Subscribe to get access
Read more of this content when you join the Fuji X Weekly Creative Collective today! Click here to learn more.
I asked OpenAI’s ChatGPT to make a Film Simulation Recipe to mimic the look of Kodachrome X slide film. This wasn’t the first time that I attempted to use ChatGPT to make a Recipe for Fujifilm cameras… you might recall that the Urban Dreams Film Simulation Recipe was made by ChatGPT, and by chance it has some resemblance to Kodachrome 200. I learned a lot about the AI’s ability (or is it inability?) to make Recipes, so I decided to try again just for the fun of it.
Kodak introduced Kodachrome—a color transparency film, and the world’s first commercially successful color film—in 1935. Kodachrome X was in the second era of the emulsion, sold between 1962 and 1973. It was replaced by Kodachrome 64, which was discontinued in 2009. Today you cannot buy Kodachrome, and even if you found some old rolls of the film, you cannot even get it developed. Shooting with a facsimile Film Simulation Recipe on Fujifilm cameras is a great way to experience some of these old emulsions that no longer exist, such as Kodachrome X.
Here’s a YouTube video I made documenting the experience!
I have Film Simulation Recipes already that mimic Kodachrome X slide film. These Recipes are called Kodachrome II, and there’s one for X-Trans I, one for X-Trans II, one for X-Trans III, and two for X-Trans IV cameras. In the video above, I compare ChatGPT’s Kodachrome X Recipe to my Kodachrome II v2 Recipe for X-Trans IV, which I shot on my X-T5; in order to make the Recipe compatible, I set Color Chrome FX Blue to Off since X-Trans V cameras render blue more deeply with some film sims.
My opinion is that ChatGPT’s Recipe is much too vibrant to mimic Kodachrome X. While the film was richly vibrant for its time, no emulsion in the 1960’s was that colorful. Today it would be described more as true-to-life. There are also other issues I take with the settings that the AI chose, so I don’t think it did well at mimicking Kodachrome; however, that doesn’t mean the settings (by chance) don’t look nice.
After examining the ChatGPT Recipe, I decided that it reminds me a lot of Kodak Ektachrome E100VS. There have been over 40 different emulsions that carried the Ektachrome name over the years—each with their own unique look—and E100VS was just one. Kodak introduced this film in 1999 and discontinued it in 2012. Ektachrome E100VS was Kodak’s best attempt at Velvia, and was their most vibrant emulsion. The “VS” in the name meant Vividly Saturated. While it was similar to Velvia, it wasn’t identical—the warmth of the film was the most obvious difference—and many photographers preferred Fujifilm’s Velvia over Kodak’s Ektachrome E100VS. Still, at the pinnacle of the film era, it was a popular choice for landscape photographers wanting a boost in vibrancy.
I noticed with AI generated Film Simulation Recipes that most of the time it chooses Auto White Balance, Grain Strong, and stays within -2 to +2 on all of the settings; my experience is that it only occasionally strays from that. It also seems to always leave some necessary settings out, and you have to ask it to add those. Of course, no film has Auto White Balance—most are Daylight (around 5500K), and some are Tungsten (around 3200K). While it is amazing that ChatGPT can produce a Recipe for Fujifilm cameras, if it looks good or not—and if it truly produces the aesthetic that you asked for—is more by chance than skill. Also, it doesn’t like to cite its sources, which is just wrong in my opinion.
While it tried and failed to resemble 1960’s era Kodachrome, I still liked the look produced by ChatGPT’s Kodachrome X Film Simulation Recipe. Since it has some similarities to Kodak Ektachrome E100VS color transparency film, I renamed it after that emulsion. I also refined the settings to more closely resemble the film, and am including that as a second Recipe, which I call Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v2. So v1 is ChatGPT’s Recipe, and v2 is my modified alternative.
I shot a number of rolls of Ektachrome E100VS back in my film days. Most of these pictures are stored away in little yellow boxes, but a few images have been scanned. Obviously, the scanner—and especially the quality of the scan—has an impact on the photo rendering. The four images below are some real Kodak Ektachrome E100VS frames that I shot many years ago. None of these are high-quality scans, and for that I apologize, and I hope you can overlook that aspect of the pictures. Also, it’s important to state that they all look significantly more impressive when viewed on a light table or especially from a slide projector.
How the film was shot had a significant impact on the look. For deeper blues and reds, one should underexpose the film slightly. For cyan sky and brighter (and warmer) colors, one should overexpose slightly. Of course, you had to be careful, because the film—like most slide films—had a narrow dynamic range, and there wasn’t much room for error either direction. These two Film Simulation Recipes behave similarly, although I believe v2 a little more so than v1.
Without further ado, here are the two Kodak Ektachrome E100VS Film Simulation Recipes!
Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v1
ChatGPT Recipe for Kodachrome X
This is the Recipe that ChatGPT created to mimic Kodachrome X, but it looks more like Kodak Ektachrome E100VS. It produces vivid colors similar to—but more warm and slightly less vibrant than—Velvia film. For darker blues and deeper reds, use a lower exposure compensation, and for lighter blues and brighter/warmer colors, use a higher exposure compensation. Because it uses Auto White Balance and DR400, you’ll find it to be quite versatile; however, the rendering is clearly “wrong” in some situations.
The Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v1 Film Simulation Recipe is fully compatible with X-Trans V cameras, which (as of this writing) are the X-T5, X-H2, and X-H2s, as well as “newer” X-Trans IV cameras, which include the X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II. You can use this Recipe on newer GFX cameras; however, it will render slightly differently (but try it anyway!). For the X-T3 and X-T30 (plus older GFX), you’ll have to ignore Color Chrome FX Blue, Grain size, and Clarity (since your camera doesn’t have those options), so it will definitely look a little different, but you might like it nonetheless; for X-Trans III, you’ll have to additionally ignore Color Chrome Effect.
Film Simulation: Velvia
Grain Effect: Strong, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Strong
Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong
White Balance: Auto, +2 Red & -2 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR400
Highlight: +1
Shadow: +1
Color: +2
Sharpness: +1
High ISO NR: -2
Clarity: +1
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v1 Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5:
Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v2
Fuji X Weekly Recipe
This version of Kodak Ektachrome E100VS is my modification to better mimic the film. It’s not too divergent—only slightly dissimilar—since it’s simply a modification of the AI Recipe, and not made from scratch. Because it uses more of a daylight-balanced Kelvin White Balance and DR200, it’s not quite as versatile as v1, and you have to be a little more careful of the light situation you are shooting in and pay closer attention to the highlights to avoid clipping. Sometimes it’s not completely correct, but I think in the “right” conditions it can be quite convincing—nearly identical to some slides I have.
The Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v2 Film Simulation Recipe is fully compatible with X-Trans V cameras, which (as of this writing) are the X-T5, X-H2, and X-H2s, as well as “newer” X-Trans IV cameras, which include the X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II. Unfortunately, it is not compatible with the X-T3, X-T30, X-Pro3, or X100V. You can use this Recipe on newer GFX cameras; however, it will render slightly differently (but try it anyway!).
Film Simulation: Velvia
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Strong
Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong
White Balance: 5150K, +3 Red & -3 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR200
Highlight: +1.5
Shadow: +0.5
Color: +1
Sharpness: -1
High ISO NR: -4
Clarity: +3
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: -1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v2 Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5 and X-E4:
Comparison
In the three examples above, Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v1 is on the left (revealed by moving the slider right), and Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v2 is on the right (revealed by moving the slider left).
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
As a bonus, I asked OpenAI’s DALL-E 2 AI image creator to show me what ChatGPT creating Film Simulation Recipes looks like. The results? Awful, but also kind of funny! I tried rewording the request several different ways in hopes of getting a better image, but it never really got any better.
Here are a few:
Help Fuji X Weekly
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
$5.00
I’m sorry to announce that today’s SOOC Live broadcast has been postponed one month, and next week’s show has been canceled. A number of unforeseen and unfortunate life events happened, and something had to give. Sadly, it became obvious late last night that today’s show just wasn’t going to work out.
The silver lining is that you have more time to shoot with the four Film Simulation Recipes that we are challenging you to shoot with: Reggie’s Portra, AgfaChrome RS 100, Classic Slide, and Ilford Delta Push Process. Be sure to try those Recipes for your storytelling photography. Additional challenges, for those who want more, are to use layered compositions and/or elicit emotion. If you missed the last episode, be sure to watch it (click here), because all of this will make a lot more sense to those who have viewed the broadcast.
For those who don’t know, SOOC Live is a bimonthly broadcast where Nathalie Boucry and I discuss Film Simulation Recipes, give tips and tricks for achieving the results you want straight-out-of-camera, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow.
Nathalie has a good writeup about the latest episode theme on her website that you should definitely check out! She also published an article explaining the broadcast delay. Once again, I apologize that we couldn’t go live today, but I hope that it only makes it better when we can finally come together for the show. I hope that you can join us in four weeks!
Everyone is after a Wes Anderson look right now!
When I first watched the trailer for the upcoming Wes Anderson movie Asteroid City, I thought perhaps it might be possible to mimic the aesthetic on my Fujifilm X-T5; however, I quickly realized that it’s not possible straight-out-of-camera. The movie has an orange and teal look, and I’ve tried unsuccessfully for years to achieve that on Fujifilm. In order to get orange and teal, the White Balance Shift requires plus red for orange and minus red for teal; it’s not possible to do both, so you must decide which one you want: orange or teal? After a few hours of unsuccessfully trying to get the settings right, I gave up.
Then I saw your pictures on Instagram. Specifically, there were photos captured using the Bright Summer, Bright Kodak, Kodak Portra 400 Warm, and Pacific Blues Film Simulation Recipes that had some Wes Anderson vibes to them, which convinced me to try again. I directly compared those four Recipes to Asteroid City screenshots, and decided that Bright Summer and Bright Kodak were the closest; however, none of them were quite right. So I set out to get a little closer—as close as I could—knowing that I wouldn’t be able to achieve a perfect match, but I hoped it would be similar enough that at a cursory glance it would pass for Asteroid City.
Knowing that most of you don’t have an X-Trans V camera, I made a version for X-Trans IV models, too, since the majority of those who shoot with Recipes do so on X-Trans IV cameras. Also, I figured that some of you won’t be satisfied with the results, and are after an even closer facsimile of Asteroid City, so I have some advice for that, too, a little further down, but it does require a small amount of post-editing with Capture One.
While attempting to mimic Asteroid City, I was inspired by another Wes Anderson film: The French Dispatch, specifically, the indoor scenes of the newspaper office, so I made Film Simulation Recipes for that, too—one for X-Trans V and another for X-Trans IV. I don’t know what the light situation was exactly in those scenes, so I don’t know if it would render similarly under identical light, but it does produce convincing results in certain artificial and mixed light scenarios.
If you are after a Wes Anderson look, check out the four Film Simulation Recipes below!
Vibrant Arizona (X-Trans V)
The Vibrant Arizona Film Simulation Recipe can be characterized as bright, colorful, and warm, yet still classic-analog-like, with some similarities to overexposed Kodak negative film. While not an exact match, I’m confident that it is as close as you’re going to get to an Asteroid City aesthetic straight-out-of-camera. The movie takes place in a fictional northern-Arizona town (although it was filmed in Spain, apparently), so that is why I’m calling it Vibrant Arizona.
An important note is that this Recipe uses D-Range Priority (a.k.a. DR-P), which takes the place of Dynamic Range and the Tone Curve (Highlight and Shadow). I don’t have a lot of Film Simulation Recipes which utilize D-Range Priority, but there are a few, including Pulled Fujicolor Superia, Scanned Superia, and Portra-Style, the last of which has some similarities to Vibrant Arizona.
This particular Recipe is for X-Trans V cameras, which (as of this writing) are the Fujifilm X-T5, X-H2, and X-H2s. For best results, use in sunny daylight. I shot in both the 3:2 and 16:9 aspect ratios, and preferred the latter for a more cinematic feel.
Film Simulation: Classic Chrome
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Off
Color Chrome FX Blue: Weak
White Balance: 4350K, +6 Red & -8 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR-P Strong
Color: +4
Sharpness: -2
High ISO NR: -4
Clarity: -3
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: +2/3 to + 1 1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Vibrant Arizona Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5:
Vibrant Arizona (X-Trans IV)
Because X-Trans V cameras render blue more deeply on some film simulations, the X-Trans IV version of this Recipe calls for Color Chrome FX Blue to be set to Strong instead of Weak, and is otherwise identical. This Vibrant Arizona Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. For the X-T3 and X-T30, you can ignore Grain size and Color Chrome FX Blue (since your camera doesn’t have those options), and use a 1/4 Black Pro Mist or 10% CineBloom diffusion filter in lieu of Clarity; however, it will look slightly different. For newer GFX models… I’m not sure if you should use this version or the X-Trans V version, but one of the two should work well on your camera—try them both, and see which you prefer.
Film Simulation: Classic Chrome
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Off
Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong
White Balance: 4350K, +6 Red & -8 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR-P Strong
Color: +4
Sharpness: -2
High ISO NR: -4
Clarity: -3
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: +2/3 to + 1 1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Vibrant Arizona Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4:
Asteroid City Edit
If you aren’t satisfied with how well the Vibrant Arizona Film Simulation Recipe matches Asteroid City, there is a quick and easy Capture One edit that will make your pictures even closer to the aesthetic of the motion picture film. Simply import your straight-out-of-camera JPEGs (not the RAW!) into Capture One, find the Basic Color Editor, and make these adjustments:
Cyan
Hue -30
Lightness -20
Blue
Hue -20
Saturation +50
Those are the adjustments that I made to the picture above plus the five images below. You might have to stray from the above settings and modify the exact parameters, just depending on the photographs, but for these six, I followed them precisely and made no other changes. With this edit, the pictures are pretty convincing, and there’s no doubt that we’re mimicking Wes Anderson’s Asteroid City. Even though this will get you closer to the movie aesthetic, I personally prefer the unedited versions.
There was a moment while creating the above Recipes that I became particularly frustrated with the process, so I took a break, and instead worked on a different Wes Anderson look. I was inspired by the indoor scenes inside the newspaper office in the movie The French Dispatch, so I began working on a Film Simulation Recipe to mimic that aesthetic. The look is warm when shot in warm light, with somewhat muted colors and low contrast. This is a much different aesthetic than Asteroid City, but it is another Wes Anderson film that’s popular right now.
While the movie takes place in a fictional French town, it was filmed in the real town of Angouleme, which apparently (and appropriately) is known as the City of the Image. While these Recipes look quite interesting in outdoor daylight situations, they are intended for artificial and mixed indoor lighting, which is where they really shine. That’s why I’ve named the two Film Simulation Recipes below Indoor Angouleme. Although none of the movie was filmed in the 16:9 aspect ratio, I used it for these Recipes, but feel free to use whichever aspect ratio you prefer.
Indoor Angouleme (X-Trans V)
This version of the Indoor Angouleme Film Simulation Recipe uses the new Nostalgic Neg. film simulation. It also utilizes the Auto Ambience Priority White Balance, which I’ve only used once before (on the Ektachrome 320T Recipe). Indoor Angouleme is compatible with X-Trans V cameras, which (as of this writing) are the Fujifilm X-T5, X-H2, and X-H2s. Those with newer GFX cameras can use it, too; however, it will likely render slightly differently.
Film Simulation: Nostalgic Neg.
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Strong
Color Chrome FX Blue: Weak
White Balance: Auto Ambience Priority, -2 Red & -6 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR400
Highlight: -2
Shadow: -2
Color: -1
Sharpness: -2
High ISO NR: -4
Clarity: -3
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: +2/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Indoor Angouleme Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5:
Indoor Angouleme (X-Trans IV)
The Nostalgic Neg. film sim is somewhat similar to Eterna, and can sometimes be closely mimicked with it. Since X-Trans IV models don’t have Nostalgic Neg., I used Eterna instead. While this version isn’t 100% identical to the X-Trans V Recipe, it is pretty close overall, and retains the same feel.
This version of Indoor Angouleme is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. To use it on the X-T3 and X-T30, ignore Color Chrome FX Blue and Grain size (since your camera doesn’t have those options), select regular AWB (since your camera doesn’t have the Ambience option), and use a 1/4 Black Pro Mist or 10% CineBloom diffusion filter in lieu of Clarity; however, it will look slightly different.
Film Simulation: Eterna
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Strong
Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong
White Balance: Auto Ambience Priority, -1 Red & -6 Blue
Dynamic Range: DR200
Highlight: -1
Shadow: -1
Color: +4
Sharpness: -2
High ISO NR: -4
Clarity: -3
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: 0 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Indoor Angouleme Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4:
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-E4 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-E4 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Help Fuji X Weekly
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
$5.00
Neutral Density filters, more commonly called ND filters, are very useful. It’s worthwhile to have at least one ND filter available for your photography. Maybe you don’t know which one (or ones) to own and why you’d use it. I recently got some ND filters, and perhaps my story will be helpful to you.
In my How to get Filmic Photographs from your iPhone article I explained that my wife has a Sandmarc case for her iPhone 13 Pro. I thought she’d also appreciate some ND filters for her phone, since she uses it regularly for videography, so I got her three Sandmarc ND filters that can attach to her iPhone case. You see, ND filters are common in cinematography because you want a shutter speed close to the frames-per-second you’re recording in order to avoid jutter (a.k.a. stutter or choppy) when panning or whenever there is movement. Getting a slow enough shutter speed in bright conditions can be difficult without an ND filter. Unfortunately, the ND filters didn’t really work out with her iPhone workflow, so they initially went unused. Not wanting to let the filters go to waste, I reimagined how they could be utilized, and I figured out how to make them work for me. Now I see them as an essential tool for my photography!
Before I get to the filters, I want to briefly talk about one other Sandmarc item I have: iPhone Tripod, Compact Edition. This was also for my wife, but she doesn’t use it often—only occasionally—so I borrow it regularly, except that I use it with my Fujifilm cameras and not my phone. I need a small tripod for my desk when I do the SOOC Live broadcasts, but the one I’ve owned for years kind of sucks and just barely works; however, with Season 3, I began using the Sandmarc tripod, and it is so much better—perfect for the job! I also discovered that it’s great for travel because it folds up very small and doesn’t take up much space (about 8.5 inches). The tripod only expands to a little taller than two feet, but it is sturdy enough to hold my X-T5 with a lens as large as the Fujinon 90mm, so for occasional casual use—which is all I ever use tripods for in my photography—it is just fine. Since getting it, the Sandmarc tripod has become my most-used. I don’t think that it’s intended for “real” cameras like the Fujifilm X-T5, but that’s what I use it for, and it works great. I bring this up because tripods are closely associate with ND filters.
Neutral Density filters block the amount of light entering the lens, which allows for slower shutter speeds. Why would you want to do this? I already mentioned that in cinematography, slowing the shutter can reduce juttering. In still photography, slowing down the shutter allows you to show motion by way of blurring moving things, and it allows for high-ISO photography in bright conditions.
Sandmarc’s iPhone ND filters come in a pack of three: ND16, ND32, and ND64. The ND16 reduces light by four stops, the ND32 reduces by five stops, and the ND64 reduces by six stops. I most commonly use the ND16, but for longer exposures, the other two certainly come in handy. Did I mention that Sandmarc’s ND filters are also polarized? They are! Polarizers reduce glare and haze, which can be particularly useful when photographing water. Pretty cool, eh?
So if these ND filters are made for iPhones, how am I using them on my Fujifilm cameras? Technically, I’m not using them on my camera, I’m attaching them to my Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 lens. The ND filters have 40.5mm threads, and the 27mm lens accepts 39mm threads, so I purchased a cheap Rise 39mm-40.5mm step-up ring, which allows me to use the Sandmarc ND filters on my Fujinon lens. It works like a charm!
There are three ways in which I’ve integrated ND filters into my photography: slow shutter with a tripod, slow shutter without a tripod, and high-ISO in daylight. I’ll briefly explain each below.
ND Filter + Tripod
The classic way ND filters are used for still photography is with a tripod. By utilizing a slow shutter speed, things within the frame that are moving will become a blur. Waterfalls are probably the most common subject for this technique, where water appears to be a streak of blur or even a mist if the exposure is long enough. Typically, a maximum shutter speed of 1/15 is required for blurring the subject, but there are a few factors—lens focal length, speed and distance of the subject, desired blur—that could affect the necessary shutter speed, either faster or slower. The longer the shutter is open, the more blur you will get. Because you want everything that’s not moving to be sharp, a tripod is required for this technique.
ND Filter without Tripod
Who says that pictures have to be sharp? Maybe you want everything in the frame to be blurry! For this, you simply remove the tripod and use a slow shutter while the camera is handheld. Panning is one example of this. Using a slow shutter speed without a tripod is probably the most difficult ND filter technique, but there is a lot of opportunity for creativity, which means there is potential for dramatic or interesting photographs. The longer the exposure the more difficult this technique is—unless you’re really going for abstract art—so be careful not to set the shutter too slow.
High ISO in Bright Daylight
You might think that purposefully setting a high-ISO in bright daylight is a weird thing to do. The general advice given since the beginning of photography is to use the lowest ISO that you can get away with. If you can use ISO 200, use ISO 200. If you need to bump it up to ISO 400 because the light is dimmer, use ISO 400. Only use ISO 800 if you have to. And ISO 1600 should be used with extreme caution. ISOs higher than that are for emergency purposes only. But is that still good advice? In my opinion, Fujifilm cameras are excellent at high-ISO because—thanks to the X-Trans sensor and processor—they better control the aesthetic of digital noise, rendering it more like film grain. In other words, purposefully using high-ISOs can produce a more analog-like result. Some of my Film Simulation Recipes actually require ultra-high ISOs, and using them in bright daylight can be difficult; however, ND filters make it much more practical. My X100V has a built-in ND filter, but my other Fujifilm cameras do not; ND filters have opened up the opportunity to use these high-ISO Recipes in situations that would be much more difficult otherwise—this is how I’m most often using my Sandmarc ND filters.
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujinon 27mm f/2.8: Amazon B&H Moment
Note: the top four pictures were captured with a Fujifilm X-E4 & Fujinon 35mm f/2; images 1, 2 & 4 are Pacific Blues and image 3 is Kodak Portra 400 v2. The other pictures were captured using my Fujifilm X-T5 & Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 with a Sandmarc ND filter attached.
April showers bring May flowers, as the saying goes. Yes, it’s wildflower season already, and if you are not sure which Film Simulation Recipe to program into your Fujifilm camera to capture the colorful spectacle, this article should help with that. No matter which Fujifilm X-Trans camera you have, there’s a Recipe for you to try today!
This is far from a comprehensive list of Film Simulation Recipes that will work well for photographing spring blossoms. There are nearly 300 Recipes, and most of them could be a good choice, depending on the exact subject, lighting, and your style. This list is simply a selection of the ones that I personally like and can recommend to you. Feel free to try other Recipes not included in the list below. If I didn’t include your favorite Recipes for photographing spring flowers, let me know in the comments because I’d love to hear which ones you use. If you are not sure which Film Simulation Recipe to try, these recommendations should get you started.
X-Trans V
X-T5, X-H2, X-H2s
X-Trans IV — Part 1
X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, X-T30 II
X-Trans IV — Part 2
X-T3, X-T30
X-Trans III
X-Pro2, X100F, X-E3, X-T2, X-T20, X-H1
X-Trans II — Part 1
X100T, X-E2, X-E2s, X-T1, X-T10, X30, XQ2, X70
X-Trans II — Part 2
X100S, X20, XQ1
X-Trans I
X-Pro1, X-E1, X-M1
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
Due to unforeseen circumstances, the next SOOC Live broadcast is being delayed one day, and will now be on Friday April 28, and not Thursday the 27th. I apologize for any issues that this might cause. I hope that you can still join us!
What will this episode be about? It’s Part 2 of our discussion on Storytelling Photography. If you missed Part 1 when it was live, be sure to watch it now (click here).
The Film Simulation Recipes that Nathalie Boucry and I are challenging you to shoot with this month are Reggie’s Portra, AgfaChrome RS 100, Classic Slide, and/or Ilford Delta Push Process. You have until this Tuesday to use these Recipes and upload the results to be included in the Viewer’s Images Slide Show and potentially this upcoming broadcast. Click here to upload your pictures—please include the Recipe name in the file name so that we know which one you used. I can’t wait to see your photos!
Don’t forget: the next show will be LIVE on Friday the 28th! It’s an interactive program, so the more who can tune in, the better it will be. I look forward to seeing you then!
I shot a 36-exposure roll of Fujichrome Fortia 50 on my Fujifilm X100V.
Right now you are thinking one of a few things. What is Fujichrome Fortia 50? Fortia was discontinued a long time ago, and is well expired now and difficult to find. Anyway, you can’t shoot film in a Fujifilm X100V! There’s not a Fujichrome Fortia 50 Film Simulation Recipe, is there? All of that and more will be explained in this article!
Read more of this content when you join the Fuji X Weekly Creative Collective today! Click here to learn more.
I’m always working on new Film Simulation Recipes. Even though there are nearly 300 on the Fuji X Weekly App (available for both Android and Apple), I’m nowhere near finished. There are so many more that I want to create!
Recently I’ve been working on two specific Recipes that I’m especially excited about. I’m not going to say today what they are inspired by or are supposed to mimic—feel free to guess in the comments! Both required a lot of testing and adjusting and retesting and readjusting… and compromises. I look forward to sharing them with you soon. Which one are you most excited for: Recipe 1 or Recipe 2? Let me know!
Why should you shoot with Film Simulation Recipes? It’s a part of a better way to get a retro film look. It’s one of seven tips to get a film look from your digital photos. It’s popular. Why do I? It saves me a ton of time over post-processing RAW files and is so much more fun—shooting with Recipes on Fujifilm cameras has had such a profound impact on my photography and my life, no hyperbole!
Pentax just announced the K3 III Monochrome DSLR. Yes, a black-and-white only camera!
I find a few things intriguing by this. First, a lot of people say that there’s no market for such a camera, that only the Leica enthusiasts with Leica-like budgets will buy a monochrome-only camera. Yet Pentax apparently disagrees. I hope they’re right. It’s certainly a risk that they’re taking, but I think it will do well enough simply based on all the initial hype, which there’s quite a bit of.
The Pentax K3 III Monochrome (such an uninspired name, right?) has a 26-megapixel APS-C sensor inside. Sound familiar? My guess is that it’s the same Sony sensor that’s found in Fujifilm X-Trans IV models, just with the color filter array removed. I could be wrong about that. Perhaps more importantly, this monochrome sensor is clearly available for camera makers to buy, because Pentax is doing so, which means Fujifilm could, too.
The price difference that Pentax is charging for the monochrome vs the regular model is $500. That seems pretty steep, but it’s a niche product, so a premium should be expected. I suspect that Fujifilm would likely charge a similar amount—$300 to $500—for a monochrome version of one of their models, if they were to make one.
I’ve been suggesting for years that Fujifilm should make a dedicated black-and-white camera, and call it the Acros Edition. Why? With an X-Trans sensor, 55% of the light-sensitive sensor elements are recording luminosity information while 45% are recording color information. With a monochrome sensor, 100% of the light-sensitive sensor elements are recording luminosity information. Because of this, you get higher perceived resolution, as pictures will appear more richly detailed, and there’s more shadow latitude, which improves dynamic range and high-ISO capabilities. You can also use color filters just like with black-and-white film. It’s definitely not a camera that everyone will want, but some—myself included—will line up for it the day it is announced.
Basically, it will have only the Acros film simulation, and the same JPEG options as other X-Trans cameras (except no Color or White Balance). I can imagine Fujifilm offering a stronger Grain option than what’s currently available on the other models, and perhaps an Acros Hi and Acros Low, for higher or lower contrast rendering. I’d also like to see a lifted shadow option for a faded look. The X-Pan aspect ratio should absolutely be included. Otherwise, I don’t think too many modifications will be required to the menu.
Hopefully Fujifilm is already working on this. They should be, anyway, but they’re probably not. Ideally, it would be an X-Pro or X100 model, but at this point I’d take any, except for the X-S or X-H lines. Seriously, a Fujifilm X-Pro3 Acros Edition or X100V Acros Edition would be simply incredible! It would definitely catch people’s attention. If Fujifilm wants a WOW product, this is it right here.
My journey to Fujifilm wasn’t a straight path. Like many worthwhile adventures, there were a lot of twists and turns, and even moments where I nearly gave up. I’ve yet to chronicle this camera odyssey, so I thought I’d share it with you today. Perhaps you can relate, or maybe it will somehow assist you on your own journey.
In autumn of 1998 I enrolled in Photography 101 in college, where I learned to develop and print film in a darkroom. My first camera was a Canon AE-1, which I absolutely loved. Digital photography was in its infancy back then; I could tell a digital picture from film very easily, so I steered clear of it. I was one of those “holdouts” who stubbornly refused to go digital, and continued to shoot film even though it was no longer popular.
In 2009 I was asked to photograph my uncle-in-law’s wedding, which would happen the following spring. Realizing that the cost of film and development wouldn’t be that much less than the price of a new DSLR, I figured the time was finally right to give digital photography a try. My first DSLR was a Pentax K-x. I had a couple of Pentax SLRs, and I could use those K-Mount lenses on any Pentax DSLR—being able to use lenses that I already owned was a big upside. While the K-x was a budget model (not the cheapest, though), it was their newest, so I took a chance and went for it.
I didn’t realize how much of a learning curve there would be. Photography is photography, I thought, but I was very wrong. I had never used PASM—on my film cameras, if I wanted to adjust the aperture, I turned a ring on the lens; if I wanted to adjust the shutter speed, I turned a knob on top of the camera; and ISO was set by the film. Choosing the shooting mode and using command wheels to adjust aspects of the exposure triangle was foreign to me. Crop-sensor was another new concept, which affects focal lengths and depth-of-field, something I didn’t even consider. With film, it’s often better to overexpose a little than underexpose, but with digital it is the opposite, because you can lift shadows but you cannot unclip clipped highlights. Post-processing with software… I had a lot of experience in the darkroom, but Lightroom… curves and sliders and layers and masking, that was all new to me, and it was not easy. I did not enjoy any of this.
Still, I had that wedding to photograph, so I begrudgingly trudged ahead, trying to become competent with my K-x.
For the next couple of years I was shooting more film than digital, but the film canisters were piling up in my refrigerator. My wife was getting tired of sharing fridge space with my film, but money was tight and I could only afford to get a couple of rolls developed here and there. I almost sold my K-x to fund the development of the film, but instead decided to just shoot more digital until my current stash of exposed film could be processed.
In 2012 I purchased my second model: a Samsung NX200. Yes, Samsung briefly had a line of mirrorless interchangeable-lens APS-C cameras that were actually quite innovative. By this time I had accumulated enough experience with digital photography—both operating digital cameras and post-processing with software—that it was becoming more comfortable and enjoyable, which made me want to shoot more.
I used that Samsung a lot… until one day when someone stole my camera bag from my car. Both the K-x and NX200 and all of my lenses were inside. Thankfully, I had good insurance, which replaced the K-x with a Pentax K30, and the NX200 with an NX210, plus they replaced the lenses. For about a month I didn’t have a digital camera, but once the insurance delivered, I had upgraded gear, and my zest for photography picked up right where it left off.
Funny enough, the stolen camera gear was recovered when the thief tried to pawn it. Because I had kept a record of the serial numbers, when I filed the police report the cameras were added to a list that was distributed to local second-hand shops; the pawn shop clerk saw that the gear was stolen, so they alerted the police. It took awhile, but I was able to acquire my stuff back, and suddenly I had four digital cameras!
I didn’t need four cameras, so I sold both of the Pentax bodies and the Samsung NX210, and used the funds to buy a Sigma DP2 Merrill (plus more NX lenses). I kept the NX200 for when I wanted an interchangeable-lens option. I liked this setup because the Sigma was small and pocketable, and the Samsung was smaller than a DSLR yet just as versatile.
The photographs from the Sigma DP2 Merrill were absolutely fantastic—finally as good as or perhaps even better than many of the film emulsions that I used. It was the first time that I felt this way about the quality of digital images. I finally truly embraced digital photography. I was in love with the pictures; however, the camera was far from perfect. Battery life was similar to a roll of film. You couldn’t stray far from base ISO. The camera itself was uninspiring. The RAW files were a complete pain to process. The photographs were amazing, but it was frustrating, difficult, and often time-consuming to achieve it. It was the epitome of love-hate.
For the next year, I used the Sigma for about 75% of my photography and the Samsung for about 25%. Man, that DP2 Merrill was a pain, but boy-oh-boy were the pictures good! Even though it had a fixed 30mm (45mm-equivalent) lens, I didn’t feel hindered by that limitation very often, and when I did the Samsung was eager to go.
A friend loaned my their Nikon D3200 to try for a few weeks, then I gave it back. The image quality was impressive for such a cheap body, but I was happy enough with the gear I had that I wasn’t tempted to switch brands.
While cellphones had had a camera built into them for many years, I never felt that they were useful photographic tools until I got a Nokia Lumia 1020. This cellphone was a legitimate camera! Not a decent cellphone that happens to have a so-so camera, but a decent camera that happens to have a so-so cellphone. While the Sigma was quite compact and easily carried, the Nokia was even more so, which means that I literally always had it with me.
For about another year, I used the DP2 Merrill for about 50% of my photography, the Lumia 1020 for around 35%, and the Samsung was down to roughly only 15%. During this time two things happened: I was getting burnt out on post-processing the Sigma files, which was extraordinarily time consuming, and the Samsung began acting weird sometimes. Perhaps that’s why I used my cellphone so much.
In 2015 I sold the NX200 (and the lenses for it), and went all-in on the Nikon D3300, returning to the DSLR. This was Nikon’s low-budget model, but (because I had previously tried the D3200) I knew it would work fine for me; I spent more money on lenses instead. I really liked the quality of the pictures from this camera, but it didn’t take me long to remember that I didn’t care much for DSLRs. While the D3300 was very small and lightweight for a DSLR, it was still bulky, and less convenient to carry around.
I preferred the D3300 process—the shooting experience and especially the editing—over the Sigma, so I used the DP2 Merrill less and less. I have several thousand unprocessed RAW Sigma files still sitting on an old computer that’s in a box in the closet, and I’m sure they’ll be lost to time soon enough. Within a few months of purchasing the Nikon, I was only using the D3300 and cellphone, and not the DP2 Merrill.
It was a tough decision that I occasionally regret, but I reluctantly sold the Sigma DP2 Merrill. I set out to replace it with something somewhat equivalent—good image quality in a small, pocketable body—but with easier images to deal with. I wanted something that would be better than a DSLR for travel or just carrying around. I landed on the Sony RX100 II, which had a smaller sensor and a zoom lens.
It was definitely good to have a smaller option; however, while the camera certainly was good, I was never really happy with it. Perhaps I was too closely comparing the images to the Sigma, which was unfair to do. Sadly, despite trying, the RX100 II never found its place in my workflow, and was often underutilized.
I didn’t even own the Sony RX100 II a whole year before I sold it. During this time I was photographing less, while simultaneously shooting more film than I had the previous few years. Soon the D3300 and my cellphone were the only digital cameras that I owned, and I was using the Lumia 1020 more than the Nikon.
My wife had a Canon PowerShot N digicam. This little weird square camera actually took interesting pictures. I borrowed it on several occasions, including a trip to the eastern Sierras and Yosemite National Park, where I often chose it over the Nikon.
I realized that I don’t enjoy big cameras. I appreciate smaller models because they’re easier to carry around and don’t get in the way of whatever else is happening around you. I feel sometimes that one has to choose whether they’ll be a photographer or just a regular person in the moment; however, small cameras allow you to be both, but often the compromise is image quality.
Even though some of my favorite pictures (up to that point) were captured on the Nikon D3300, in early 2016 I sold it, and seriously contemplated getting out of digital photography completely, and just shoot film. Instead, I purchased a Panasonic Lumix ZS40, which was similar to the RX100 but cheaper and not as good. For about four months my only digital models were this and my cellphone.
I also replaced my aging Nokia Lumia 1020 with an LG G4. The Nokia was barely being supported, so the phone side of it was becoming less practical. While the LG phone was not terrible for photography, I did not like it as a camera nearly as much as the Nokia; however, it was a much better phone overall.
This period of my photography is a bit of an empty hole. I nearly stopped. I was burnt out by a lot of things—some photography related and some not—and there just wasn’t the same joy in it that there once was.
But, then everything changed. I always had an interest in Fujifilm cameras since the original X100 was released, but never purchased one. In the summer of 2016, after months of not owning a “real” camera (aside from several analog models), I found a good deal on a used X-E1, so I bought it. When I first tried the X-E1, I instantly fell back in love with photography! The design—the retro tactile dials like my film cameras—just made so much sense to me. Why weren’t all digital cameras like this?!
Because I loved the camera so much, I was suddenly photographing a lot. I mean, a lot. The old problem of spending hours and hours editing pictures was returning, but at least the joy of photography was back. I sold the Panasonic, and used the X-E1 pretty much exclusively. Even the film cameras were going unused.
After one year, I traded out my beloved X-E1 for a Fujifilm X100F. Because the Sigma DP2 Merrill held such a special spot in my soul, I had high hopes that the X100F could basically do the same for me. It could be my “DP2” without the ridiculous editing hassle and without the shortcomings of that camera. At base-ISO the DP2 Merrill is really difficult to beat, but overall I found that I like the X100-series better. Much better, in fact.
Something very important happened at this time that must be pointed out: I figured out that the Fujifilm JPEGs were actually really good. I realized that the unedited straight-out-of-camera JPEGs didn’t look all that much different than my post-processed RAW files, and by tweaking the settings I could get even closer. Why was I spending all of this time editing RAW files when the camera could do the work for me? This realization literally changed my life. This was when I began making Film Simulation Recipes, which saves me so much time, and has allowed me to become a much more prolific photographer, while avoiding getting bogged down in the stuff that sucks the fun out of it.
This article is already much too long, so I want to skip over my journey within Fujifilm. Maybe I’ll save that for another time. Currently I own a number of X-series models—nine bodies, to be exact—and I have owned or used a number of others. In a moment I’ll tell you what I’m shooting with in 2023.
I have had the opportunity to try several non-Fujifilm cameras over the last few years. I’m a proud Fujifilm fanboy, but that does not mean I’m not curious about or are not interested in other brands. I’ve tried Canon, Sony, Nikon, Ricoh, and Apple. They’re all good. They all have positive attributes. For me it’s no contest: Fujifilm is hands-down the best—I love Fujifilm cameras, and I cannot envision being a photographer without at least one; however, everyone has their own tastes and appreciations, and you might disagree with my assessments.
So what am I shooting with now? Which cameras am I currently using?
Below are my top-ten most-used models so far in 2023, half of which are Fujifilm, which means five are not Fujifilm. I’ve placed them in order of most-used to least-used. As the year goes on I’m sure this list will change, at least a little. Without further ado, here are the camera’s I’ve been shooting with in 2023:
Fujifilm X-T5
Fujifilm X100V
Fujifilm X-E4
Ricoh GR III
iPhone 11
Fujifilm X70
Fujifilm X-H1
Samsung ST76
Nikon CoolPix S7c
Fujifilm FinePix AX350
See also:
Fuji X Weekly App
Ritchie’s Ricoh Recipes
RitchieCam iPhone Camera App
Classic DigiCams
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X100V in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X100V in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-E4 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-E4 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
Ricoh GR III: Amazon B&H Moment
All photographs tell stories—a picture is worth a thousand words, after all—but storytelling photography is perhaps a step further than just ordinary picture-taking. How exactly do you effectively tell stories through photos? What gear do you need? Which techniques should you consider? Which Film Simulation Recipes are best?
All of those questions and more are discussed at length by myself and Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry in the video below, which was last week’s SOOC Live broadcast. If you haven’t yet watched it, I invite you to do so now. If you want to try this type of photography or simply challenge yourself to become better at telling stories through your pictures, this episode is a must-watch. Also, so you don’t miss any future broadcasts, be sure to follow the SOOC Live YouTube channel—Episode 1 and Episode 2 of Season 3, plus all of the first two seasons, can be found there, too.
Most simply, storytelling photography is a type of documentary photography. It is chronicling the important or everyday events that you’ll want to remember for many years to come, such as holidays or precious family moments. It is capturing the human experience—how people adapt to or effect the environment around them. It is eliciting a response from the viewer, weather prompting questions or evoking emotions. Perhaps most importantly, you should “f8 and be there” because storytelling pictures become more meaningful over time, so it is critical to be in the moment and capture the picture.
The four Film Simulation Recipes that Nathalie and I challenge you to use for storytelling photography are:
This is a versatile Film Simulation Recipe that produces classic Kodak negative film colors. This could easily be your go-to Recipe for almost any situation, as Reggie Ballesteros, the creator of this Recipe, will gladly attest. It is intended for “newer” X-Trans IV cameras—X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II; for X-Trans V, I recommend setting Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, and for the X-T3 and X-T30, simply ignore Color Chrome FX Blue and Grain strength, since your camera doesn’t have those options.
I love the retro rendering of this Recipe! It’s not quite as versatile as Reggie’s Portra, but, because it has a cooler cast, it does still do well in a variety of light situations. If you want to emphasize blues and reds, this is the one to use. It is intended for “newer” X-Trans IV cameras—X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II; for X-Trans V, I recommend setting Color Chrome FX Blue to Weak.
This Film Simulation Recipe reminds me of a reversal film aesthetic similar to Elite Chrome or Provia 100F, although it’s not modeled after those emulsions specifically. It has a lot of contrast, and (like slide film) you have to be careful to get the exposure right. Because of the cool cast, it can be used in some artificial light situations and produce good results. This Recipe is compatible with all X-Trans III cameras, plus the X-T3 and X-T30; to use it on newer models, set Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, Clarity to 0, and Grain size to Small.
This is a great black-and-white Recipe; I think B&W lends itself well to this genre in general, so definitely give it a try! It does require an ultra-high ISO, which is challenging for bright daylight photography—enable the electronic shutter for faster shutter speeds and stop down, or use an ND filter. It is compatible with all X-Trans III cameras, plus the X-T3 and X-T30; to use it on newer models, set Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, Clarity to 0, and Grain size to Large.
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
Is there a better way to get a retro film look? In my opinion, the answer is yes!
Notice that I didn’t say the best way, only a better way. The best way to get a retro film look is to shoot actual analog film on a retro film camera; however, film is expensive and the process inconvenient. Digital is much more convenient, but digital images inherently don’t resemble film—one must manipulate them. There are numerous programs, plugins, and presets that will provide you with a film look without a lot of fuss, but it does require some level of post-processing; editing pictures is a good way to get a retro film look, but a couple downsides are 1) you must have access to (and pay for) the software and know how to use it and 2) it takes time to edit all of your pictures. There is another way, which I believe is a better way.
It’s very simple: shoot JPEGs on Fujifilm cameras programmed with analog-like Film Simulation Recipes and use vintage lenses. I say that this is a better way because you can achieve a retro film look without the hassle of picture manipulation. Better, of course, is subjective, but this is an increasingly popular method, largely because more and more photographers are deciding that it is indeed a better way for them.
Fujifilm cameras are an important ingredient to this because, when programming their digital output, Fujifilm utilized their film department to assist with the image rendering. In other words, using their vast film experience, they set out to infuse an analog aesthetic into their digital photographs. Film Simulation Recipes take it a step further by fine-tuning the camera settings to better replicate specific film stocks and/or processes or mimicking certain looks. There are nearly 300 Recipes on the Fuji X Weekly App (available for Android and Apple), so be sure to download it if it’s not already on your phone. You can do pretty much the same thing as Recipes with software, but it will not 100% match the straight-out-of-camera images and you will have to work for it (at least a little), while camera-made JPEGs are good-to-go without editing (the work is already done for you). This is a paradigm shift that can dramatically transform your workflow by drastically simplifying it, which saves you a lot of time, hassle, and potentially money, while simultaneously making photography more fun. Like I said: better.
The final ingredient is the glass. Modern lenses are often precision engineered, making them nearly flawless. That’s great if you want a digital look, but if you want a retro film look you should employ the same lenses that were used to shoot film, which often have flaws that give them character—an important aspect of the analog aesthetic. Find some old glass and shoot through it! You’ll need an adapter—the exact one depends on the mount of the lens—and set the camera to “Shoot Without Lens” in the Menu settings. These lenses are manual focus, which can be tricky at first, but thankfully Fujifilm provides you with some excellent tools to assist with it, making manual focus much easier and more enjoyable. Alternatively, you could use inexpensive third-party lenses, which often have similar characteristics to vintage lenses, and you won’t need a special adapter.
For the pictures in this article, I used a Fujifilm X-T5 programed with my AgfaChrome RS 100 Film Simulation Recipe shot through various tiny Pentax-110 lenses. The straight-out-of-camera results are very analog-like, and could probably pass as actual film photographs if I didn’t provide any background information. You’re not likely to think that these are out-of-camera pictures from a modern camera. If you weren’t convinced that they’re film, you’d likely assume some post-processing was done to make them appear film-like, yet they’re unedited. In any event, if you want a better way to get a retro film look, use Fujifilm cameras programmed with Film Simulation Recipes and shoot through vintage lenses. Simple. Easy. Convincing. Fun.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X-T5 in black: Amazon B&H Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver: Amazon B&H Moment
According to Fujirumors, who is almost always right, the upcoming X-S20 camera, which will likely be announced in May, will have a 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor, the same sensor as the X-S10 and all other X-Trans IV cameras, and not the new 40-megapixel or 26-megapixel-stacked X-Trans V sensor.
Wait, what?!? Why would Fujifilm do this?
This doesn’t make any sense because Fujifilm has historically used the same sensor in all models of a certain generation, with few exceptions. What are the exceptions? The X-M1 had an X-Trans I sensor paired with an X-Trans II processor (yet with options more like a Bayer model). The X20, X30, XQ1, and XQ2 were X-Trans II cameras with small sensors and not APS-C. Otherwise, all of the X-Trans cameras in a generation shared the same sensor. All of the X-Trans III cameras had the 24-megapixel X-Trans III sensor. All of the X-Trans IV cameras had the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor. But X-Trans V is definitely different.
First we have the 26-megapixel-stacked X-Trans V sensor in the X-H2S, which presumably will be found only in that one model and no others. Then there is the 40-megapixel X-Trans V sensor found in the X-H2 and X-T5, which presumably will also be found in the next X-Pro and X-100 models. Now we’ll have the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor (presumably paired with the X-Trans V processor) in the X-S20. Weird.
The advantage of having just one sensor for each Fujifilm era is that no matter your camera within a certain generation, you know you will get identical images out of each body. So you could have an X-T2 as your main camera, an X-T20 as a second body, and an X-E3 as a travel option, and the images will look the same, because they all share the same sensor and processor. Consistency. Or you might have an X-Pro3 and X100V, and—no matter which you used—the picture quality will be identical. Now with X-Trans V there’s a lot less consistency across the range, which in my opinion is a disadvantage.
Using the X-Trans IV sensor in the X-S20 does make sense because the sensor, while a few years old, is still excellent, and pairing it with the new processor will (potentially) get the most out of it. I have both X-Trans IV and X-Trans V cameras; while they’re all great, I actually prefer X-Trans IV. I don’t need 40-megapixels. Some people do—yes—but the vast majority don’t, and it’s overkill that for most people only exacerbates storage issues. So I would rather Fujifilm work to squeeze more—increased dynamic range, improved high-ISO, speed, etc.—out of the 26-megapixel sensor than to push more resolution. I feel like 26MP is a really good spot for APS-C, and Fujifilm shouldn’t be in a hurry to move past it. I’ve made many very nice 2′ x 3′ prints from X-Trans IV JPEGs, and the majority of people don’t print that large, let alone bigger.
One question that this raises is what will be different about the X-S20 compared to its predecessor, since they’ll share the same sensor? Apparently the X-S20 will have the new NP-W235 battery, which is certainly nice. I would be surprised if a slight design change isn’t necessary to accommodate the bigger battery, but I don’t expect any drastic changes to the design overall. I expect some improvements to autofocus, maybe image stabilization, and perhaps some small video spec upgrades (such as better time limits) will be included, but certainly nothing major. Most likely more will be alike than dissimilar; however, the upgraded battery and processor will make the X-S20 better than the X-S10, at least by a little, but probably not much more than a little.
I do think this gives some credibility to my theory that another PASM model is in the works—I don’t have any inside information, this is just my personal thoughts. I think a number of X-S10 users would like to upgrade to a higher-end body, but the X-H2/X-H2S is too big and expensive for them. I also believe that a number of X-H2/X-H2S owners would like a more compact and cheaper second body, but the X-S10 is a little too much of a downgrade for them. These folks aren’t interested in the X-T4 or X-T5 because of the traditional dials. Fujifilm has created a need for an in-between mid-tier PASM model. Don’t be surprised if an X-S2 (or whatever they will call it) is being designed right now, which will be a little larger than the X-S20 (but not as large as the X-H2/X-H2S), have weather-sealing, two SD-Card slots, seven Custom Presets, but no external fan accessory and slightly more limited video specs compared to the X-H2 (more similar to the X-T5), with an MSRP around $1,500-ish. Look for it in 2024. Like I said, this is all just a guess.
Another question that is raised is whether the X-T40 (or maybe they’ll call in X-T50) will have the X-Trans IV sensor like the X-S20, and I think the answer is yes. Fujifilm will use the “old” sensor to differentiate low-end models from mid and high-end bodies. If there is an X-E5, which is far from guaranteed, it would also have the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor. I don’t personally believe that both the X-T00 and X-E lines will continue, and most likely the one to get axed is the X-E series, which is unfortunate because I really like the X-E line. If there eventually is an X-E5, look for it in 2025 near the very end of X-Trans V. Fujifilm should 100% be making an X80—the long awaited successor to the X70—and if they do it will certainly also have the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor, but I don’t think that such a camera is in the works. I really hope I’m wrong.
I don’t know if the X-S20 (and future X-T40) will have an output more similar to X-Trans IV or X-Trans V or something unique. My guess is that the processor will be programmed to produce results more like the X-T5, which renders blue a little deeper on some film simulations and does some odd things with AWB (otherwise the differences between X-Trans IV and V are pretty small overall). We’ll have to wait until the camera comes out to find out.
Personally, I feel as though camera makers release new models much too quickly. There’s still quite some demand for X-Trans IV models. The X-E4 and especially the X100V have long backorder lists. A camera store told me that if they received zero new orders for the X100V and they continued to received new bodies at the same rate that Fujifilm has been delivering them, that it would take them six months to fulfill all of the current X100V orders; yet, they continue to receive new orders at a higher rate than bodies are being shipped to them by Fujifilm, so the backorder list is constantly growing. Fujifilm should concentrate their efforts on fulfilling current demand for X-Trans IV before pressing forward with X-Trans V. Unfortunately, camera makers will constantly push slightly improved new models because there is so much GAS and FOMO out there that people will buy them up.
There’s a cycle, which I’ve certainly been caught up in, and it’s not healthy: buy a new camera every year. People often have two camera bodies (sometimes someone has only one, and sometimes someone—like me—has a bunch)—and one of the two is replaced every odd year and the other is replaced every even year. Perhaps in 2021 you replaced your X-T2 with an X-T3 and in 2022 you replaced your X100F with an X100V; maybe in 2023 you will replace your X-T3 with an X-T5, and in 2024 you’ll look to replace your X100V with an X100Z (or whatever they’ll call the next X100). The cycle goes on and on.
My most recent camera purchase was an X-T5, but I did so in order to try the new film sim and make Film Simulation Recipes for X-Trans V; otherwise I didn’t need it—yes, the X-T5 is very nice to have and I’m not complaining whatsoever, but I’d be just as happy without it. I purchased my X-E4 two years ago, and I have no desire to replace it anytime soon—it was my most-used camera in 2022. My X100V was a birthday gift from my wife nearly three years ago, and I’m sure I’ll skip the next X100 series model, unless there’s something really radical about it. A year before that I bought an X-T30, which is a good camera that would still seem fresh if Fujifilm had shown it more Kaizen love, instead of releasing the firmware as a new model. Of those four, the X100V and X-E4 are my two favorites, and I hope to be still using them in 2025 and perhaps well beyond that. If Fujifilm made an X80, monochrome-only X100 or X-Pro, or an IR model, I’d be in line to buy those, but otherwise I’m not personally interested in anything new. I have what I need, but more than that I need to break the cycle of buying a new camera every year.
The fact is that even the older Fujifilm models are good. Yes, the newer models are better in many ways, but that doesn’t mean that their predecessors weren’t good. I used my Fujifilm X-T1 exclusively for a couple of weeks last November, and, not surprising to me but perhaps a surprise to some of you, the X-T1 did exceptionally well in most situations, including sports—the biggest shortcoming was autofocus in dim-light. If your camera still works for you, there’s not likely a good reason to upgrade.
Of course, the X-S20 isn’t intended as an “upgrade” model. Its purpose is to convince those unhappy with their Canikony cameras to consider Fujifilm instead. The X-S line’s main goal is to attract those from other brands who aren’t interested in (or are intimidated by) Fujifilm’s traditional tactile controls, but want Fujifilm’s colors and such. The X-S20 is an entry-level model, so Fujifilm is hoping that those with a Nikon D3500 or Sony A6300 or Canon T7 (or another model along those lines) will take a long look at the X-S20. I’m sure it will sell well, bringing people into the Fujifilm fold who otherwise wouldn’t be.
Which Film Simulation Recipes are good for nighttime photography? With nearly 300 to choose from, it can be difficult to know when to use which Recipe. Almost all film emulsions are either Daylight-balanced or Tungsten-balanced; similarly, most Recipes are intended for daytime photography, and some are intended for nighttime photography. There are also some that, even though made for sunny conditions, still do well after the sun goes down. So let me suggest to you 10 Film Simulation Recipes that do well at night!
Depending on the exact light situation, some Film Simulation Recipes that are intended for daytime use will still look good at night, and other times they will produce a strong warm cast that you might not like. While adjusting the White Balance to better suite the situation is always an acceptable option (“season to taste” the Recipe), picking a Recipe that is intended for the light situation you are in is my preferred method. Like film, it’s better to pick the “right” one that matches the conditions you’ll be shooting in, but there’s no right or wrong way to do photography, so you’ll have to decode what works for you.
Of course, everyone has different tastes. There are some Recipes that you might love, and some that you might not. Your favorite after-dark Recipe might not be in this list, as it’s not comprehensive. There are certainly other Recipes that I have personally used and liked for nighttime photography; however, these are ones that I think are especially well-suited. A couple were tough cuts, and would certainly have been included if it was 15 Recipes and not 10.
If you are not sure which Film Simulation Recipe to use at night, try one of these!
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
Help Fuji X Weekly
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
$5.00
There’s an easy way to get a filmic look from your iPhone!
I set out to help my wife, Amanda, get a filmic look from her cellphone images. Her “main” camera is a Fujifilm X-T4, but she also shoots quite a bit on her iPhone 13 Pro; her interest in photography and videography began with the iPhone. The filmic aesthetic is highly sought after, but not always easy to achieve; however, I found a good way to get it on the iPhone, so read on to find out how you can do it, too!
What exactly is a filmic look? I would describe it as a cinematic film aesthetic. Think stills from a motion picture, or photographs captured with cinema film that has had the Remjet layer removed. This wasn’t an attempt to mimic any specific movie or emulsion, but just achieve a general filmic look through cellphone photography—make it seem less digital and more analog-like, except without all of the editing that is traditionally required. As a mother of four and behind-the-scenes Fuji X Weekly cohort, Amanda is quite busy, and doesn’t have time for extensive editing, so post-processing pictures could not be a prerequisite for achieving a filmic aesthetic.
I started with a Sandmarc case for her iPhone 13 Pro because Sandmarc has an adapter, which they call Step Up Ring Filter Mount, that allows you to use filters on your cellphone camera. This adapter has 40.5mm threads, and, using a 40.5mm-49mm step up ring that I already owned, I was able to mount my 20% CineBloom diffusion filter to Amanda’s iPhone. I felt that this filter would be a key component to achieving a filmic look, and the Sandmarc case with the Step Up Ring Filter Mount plus the 40.5mm-49mm step up ring was the easiest way to get that CineBloom filter onto her iPhone.
I’m sure the Sandmarc case isn’t the only one that allows you to use filters, but it is the one we got, and so far it seems to be a quality product. It works well and is reasonably inexpensive, so it’s easy to recommend. It did take a fall; while the case kept the phone safe and undamaged (which is great!), it did leave a noticeable mark on the case itself. Another note: Sandmarc has their own line of filters—including a diffusion filter—but we used the 20% CineBloom because I already own it for my Fujifilm X100V. I personally really like CineBlooms, but the brand of diffusion filter doesn’t really matter all that much, I don’t think.
On the iPhone 13 Pro, you can attach the filter over the main 26mm camera or over the telephoto 77mm camera, but not over the ultra-wide 13mm camera. You can only use it on one camera at a time, so it does take some of the convenience out of using the iPhone for photography—not only do you have to carry the filter, but also screw it over the correct lens. Not a dealbreaker for this method, but certainly a limitation that one should be aware of.
The camera app that Amanda uses is RitchieCam, which has filters inspired by film, crafted to have an analog essence. Designed with a one-step philosophy, RitchieCam produces photos that are ready to be shared or printed the instant that they’re captured. RitchieCam was recently enthusiastically endorsed by Leigh & Raymond Photography as their favorite iPhone camera app—it was one of their five suggested ways for achieving a film look on a digital camera. RitchieCam is my very own camera app; download it for free today from the Apple App Store!
I said that the 20% CineBloom was key to getting a filmic look because diffusion filters take the digital edge off of digital pictures. It blooms the highlights and softens the shadows more like negative film. Also, diffusion filters have been a cinematographic tool long before they were popular for still photography, so the aesthetic produced by these filters is inherently filmic. Below is an example of what a diffusion filter does to an image. I chose this particular set because the difference is obvious; oftentimes the effect is a little less apparent, especially if there is not a bright light source (such as the sun) in or near the frame. The strongest CineBloom is 20%, so if you find it to be too strong, consider the 10% or 5% options instead—sometimes subtlety is preferable.
Below are some of Amanda’s pictures captured with her iPhone 13 Pro using RitchieCam and the 20% CineBloom filter, made possible by the Sandmarc case and filter adapter. Combining RitchieCam with a diffusion filter produces images with a filmic quality, and, because editing isn’t required, this process works well for those who don’t have time to post-process their pictures, or who only want to do quick adjustments.
Visit RitchieCam.com to learn more about the App. Also, RitchieCam is on Instagram!
Photos tell stories.
Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words—a lot can be nonverbally communicated through an image. But what exactly is storytelling photography? How do we effectively become storytellers with our cameras? Those questions and so many others will be discussed at length in the next SOOC Live broadcast, which is THIS Thursday, April 6th, at 10 AM Pacific Time, 1 PM Eastern. Mark your calendars now! I hope you can join us live!
For those who don’t know, SOOC Live is a bimonthly broadcast where Nathalie Boucry and I discuss Film Simulation Recipes, give tips and tricks for achieving the results you want straight-out-of-camera, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow. On the first Thursday of each month we introduce and discuss a theme—the theme for March was Street Photography—and the fourth Thursday of each month we look at the photographs captured within the theme using the Recipes, talk about lessons learned, and answer any and all of your questions. It’s an interactive show, and your participation is what makes it great!
Last Thursday was the Q&A broadcast. If you missed it when it was live, you can watch it now (see below). We had some very good discussions about street photography, so be sure to play it if you haven’t seen it yet!
Also, check out the Viewer’s Images slideshow! It was so great to see your wonderful pictures—they were quite inspiring to me—and I appreciate everyone who shared—thank you! Take a look!
Be sure to follow SOOC Live on YouTube if you don’t already, so that you don’t miss any broadcasts. I look forward to seeing you in just a few days as we talk about Storytelling! This will be an especially insightful episode, I think, so you won’t want to miss it. See you on Thursday!
Have you ever wondered about the story behind Fuji X Weekly? How did it all began? What’s behind the curtain? The April issue of FXW Zine is for you!
This never-before-told journey is something that I’ve been wanting to share with you for awhile now. I had to be a little vulnerable, because some of the details are personal. I hope that you find it inspirational to you and your personal journey, whatever that is. Ultimately, this journey isn’t so much about me as it is about you.
If you are a Creative Collective subscriber, the latest issue of FXW Zine is available for you to download now! If you are not a subscriber, consider joining the Fuji X Weekly Creative Collective to gain access to all of the issues plus other bonus articles.
Read more of this content when you join the Creative Collective today!