easily. 90% of the time I use camera JPEGS with little or no tweaking. I also love mounting vintage lenses, including my Summicrons to my X-E cameras. Cheers!
I shoot mostly film but one of my favorite shots from the last few months I took on my phone - the colors just popped and my film camera was loaded up with black and white so I chose the right tool for the job and it came out great.
Fuji's are fun to take photographs with, but I feel in my opinion, you want more of a film look from a digital camera, go with a ccd sensor camera such as the Pentax *ist d, Olympus evolt e-300, or a Nikon d40, d60.
Cool video man. Thanks for putting in the work and doing this. The interesting thing about this test is, that you can adjust the settings in the Fuji to get it closer (or further) to those film stocks. FujiXWeekly is awesome and that dude rocks, but he just gets it as close as he can I find it interesting too, that in like 30 years, people are probably going to be all like “man, we are trying to replicate this Fuji x100t settings”
Yep, I agree. I tried a few of Fuji Weekly’s recipes but even just looking at the posted samples, you can tell they don’t look like the film they are emulating. But…their TX and HP5 recipes are pretty good, esp when you tweak the recipes to match your developing regimen. Great investigative reporting! 😊
This video was amazing. This is how I found your channel. Keep it up I love your vids. Would you ever do a similar video where you test nikon film simulations (picture profiles) with film. Maybe they are closer maybe further off, would be interesting to see tho.
The fact that we’re chasing film look in digital world, describes so well natural and eye pleasing analog approach. Fujifilm is closing the gap but I believe that won’t be fully accomplished anytime soon.
Hey, fun vid! Your "adjusted" Fuji shots do a darn good job at getting closer to the film look SOOC. Any chance you could share you process for those corrections? A little lightroom demo maybe? Hmm? :)
in regards to the softness of film vs the sharpness of digital, that is simply a given when it comes to these two mediums. You have options though. You should consider a Moment Cinebloom filter, probably a 10% would give you the look you crave.
I was a Fujifilm x-t3 shooter and loved it. A year ago I wanted the x100v but couldn’t find one so I bought a Leica Q2 monochrom since I mostly shoot black and white. I’ve since moved to shooting film again on a Leica. It’s just more fun.
great vid- i'm glad i wasn't the only one who felt film sims across fuji and olympus weren't doing quite enough work to simulate film, and it's also a great starting point to see if maybe we can adjust the settings further to try and match film more right out of the camera. for example, the settings in that recipe- notice sharpness is turned up but then one of the complaints for the digital results is that it's too sharp. highlights has been lowered to -1, but what if we lower to -2? also, i've personally found that lowering the blues on auto white balancing seems to have better results than lowering the blues on daylight preset (i think the camera's preset may be very different to film's daylight balance). it's very helpful that you shot on actual film to compare so we have a reference point to maybe create better recipes from.
Very interesting comparison. As an older guy I'm happy to leave my film days behind, but I understand the allure and aesthetic that attracts younger photographers in this digital era. I was actually impressed how close the 100V images could look to the film shots, albeit lacking and/or just a bit different in some nuances.
From my experience taking digital photos at a lower resolution or downscaling them instead of upscaling them in post can get you even closer to the look of film. Everyone gets so caught up in doing the highest-resolution and megapixel crazy to make the sharpest best picture possible but you can see especially in the sign photos that you took that the digital photos were much more clear much sharper then you're very expensive top quality film and film camera setup. I'm not saying the digital photos were better. The colors and feel of the film photos are much more pleasing of course.
Thank you for this very honest side by side comparison, Ramsey. Personally I shoot digital with Fuji cameras and love the absence of any workflow with recipes. I just shoot JPGs and that's it. I use over/underexposure, diffusion filters to get a look I like. Granted, some of the recipes are much better than others. Funny thing that we try to imitate filmstocks with film simulations that were not meant to duplicate film in the first place (if you listen to Fuji devs). Fuji refers to the simulations giving you "memory color" - a trip down memory lane to how photos used to look like, but how you remember them, not necessarily how they may have looked like in reality (maybe my explanation is not 100% correct but in the ballpark).
Dehaze in lightroom is a good setting to add some blurry / soft melding of colours. I feel it helps remove some of the harsh and clinical nature of a digital image.
I was hoping you could clarify: was the before and after edits on the digital photos the film stick recipe and then your tweaks? Or the unedited photo and then the film stock recipe?
I'm not a Fuji shooter, but had my time of film shooting and I still shoot on digital with vintage lenses. I would say it seems fair close to me, if you take into account that any comparison will inevitably be biased by a lot of factors with impact, such as WB, the developing process, the digitalization device and post processing, resolution and optical performance and characteristics of the lenses.
I absolutely loved this! Great work and really appreciated this. But Since this was not a clean film vs Recipe, I am curious to what you mainly did with the Portra to get it so similar. Cause it seemed to be the same adjustments on all of them. Could you tell some about what you did? Thanks!😀
Arri Alexa said getting the film look is about gamma not the dynamic range as much as other companies keep talking about. The Sigma L-Mount camera is said to be on pare with Arri Alexa when it comes to gamma.
Still super close and good enough for me. Nothing can actually emulate film. Fuji sims are great but they're not a replacement for film. Digital will never be analog for music or photos. Nice video mate!
Great video! I have a lot of experience with both film and Fuji as a professional fine art landscape photographer who often aims for a filmic look, so I feel like adding my 2 cents here because I see a lot of confusion and and reliance on this stuff within this niche community of digital-film photographers. I’ve shot fuji for about 6 years now and have been a GFX shooter for 3. I have owned the X100v and F as well. I’ve shot lots of film my whole life and owned Canon and Sony systems too. These recipes will never look as much like film as you can do in post, with considerate editing to each photo and an understanding of film already, to know what imperfections there would be. I love GFX files flexibility for this and often adapt vintage lenses if I really want that look, but it’s honestly unnecessary unless you’re looking for a specific form of CA, refraction, bokeh shape ect. In terms of sharpness and all these imperfections, it’s a lot easier to take away than it is to add; you can easily replicate the softness and grain of film, but the specific highlight and shadow curves are going to very so much per scene to really replicate the behaviour - digital sensors just compensate so much, even in jpg. You can get close, but really, edit in post if you have the time. I haven’t even talked about the colours, which a lot of film stocks require way more specific tweaking than what Fuji does in-camera. Not to shit all over these simulations, but people give them way too much credit; a shot on Sony can look way more filmic with the time put in than a Fuji jpg SOOC.
Fair points, the main difference for me is I can just pick my film presets on the fly in camera and have wonderful looking jpegs to share with friends and fam while also having great jpegs as starting points for further editing of your best pics which will require few quick edits. That in of itself makes a huge difference when using a fuji vs a competitor. Can competition reach and exceed it, yeah totally, but does it let their user do it easily every time? Not quite
Heyy! I like the scientific way you chose to approach this topic. Big respect for that cuz you spent time and money and really tried to do fair fight. Regardless your effort, I feel like its kinda not fair to choose just random "portraits" recipe some random dude uploaded to fuji weekly. I feel like you also had chance to tweak the preset a bit (in camera) to achieve better results and yes; as x100v user I can tell how easy would be to correct some issues you had with digital results (turning the "real white" into "offwhite" requires like 2,5 seconds). But yet again! Great videa! I definitely follow you and adding your Chanel my favorites! Thanks again! Keep doing great job!
Wonderfully made experiment, man! I love your style and honesty about the simulations. But I wish that part of the test would be between the film and digital right out of the box since really any digital photo could be made to look like film in Lightroom. Thanks!
Super impressed by your shots and compositions. I'm not a street photographer but every time I try I know I found something cool but can never figure out how to frame it up.
What if you intentionally change resolution of your camera from 24mpx to 3? I forgot exact number but you can set 3:2 aspect ratio with 2 or 3 mpx in camera, maybe that will make photos look less sharp and more film like
There’s something about film or the final prints. I seem more luxurious when you get the print. In school they had a dark room and the process was magical. The fujifilm is my favorite camera.
I found that really Strong+Large settings for Grain with reduced sharpness is the only way to really have a film look aside from figuring out the colors. I ended up just making my own recipe off of my favorite film stocks
Ok, you just confirmed my decision to invest into another film camera instead of digital. As much as I want to love digital film recipes and save tons of $$$, there is just no comparrison to authentic film. Those night shots on Freemont really showed that.
Many of your problems with highlights roll of in the digital can be solved with the use of a 1/8 black mist diffusion filters. Totally recommend you give them a try.
The film seems to accentuate reds more -- which is why the reds are more vivid and the whites are off-white. Would be interesting to throw an enhancing filter on the X100 and retest.
You know what would have been slightly closer, while not having all the simulations you perhaps want an older lower mb x100 such as the orginal, or the s. My experience is that the older sensor in the x100, specifically, is magic for film reditions right out of the camera because of the combination of lower resolution and the specific rendering of the Bayer sensor.
Even though I don't own a 100v, I really appreciate what it captures and how the recipes can be generated. Many of my friends tell me about how much they love it and actually indicate it's the best camera they've ever used or owned. People need to remember that every film processing service or lab has different settings (to a degree) when they are printing or generating photos, like if you take home a CD (like here in Tokyo) or receive JPGs online. Also, how is XYZ film camera metering the scene? Center-weighted like the M6? Evaluative or Spot metering on a Canon EOS-1N? The variations go on and on. The same roll of film in different cameras with different lenses will produce different results. And what if there's a choice to expose on the darker side? Whew! Imagine the countless digital recipes. There's something about deciding how to develop film with variations in the process. The results of each roll can be much different depending on that process. I really enjoy seeing those results. Very cool video. It went further than some and I definitely appreciate that. See you in Tokyo.
I think I might agree with a couple of peeps re trying out either a Promist or black mist (if you want to keep your shadows but that's getting away from the whole emulation conversation) at around the 5% (if you can get your hands on a Moment Cinebloom 5%, just leave it on there but good luck?) or 1/8 mark, just to take the digital edge off...have you tried warming up the white balance for the Portra, or raising the highlights in-camera as it were for the Acros? Great video. You have my sub.
Nice video. Tinting the midtones and shadows in lightroom orange or yellow would help you get the digital files much closer to the film...try it and see what you think. Also some dodging and burning would help with the highlight rolloff
I find that film shots always have some sort of micro-bloom around highlights, like the cinestill 800 halation effect but more subtle and on a smaller scale
Dead Give Away, look for dust and the tell tale scratch. How did you adjust the digital WB, in camera or post edit? I don't like to do a film sim WB in post. It seems to put you back to square one in the digital world. color that is faded and pastel is film's uniqueness for me.
Recently I found a workaround to the cost of film which is to buy movie film. It may be a steep purchase, however bulk loading one film will be consistent and economical. Saving trips to the photo lab.
this is the comparison that everyone on tik tok needs 😤 I'm very much in the film camp but those digitals turned out great and at the end of the day a photo is a photo!!
The biggest issue with most of these digital vs analogue comparisons are that many of the modern lenses are TOO sharp. For some reason there’s this endless quest of wanting manufacturers to make razor sharp lenses that have zero flaws or character to them. It really does suck the soul out of a lot of photos that would have an assload of character with some old 50 year old vintage lens. There’s a time and place for sharp lenses. There’s also a time and place for ‘flawed’ lenses. With that said, I do dig the Fuji cameras overall. I mostly use Pentax and Leica cameras, but I was really captivated by the xpro 3 and had to pick one up. Since I got it, the other cameras have just sat in their bags. Awesome Video and fantastic work that you did!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The shots of the drummer in the street really highlight the differences between the two. This is the most honest review of the X100V I’ve seen, everyone else makes it sound like the film simulations are spot on right out of the box
I've never seen peoples reviewing Fuji and saying Fuji can literally replace film or spot on film look, all I've seen is peoples always say Fuji digital camera is the "alternative" to someone wanted change to digital from film since film more expensive this day.
Specially they camera that have hybrid viewfinder really gave the user feels like shot on film.
@@accidentalinfluencer Agree, from what I saw people always called film sim as "filmic". In the ballpark of film, but not exactly the same as film.
I've always loved the SOOC look I get out of my X100V, but I've never understood when folks say it looks just like film, because it doesn't. Personally, I've found that I can get much closer to the look of photos from my FM2 when I use my Z6 with the same lens that I use on the FM2 as compared to my X100V. I feel like half the look of film photos comes from glass and the X100V certainly doesn't have a vintage lens.
The other half of the story for me is that digital handles shadows very good and film handles highlights very well. So you have to be very careful on the X100V to to not bring out too much shadow detail.
I use a G1 and X100F almost interchangeably and absolutely agree - once that light leaves the digital sensor looks.. well, like a digital sensor. I understand the subculture of film and when I post my digital renditions of film I am careful to tag it as such. Both are great ways to capture images and two things can be true at the same time.
Personally I can’t stand the JPEGS/film simulations but I developed a custom Lightroom preset for the RAW files based on side by sides with Portra 400 scans and now I adore my X100F!
I love that you still count down 3...2...1 for static, non-human subjects. 😄
Even time lol 😂
It's that we can fell immersed in his experience! 😂 love it
HAHA hated when he do that, and now I started to like it jejeje
For Portra 400 - change the following recipe settings:
Colour Temp: Daylight with R +4 and Blue -6
DR: DR400 (with need to shoot at ISO 640 and over, but the x100V can handle it)
Highlights: -2
Did heaps of trial and error with FUJIFILM X RAW STUDIO and found this warms it just a little and brings back the highlights
Putting in the work my dude!! Thank you!!
Yep. Dr400 and if you want even more range on a tricky contrasty scene, try Dynamic range priority weak or high instead of off.
A couple of things you could have done.
1) bring in the raw image from your Fuji into Fuji RAW X Studio, and make your own film recipe. Have the RAW file, and the film photo version side by side, tweak the settings in Fuji RAW X Studio and save that as a custom preset.
2) For the sharpness... use vintage glass on your Fuji. I bought a Leica M to Fuji X adapter, and use my Leica Summericon lenses on my Fuji X-T5. That combined with turning down the clarity and sharpness setting in the Fuji film recipe gives you that smoothness you're looking for.
It just seems like you focused on the colors, in post. Which is totally fine.. but you could tweak the settings in your Fujifilm camera, use vintage lenses and get way better results than you did here.
Thanks for a great video though!
One thing I've found is Fuji jpegs change drastically with exposure comp. It seems like yours may have used that +2/3 bump and a lil more tweaking in camera. Fuji X Raw Studio lets you tweak and create presets so you can find your version of film stocks yourself and save them. And mist-style filters are AMAZING for creating a softer more analog feel. Lots of folks keep a 1/8 promist on their Fujis permanently.
Question about the JPGs +RAW for Fuji. Are the images in the camera/memory card JPGs? When I export I see both so just curious what do I see in the camera?
@@kristenbrasil You're seeing your jpeg settings. Even if you shoot raw only it's going to show you your image settings on the preview unt your editor rebuilds one with the RAW. There's no such thing as truly raw, there's always some sort of color profile on it in order to be properly viewable
@@charlottesimss9853 super helpful! I am 100% going to check out the Fuji X Raw Studio that you mentioned too. thank you so much!
I agree, using a black pro mist, is probably going to help the Fuji get closer to the mark.
Agree on the filter, I have the glimmer glass on mine permanently and it makes a world of difference on highlights - much less harsh and ‘digital’.
The "softness" in the Across 100 II is the interpolation of the scanner. Across' resolution if exposed, developed, and scanned properly is at least twice that of the 26MPs of the Fuji x100v.
Using a promist or cinebloom filter on the x100v would likely get that light bloom and softness that you're looking for.
I'd say most of that sharpness issue in digital will be fixed by adding an 1/8 or 1/4 pro mist filter. Nice comparison vid man!
Ill give that a shots and see how it goes!!! thanks for watching!!
You would definitely need something like a pro-mist/ glimmer glass filter to replicate the melding of the night time highlights and the lifting of the shadows
I like these filters in moderation but they really don’t blend the light in the same way. I find the effect a bit harsh at night honestly, especially for direct light sources. Glimmerglass is SO much better imo though!
The pro mist filters just make the photos look glowy and washed. Yes it makes it softer but with the above unwanted consequences. Film photos aren’t really washed. The best way to soften photos is to lower clarity and sharpness and add the tinest amount of motion blur
I appreciate the amount of effort that went into this video. Brilliant execution.
Much appreciated!
I tend not to leave UA-cam comments but I just have to thank you for this, it helped me greatly as a Fuji user obsessed with the differences between these two mediums. You really nailed the process here & it was presented in the perfect way. 👍 Definitely subbing and would love to see more comparisons with other Fuji simulations. Cheers!
I think with some tweaks the Fuji is a great middle ground between the ease of use and cost of digital and the "experience" of shooting/editing film. Once you dial in the look with the simulations it's very easy to take the entire editing workflow out of the equation and just go shoot, which is what a lot of people strive for in film to begin with.
You may want to try a very subtle diffusion filter on the X100V, as that will help bring back some of that softness you wanted out of the digital files.
Great comparison video. I've seen a lot of comment online, when comparing digital vs film, that will say something like "there's virtually no difference". There absolutely is a difference, in the shooting experience, the approach, and the end result of the photo. You perfectly illustrate why I like to jump back and forth between digital and film. I love my X100V and take it with me all the time, but there is just something about shooting film that I greatly enjoy and hope to never stop doing.
I like this experiment. Have you considered doing this with a Fujifilm X-E4 instead? Same sensor etc. as the X100V but using an adapter and using the same Voightlander 35mm 1.4 that you use on the M6?
it will not have the same field of view
@@nachoupe while true, it’s irrelevant to the experiment. The Lens quality would be directly relevant
@@JoeLopez field of view is one of the most relevant aspect in a photograph. Lens quality is not the point of this comparative, wich is digital and film aesthetic. Also, do not see the point of using a lens designed to cover full frame image circle in a much smaller aps-c area, in that case the new fuji 33mm 1.4, quality wise would greatly exceed the voigtlander wich is no designed for that use.
@@nachoupe The comparison was about the look, colors, etc. the lens plays a role.
Great video. Learned a lot about how to tell the difference between film and digital
Really enjoying your videos recently! Thanks man!
Glad to hear it!
Love the Fuji. Appreciate your video. I feel this is the first real comparison I watched in a long time. Also love my Nikon F3.
that moving old car shot in front of the sign is perfect, what a good timing
Would love to see you tweak the Portra recipe and see how close you can really get. It seems like some white balance adjustments and maybe dropping the highlights -1 would help?
(This is the best comparison I've seen, btw)
That's what I was thinking when he discussed highlights.
This was an awesome video! Great to see the comparisons! :D
I am doing photography for 20 years now and just recently got my hands on the x100v. I am heavily inspired. "Serr's 500T" is my fav simulation since it turns out spooky and moody what I like. Great video. Thank you
Best film/digital video on UA-cam, hands down
Bless you sir ❤️
This is by far the best film vs digital comparison I've ever seen. Finally someone actually grades the digital to look on par with the film. I started shooting film seriously about 3 years ago and I've finally come to the conclusion that the beauty of the 'film look' or 'film colours' that analog delivers is for the most part a result of professional film labs knowing how to convert/balance scans to be very well white balanced and properly exposed. After scanning thousands of 35mm frames, my understanding of colour balance and curves has gotten to a point where my digital work achieves better 'film colour' than my actual film work. I do still miss the delay between shooting and seeing the shots, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.
I'm a Film and Fuji (XPRO-2) Shooter. Film is the way to go. Digitally I shoot mostly B&W.
I think you can get any photo from any digital camera to have the film look in Lightroom. I found that cheap point and shoots are actually the easiest to make look like film because they have low megapixel sensors and naturally have a softness to them. Having the film look is only half the reason to shot film though. The shooting experience of having a limited number of shots and the margin of error of not having a live viewfinder are part of what give film its appeal.
for now I'll stick to slowly draining my wallet with film over emptying it all in one go. there's just no replacing the feeling, the waiting for it, the being forced to be patient, the feel of winding film in an old metal camera. great video, loved the zoomed in comparisons!
Would love to see a video of you trying to zero in on the recipe specifics to get as close to the film look/feel as you can without having to do anything in post.
Finding ways to preserve the look/feel that you and others value in a easily distributable/reproducible manner like a film recipe seems like a goal worth chasing.
Thank you for the well executed and objective video on your project. Excellent effort and I appreciate your detailed analysis. Especially the comments about how well the highlights and color roll off with film. I completely agree with the your observation of film that film has a certain pleasing softness and how the colors melt together. Your example images were amazing too.
There are a few of things that i attempt in order to get more organic looking images with my X100V. First I try to get more dynamic range by shooting at the dual gain ISO setting of 640 as a minimum value. Then I adjust the Hightlights to -1 or -2 to get more hightlight rolloff. Geting the right exposure setting is critical with many recipes requiring +2/3 or more to get a film like look. Setting the clarity to a negative value or using a bloom filter will help soften the digital edge for a more analog feel.
The last point I would like to make is that many recipes also suggest a whire balance shift. I view the recommended settings as merely a starting point that I will need to adjust on location to get the right amount of warmth into the colors that I am trying to achieve.
Great video! I would find a lot of value from you showing your editing process in Lightroom to your X100V shots 📷
Thank you, wonderful Video. I was surprised how much more I react to the Film shots. It's like almost a bodily reaction, especially the night shots. Looks like I have to get into Film:) So expensive though.
Haha do it!
That is an interesting experiment. My takeaway is that you love film and are trying to justify shooting it, but you found at the end of the day, if a print is the final use of the image, there's a negligible difference.
I started shooting with Leicas in 1968 and have had my current M3 for 40 years. I was a full time pro for a number of years back in the film days. I've used everything from 8x10 to motion picture cameras.
I found your comparison of the price of 93 rolls of film to the price of the X100 interesting. I once did an assignment and shot 100 rolls of film for it. It took me a week just to develop the black and white rolls!
Go with what you enjoy and what provides the look you are after. Personally, I find Fuji digital a godsend and I'm having as much fun as I've ever had. I'm also achieving the results I want more quickly and easily. 90% of the time I use camera JPEGS with little or no tweaking. I also love mounting vintage lenses, including my Summicrons to my X-E cameras. Cheers!
I shoot mostly film but one of my favorite shots from the last few months I took on my phone - the colors just popped and my film camera was loaded up with black and white so I chose the right tool for the job and it came out great.
Try a Glimmerglass filter for the extra softness you are looking for
Fuji's are fun to take photographs with, but I feel in my opinion, you want more of a film look from a digital camera, go with a ccd sensor camera such as the Pentax *ist d, Olympus evolt e-300, or a Nikon d40, d60.
Cool video man. Thanks for putting in the work and doing this.
The interesting thing about this test is, that you can adjust the settings in the Fuji to get it closer (or further) to those film stocks. FujiXWeekly is awesome and that dude rocks, but he just gets it as close as he can
I find it interesting too, that in like 30 years, people are probably going to be all like “man, we are trying to replicate this Fuji x100t settings”
This video was so wonderful all around. Great job!
Thank you ❤️🤘🏼📸
Yep, I agree. I tried a few of Fuji Weekly’s recipes but even just looking at the posted samples, you can tell they don’t look like the film they are emulating. But…their TX and HP5 recipes are pretty good, esp when you tweak the recipes to match your developing regimen.
Great investigative reporting! 😊
This was my favourite edit of yours to date. Great video dude.
Thank you Cody!!!
This video was amazing. This is how I found your channel. Keep it up I love your vids. Would you ever do a similar video where you test nikon film simulations (picture profiles) with film. Maybe they are closer maybe further off, would be interesting to see tho.
Ill have to look into that and see how it goes, i've never missed around with Nikons.
The best comparison I've seen! thank you so much for the job! ❤
Thank you! I’m glad you enjoyed the video
4:24 “Think I popped it off too early”…but then get a really good shot. Man, if I had your timing, I wouldn’t have twins.
The fact that we’re chasing film look in digital world, describes so well natural and eye pleasing analog approach. Fujifilm is closing the gap but I believe that won’t be fully accomplished anytime soon.
Hey, fun vid! Your "adjusted" Fuji shots do a darn good job at getting closer to the film look SOOC. Any chance you could share you process for those corrections? A little lightroom demo maybe? Hmm? :)
These are the same issues I have with the recipes. Would love to see you do more of a deep dive into making these recipes work better.
in regards to the softness of film vs the sharpness of digital, that is simply a given when it comes to these two mediums. You have options though. You should consider a Moment Cinebloom filter, probably a 10% would give you the look you crave.
The shot at 4:22 is blowing my freaking mind.
Thanks for a great breakdown, one of the best comparisons
I was a Fujifilm x-t3 shooter and loved it. A year ago I wanted the x100v but couldn’t find one so I bought a Leica Q2 monochrom since I mostly shoot black and white. I’ve since moved to shooting film again on a Leica. It’s just more fun.
love the photos bro ! nice work on the video! just subbed
The only fujifilm x100v video the internet needs to watch right now.
So glad UA-cam recommended your channel! Subbed immediately.
great vid- i'm glad i wasn't the only one who felt film sims across fuji and olympus weren't doing quite enough work to simulate film, and it's also a great starting point to see if maybe we can adjust the settings further to try and match film more right out of the camera. for example, the settings in that recipe- notice sharpness is turned up but then one of the complaints for the digital results is that it's too sharp. highlights has been lowered to -1, but what if we lower to -2? also, i've personally found that lowering the blues on auto white balancing seems to have better results than lowering the blues on daylight preset (i think the camera's preset may be very different to film's daylight balance). it's very helpful that you shot on actual film to compare so we have a reference point to maybe create better recipes from.
I think one of the reason there is more sharpness on the digital is due to the lens ? The lens on the Fuji x100v is so good in my opinion
Inspirational! You make me want to do a film video of my own!
Very interesting comparison. As an older guy I'm happy to leave my film days behind, but I understand the allure and aesthetic that attracts younger photographers in this digital era. I was actually impressed how close the 100V images could look to the film shots, albeit lacking and/or just a bit different in some nuances.
What about the fact that the look of the film doesn't matter anywhere nearly as much as the print paper and the development chemicals and process?
I would have liked a similar lens optical construction for both to make it even more comparable. Cool review.
This is so cool, well edited
From my experience taking digital photos at a lower resolution or downscaling them instead of upscaling them in post can get you even closer to the look of film. Everyone gets so caught up in doing the highest-resolution and megapixel crazy to make the sharpest best picture possible but you can see especially in the sign photos that you took that the digital photos were much more clear much sharper then you're very expensive top quality film and film camera setup. I'm not saying the digital photos were better. The colors and feel of the film photos are much more pleasing of course.
Thank you for this very honest side by side comparison, Ramsey. Personally I shoot digital with Fuji cameras and love the absence of any workflow with recipes. I just shoot JPGs and that's it. I use over/underexposure, diffusion filters to get a look I like. Granted, some of the recipes are much better than others.
Funny thing that we try to imitate filmstocks with film simulations that were not meant to duplicate film in the first place (if you listen to Fuji devs). Fuji refers to the simulations giving you "memory color" - a trip down memory lane to how photos used to look like, but how you remember them, not necessarily how they may have looked like in reality (maybe my explanation is not 100% correct but in the ballpark).
The film with the blue classic car is such a banger!
Dehaze in lightroom is a good setting to add some blurry / soft melding of colours. I feel it helps remove some of the harsh and clinical nature of a digital image.
wondering on the night shots if a cinnebloom/diffuser filter would address the neon light issue?
I was hoping you could clarify: was the before and after edits on the digital photos the film stick recipe and then your tweaks? Or the unedited photo and then the film stock recipe?
I'm not a Fuji shooter, but had my time of film shooting and I still shoot on digital with vintage lenses. I would say it seems fair close to me, if you take into account that any comparison will inevitably be biased by a lot of factors with impact, such as WB, the developing process, the digitalization device and post processing, resolution and optical performance and characteristics of the lenses.
I absolutely loved this! Great work and really appreciated this. But Since this was not a clean film vs Recipe, I am curious to what you mainly did with the Portra to get it so similar. Cause it seemed to be the same adjustments on all of them. Could you tell some about what you did? Thanks!😀
awesome video bro, thank you so much, will watch in 4k later this evening
And how was it in 4k??
@@ramseykiefer awesome xD
and already watch your last video with tmax, I really enjoy them
Arri Alexa said getting the film look is about gamma not the dynamic range as much as other companies keep talking about. The Sigma L-Mount camera is said to be on pare with Arri Alexa when it comes to gamma.
Still super close and good enough for me. Nothing can actually emulate film. Fuji sims are great but they're not a replacement for film. Digital will never be analog for music or photos. Nice video mate!
Great video! I have a lot of experience with both film and Fuji as a professional fine art landscape photographer who often aims for a filmic look, so I feel like adding my 2 cents here because I see a lot of confusion and and reliance on this stuff within this niche community of digital-film photographers.
I’ve shot fuji for about 6 years now and have been a GFX shooter for 3. I have owned the X100v and F as well. I’ve shot lots of film my whole life and owned Canon and Sony systems too.
These recipes will never look as much like film as you can do in post, with considerate editing to each photo and an understanding of film already, to know what imperfections there would be. I love GFX files flexibility for this and often adapt vintage lenses if I really want that look, but it’s honestly unnecessary unless you’re looking for a specific form of CA, refraction, bokeh shape ect. In terms of sharpness and all these imperfections, it’s a lot easier to take away than it is to add; you can easily replicate the softness and grain of film, but the specific highlight and shadow curves are going to very so much per scene to really replicate the behaviour - digital sensors just compensate so much, even in jpg. You can get close, but really, edit in post if you have the time. I haven’t even talked about the colours, which a lot of film stocks require way more specific tweaking than what Fuji does in-camera.
Not to shit all over these simulations, but people give them way too much credit; a shot on Sony can look way more filmic with the time put in than a Fuji jpg SOOC.
Fair points, the main difference for me is I can just pick my film presets on the fly in camera and have wonderful looking jpegs to share with friends and fam while also having great jpegs as starting points for further editing of your best pics which will require few quick edits. That in of itself makes a huge difference when using a fuji vs a competitor. Can competition reach and exceed it, yeah totally, but does it let their user do it easily every time? Not quite
Heyy! I like the scientific way you chose to approach this topic. Big respect for that cuz you spent time and money and really tried to do fair fight. Regardless your effort, I feel like its kinda not fair to choose just random "portraits" recipe some random dude uploaded to fuji weekly. I feel like you also had chance to tweak the preset a bit (in camera) to achieve better results and yes; as x100v user I can tell how easy would be to correct some issues you had with digital results (turning the "real white" into "offwhite" requires like 2,5 seconds). But yet again! Great videa! I definitely follow you and adding your Chanel my favorites! Thanks again! Keep doing great job!
Please, how is off-white produced?
Please could you let us know the recipe for ACROS? I did not see it posted in the video. Thank u!
It was just the one that was preset in the Fuji X100V.
Wonderfully made experiment, man! I love your style and honesty about the simulations. But I wish that part of the test would be between the film and digital right out of the box since really any digital photo could be made to look like film in Lightroom. Thanks!
Super impressed by your shots and compositions. I'm not a street photographer but every time I try I know I found something cool but can never figure out how to frame it up.
Practice makes improvement
What if you intentionally change resolution of your camera from 24mpx to 3? I forgot exact number but you can set 3:2 aspect ratio with 2 or 3 mpx in camera, maybe that will make photos look less sharp and more film like
There’s something about film or the final prints. I seem more luxurious when you get the print. In school they had a dark room and the process was magical. The fujifilm is my favorite camera.
Pop a black mist or glimmer glass or any diffusion filter on the x100v and you're one step closer. Then just tweek the recipes a bit and boom :)
I found that really Strong+Large settings for Grain with reduced sharpness is the only way to really have a film look aside from figuring out the colors. I ended up just making my own recipe off of my favorite film stocks
this is the comparison that youtube deserves! 🤩
Ok, you just confirmed my decision to invest into another film camera instead of digital. As much as I want to love digital film recipes and save tons of $$$, there is just no comparrison to authentic film. Those night shots on Freemont really showed that.
Many of your problems with highlights roll of in the digital can be solved with the use of a 1/8 black mist diffusion filters. Totally recommend you give them a try.
or proper exposure
can we talk about how good the photos are with the classic cars in them? must have been blessed by the film gods that day lol
The film seems to accentuate reds more -- which is why the reds are more vivid and the whites are off-white. Would be interesting to throw an enhancing filter on the X100 and retest.
my favorite of all your videos
You know what would have been slightly closer, while not having all the simulations you perhaps want an older lower mb x100 such as the orginal, or the s. My experience is that the older sensor in the x100, specifically, is magic for film reditions right out of the camera because of the combination of lower resolution and the specific rendering of the Bayer sensor.
Really great video! Would be curious to see another comparison but using a cinebloom or most filter on the Fuji
Even though I don't own a 100v, I really appreciate what it captures and how the recipes can be generated. Many of my friends tell me about how much they love it and actually indicate it's the best camera they've ever used or owned.
People need to remember that every film processing service or lab has different settings (to a degree) when they are printing or generating photos, like if you take home a CD (like here in Tokyo) or receive JPGs online. Also, how is XYZ film camera metering the scene? Center-weighted like the M6? Evaluative or Spot metering on a Canon EOS-1N? The variations go on and on. The same roll of film in different cameras with different lenses will produce different results. And what if there's a choice to expose on the darker side? Whew! Imagine the countless digital recipes.
There's something about deciding how to develop film with variations in the process. The results of each roll can be much different depending on that process. I really enjoy seeing those results.
Very cool video. It went further than some and I definitely appreciate that. See you in Tokyo.
I think I might agree with a couple of peeps re trying out either a Promist or black mist (if you want to keep your shadows but that's getting away from the whole emulation conversation) at around the 5% (if you can get your hands on a Moment Cinebloom 5%, just leave it on there but good luck?) or 1/8 mark, just to take the digital edge off...have you tried warming up the white balance for the Portra, or raising the highlights in-camera as it were for the Acros? Great video. You have my sub.
I’ll give all those a try and see how they go! Thanks for the sub ❤️
Nice video. Tinting the midtones and shadows in lightroom orange or yellow would help you get the digital files much closer to the film...try it and see what you think. Also some dodging and burning would help with the highlight rolloff
I’ll give it a go! Thanks dude
super interesting to see!
I find that film shots always have some sort of micro-bloom around highlights, like the cinestill 800 halation effect but more subtle and on a smaller scale
I've got a cinebloom 10% sitting on the camera permanently. Reduces the digital sharpness nicely.
Dead Give Away, look for dust and the tell tale scratch. How did you adjust the digital WB, in camera or post edit? I don't like to do a film sim WB in post. It seems to put you back to square one in the digital world. color that is faded and pastel is film's uniqueness for me.
Recently I found a workaround to the cost of film which is to buy movie film. It may be a steep purchase, however bulk loading one film will be consistent and economical. Saving trips to the photo lab.
awesome video man!
I would love to see what edits you made to the jpegs to make it look the same as the film.
this is the comparison that everyone on tik tok needs 😤 I'm very much in the film camp but those digitals turned out great and at the end of the day a photo is a photo!!
Would a pro mist filter help getting that bloom effect back that we see in film?
Did you use what you learned here to try to adjust the recipes to make them more accurate?
The biggest issue with most of these digital vs analogue comparisons are that many of the modern lenses are TOO sharp. For some reason there’s this endless quest of wanting manufacturers to make razor sharp lenses that have zero flaws or character to them. It really does suck the soul out of a lot of photos that would have an assload of character with some old 50 year old vintage lens. There’s a time and place for sharp lenses. There’s also a time and place for ‘flawed’ lenses. With that said, I do dig the Fuji cameras overall. I mostly use Pentax and Leica cameras, but I was really captivated by the xpro 3 and had to pick one up. Since I got it, the other cameras have just sat in their bags. Awesome
Video and fantastic work that you did!