Anyone who has ever used a Fujifilm X or GFX camera has used Film Simulations. No mater if you are a JPEG photographer or a strict RAW shooter, you use at least one Film Simulations. There’s no getting around it.
Those who claim “I don’t use Film Simulations” on their Fujifilm cameras are not being honest because it’s nearly impossible to disable them (we’ll get into that in a moment). What they are really stating is, “Film Simulations are for those JPEG people; I shoot RAW, so they don’t apply to me.” But, silly goose: they apply to the RAW photographer just as much as to those who shoot straight-out-of-camera. In some cases this may simply be ignorance, not realizing that Provia—the “standard” option—is one of the 20 Film Sims; however, I believe it can also be explained by arrogance: “Film Simulations are for JPEGs, and Real Photographers™ don’t shoot JPEGs.”
Interestingly enough, the most popular Film Simulation by far among strict RAW photographers is Provia, while the most popular Film Simulation by far among those who use Film Simulation Recipes is Classic Chrome. The Provia Film Simulation is intended to be broadly appealing, especially to those without a background in film photography. Classic Chrome is intended to appeal to those who want a film look. For those who use Recipes, Provia isn’t even one of the Top 5 most popular.
There are only two ways to disable the Film Simulations. The easiest and most obvious is to use the Advanced Filters, which, when activated, are in lieu of Film Simulations (although some of those are based on Provia); however, I don’t think the people who loathe Film Sims are using the Advanced Filter options. The second requires a camera with an OVF. Disable the EVF and turn off image playback. Only use the OVF. Then, in Lightroom, change the base color profile to your own or Lightroom’s neutral base. In that way, you never have to look at a Film Simulation.
The problem with saying “I don’t use Film Simulations” is that each time you look at the EVF or review on the LCD the photo you just captured, you are seeing it with a Film Simulation applied, most likely Provia. You are seeing the world through the lens of that Film Sim each time you use your camera. You may or may not use Lightroom’s or Capture One’s version of a particular Film Simulation when you edit your RAW photos (most probably do), but at the time of capture, you are absolutely using a Film Simulation.
Film Simulations are half the fun of Fujifilm cameras. Those who use Recipes already know this. My suspicion is that those who only ever use Provia haven’t tried the other options, or maybe only briefly did when their camera was brand-new before quickly dismissing them. In other words, they may not know what they’re missing. It’s quite possible that they’d like their cameras even more if they explored this feature.
My suggestion, if you are a strict RAW photographer who would never be caught dead shooting JPEGs, is to try the other Film Simulations. You might find one that better matches your vision more than Provia, which might help you to better visualize the final result at the time of capture. It can be a useful tool; you might find it to be less of a gimmick than you thought it was. Then, hopefully, we can move beyond the “I don’t use Film Simulations” nonsense, which is untrue. If you use a Fujifilm camera, you use Film Simulations. Period. Maybe you only use one, but you still use them.
As for the rest of us who find Film Simulations to be one of the defining features of our cameras, it’s ok to celebrate that. There’s no need to feel “less than” because some jerk talks down to you. If that person found what works best for him or her, that’s wonderful; if you found what works best for you, that’s equally as wonderful. There’s no right or wrong way to do photography, or one way that is superior. What I can say after meeting hundreds of you: these people might be common on the internet, but they are rare in real life. Most people are kind, friendly, and accepting. And, as it turns out, we have more in common than we thought, including that we all use Film Simulations.
This is sorta the same way of saying every single camera manufacturer uses some basis for producing a visual depiction of what is in front of you when you click the shutter. Fujifilm just puts a lot more effort and impact into grading for “film simulations” where as Canon, Sony, or Nikon uses their own proprietary “Camera Vivid” or “Camera Standard.” So, literally everyone uses some kind of simulation for color. 🙂
Also, I would throw in there that as soon as you import it into Lightroom (unless you tell it otherwise) the “Adobe Color” simulation overtakes everything. The only way to lock in a simulation is straight out of the camera jpgs.
Exactly. Well said. 😀
Something I’ve taken to doing with my Pentax where I intend to edit RAW files in post is to shoot the extra-small JPEGs. Like, the 1920×1280 small ones. They hardly take up space, but they’re right there at hand if I ever want to email someone a small picture quickly.
Even if JPEGs are mostly an afterthought to your photography, there’s some merit in them.
Yeah, I think JPEGs are certainly useful (at least to some extent) for pretty much everyone. And the photographic continuum is moving more towards camera-made JPEGs and less editing in general. But even if you have no interest in JPEGs and only ever shoot RAW, Film Simulations can be a useful tool, if for no other reason than pre-visualization. I think some people, in their pride (or whatever it is) “throw the baby out with the bathwater” (as the saying goes), and don’t realize that it might actually help them and be beneficial and overall a positive thing for their photography in perhaps a small way.
“Real photographers don’t use JPEG” Care to give Martin Parr a shout
Oh, did he say something like that? I’m not familiar.
No Martin did not say that, but he is a world famous photographer that only shoots in JPEG. The quote was from today’s article.
I’d love to read the article, where can I find it?
https://www.photocrowd.com/blog/171-how-shoot-martin-parr/
Not sure if this is the one I was looking for, but a Google search will bring up several articles about Mr.Parr
I appreciate the link. Spent the last hour reading articles about Martin Parr. I was familiar with a handful of his photographs, but didn’t realize how prolific he is.
It is true that everybody who looks at a digital photo has settled (consciously or not) on a specific translation of pixel data into color levels, a profile, to use a generic term. But in all fairness, they are not all “film simulations”, although they are clearly all necessarily to some extent inspired to the rendition of film. If they were, Fuji would not have done anything “special” here. What Fuji did was to deliberately try to replicate (some of) the characteristics of specific films (I say “some of” because practically no film had the linearity, low noise, resolution, and dynamic range of modern digital, and Fuji, smartly, did not try to replicate these constraints by default). They put a lot of effort in that, and it shows, given that color rendition is one of the things Fuji is praised for. But of course you are right that everybody USING A FUJI is definitely using a film simulation: in fact, a simulation RECIPE, given that all these other settings are still there, even if they are all to default.
This said, everybody who goes around saying what “real”-something does, automatically exclude themselves from the sample of “real”-something.
Personally, little amateur me thinks that the debate is a bit pointless. I use (non-default) film simulation recipes to put myself in a given “image mindset”, so to say: seeing a given type of rendition in the EVF pushes me to shoot accordingly, to look for compatible subjects, or to see if that rendition works for the subject I’m interested in. I always shoot raw + jpeg in that case, and which one of the two I end up using depends. In a number of cases the jpeg is just fine because I settle on a final result that requires little edit. In other cases I take the raw, use a preset more or less close to the jpeg rendition, or go completely “manual” in LR, using the jpeg as a “draft” of sort of how I want it to look. I don’t see that any of these is better or worse than the other.
The debate is indeed pointless. No method is better or worse than another, only what one finds works best for them. There’s no right or wrong way to do photography. Unfortunately, some make themselves gatekeepers, and like to tell others that their way is the best and right way, and they talk down to those who take a different path. It’s really sad.
Well said!!! I really want every person who is complaining about the Film Simulation dials on the X-M5 and X-E5 to read this article!! I may just start sending them the link. LOL
Thanks!