Velvia — Astia — Classic Chrome — PRO Neg. Hi — PRO Neg. Std — Classic Negative — Nostalgic Neg. — Eterna — Eterna Bleach Bypass — Acros
There are 20 different film simulations on the new Fujifilm X100VI. Since there are likely many newcomers to Fujifilm who aren’t all that familiar with the various film sims and Film Simulation Recipes, I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss each one in more detail, and offer my personal favorite Recipes for each. I don’t (yet) have access to the new Reala Ace film simulation, so that one will be excluded from this (for now, anyway). Also, I’ll combine the four Acros film sims into one article, and the four Monochrome film sims (and probably Sepia, too) into another.
The Provia film simulation (a.k.a. Provia/Std) is named after the Provia line of slide films by Fujifilm; however, it was not intended to closely mimic the emulsion. The Astia film simulation is actually a little closer approximation of Provia film, but it is not an especially close match, either. When Fujifilm designed the Provia film simulation, they intended to make a color profile that “looks beautiful” to those who come from a digital-photography background, and in doing so they discovered that those who have a film-photography background don’t tend to like it as much (I learned photography on film, so you can probably tell already which way I lean). In other words, if you want a close replication of Provia slide film, default Provia/Std will leave you disappointed.
While the Provia film simulation can indeed “look beautiful” (as Fujifilm put it), it’s not my personal favorite. I would describe it as being true-to-life with just a hint of contrastiness and vibrancy. It’s kind of a middle-of-the-road option that can be used for anything; a Jack of all trades, but a master of none. I don’t find it to be especially analog-like, if you are hoping for a film look. That doesn’t mean it should be avoided, because it is possible to get good results from Provia—it can even be used to replicate some emulsions and analog processes—it’s just not my personal first choice. Or second choice. Or third. You get the idea. Still, there are some pretty good Film Simulation Recipes that use Provia as the base, and I definitely do enjoy using this film simulation from time-to-time.
The five Film Simulation Recipes below are my favorites that use Provia as the base. Everyone has different tastes, so you might like other ones more. I count 26 Recipes in the Fuji X Weekly App that use Provia, so there are many to choose from. But, if you are unsure which Provia Recipe to try, let me suggest picking one from my list below.
#1:
Intended the Fujifilm X-T3 and X-T30, plus X-Trans III cameras; set Grain size to Small, Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, and Clarity to 0 for use on newer X-Trans IV models and X-Trans V. Great for sunny daylight and especially sunset photography.
#2:
This Recipe is for the GFX 50R and GFX 50S. It’s compatible with the X-T3 and X-T30, but will render slightly different; for newer X-Trans IV and X-Trans V, set Grain size to Small, Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, and Clarity to 0.
#3:
Mimics the look of slide film developed in C41 chemistry, this Recipe is for X-Trans III cameras. It’s a lot of fun when used occasionally.
#4:
A better look than default Provia, compatible with X-Trans IV (except the X-T3/X-T30) and X-Trans V cameras.
#5:
A vibrant and warm Recipe with some similarities to a couple of Kodak emulsions. Compatible with X-Trans IV (except the X-T3/X-T30) and X-Trans V cameras.
See also:
How To Add Film Simulation Recipes To Your Fujifilm Camera
Why Film Simulation Recipes are BETTER than default Film Simulations
Why Shooting JPEGs Is So Popular
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and many more on the Fuji X Weekly App!
Do you use Fuji X Raw Studio when you create these? They are really good!!
I don’t use X RAW Studio, personally. I do it all in-camera. However, you can apply Film Simulation Recipes using X RAW Studio, if that is one’s preference.
When the time comes for you to conceive of recipes that are to be applicable to the new X100 VI specifically, I guess you’ll want to be at least aware of the latest DPR forum posts over an alleged whitebalance rendering difference with the older version of the camera. (?) It’s still way too early day – and fresh news – to work up any anxiety, but … could this potentially wreak havoc on the precision of your good work?
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67571241
I wouldn’t put a lot of stock into that.
First, it’s difficult to know what settings one actually has programmed, and you never know when something is different (even when they say it is the same). For example, maybe they inadvertently did an LCD Color Adjustment and don’t even realize that they aren’t identical between the two cameras. So you just don’t know how carefully this experiment was conducted. Also, the LCD can be adjusted to better match the resulting images, if one finds it to be off for some reason.
Second, there are some differences between the rendering of each sensor generation, and it should be expected that the X100V and X100VI render slightly differently, and aren’t 100% identical. I have not noticed the tiny color shift that is mentioned/noticeable in the forum (with my X-T5), so it could simply be that some setting is slightly different between the two models. Or it could be the programming of the X100VI by Fujifilm, and there could possibly even be a future firmware update that fixes it (things like that have happened before). Anyway, whenever it is that I (finally) get my hands on an X100VI, I’ll be sure to test it out thoroughly.
Third, there are weird quirks with Fujifilm’s AI AWB.
https://fujixweekly.com/2022/12/21/why-i-dont-like-the-new-ai-awb-on-the-fujifilm-x-t5/
That might possibly explain the subtle difference.
Fourth, and this is much less likely, but still a potential possibility (albeit unlikely), that there is an LED light-source nearby, which is by complete coincidence giving a brief illumination with a certain color cast for one camera and not the other. I don’t think this is it, but when one is doing tests, it’s important to consider things like it.
All of this is to say that I’m not worried about it in the slightest, but when I get a chance I’ll look into it. My X100VI is probably not coming soon, so it will have to wait. I have pretty thoroughly compared my X-T5 with my X-E4 using the same lenses, and have not encountered what is being shown; however, AWB does have quirks on X-Trans V.
For the Provia 400, in the original article said that you use Clarity -2 and CCEB to Weak. But here you said Clarity 0 and CCEB to Off. so just curious which is your intended settings for Provia 400?
That’s a great question.
The Recipe was created three years ago, and for the GFX 50S/50R, which has more limited JPEG settings (compared to the newer cameras), and is more like the X-T3/X-T30. At the time when I published it, if the GFX camera had had the newer options, I would have liked for CCEB to be set to Weak and Clarity -2. The latest X-series cameras at that time did have those options, so I suggested that the inclusion of those two settings could perhaps improve the aesthetic slightly. However, if you want the look to be more exacting to the Recipe, then CCEB should be set to Off and Clarity set to 0 (and, really, with the cameras that can do 0.5 Highlight/Shadow adjustments, Shadow should be set to +1.5 to more exactly replicate the GFX). So I guess the answer is: it depends on your preference. I don’t think there is a right or wrong choice. You can try both, and see which you prefer. As for the picture at the top of the article: CCEB was set to Off and Clarity set to 0.
I hope this answers your question.
Thanks! This basically answered everything and more 👍
😀