Tomorrow—Thursday, December 7th—is the season finale of SOOC Live. Not only that, but it’s also our holiday special. Oh, and we’re going to take a deep dive into double exposure photography. Join Nathalie Boucry and I tomorrow at 9:00 AM Pacific Time, 12:00 noon Eastern as we bring Season 3 to a close. This is an interactive program, so your participation makes it even better. I hope to see you tomorrow!
If you don’t already subscribe to the SOOC Live YouTube Channel, be sure to do so now—otherwise you might miss out on future broadcasts. To make it easy to find, I’ve included tomorrow’s show below:
Double exposure photography is simply two exposures on a single frame; however, getting good results can be quite tricky. There’s actually a whole lot to it, with a number of techniques and considerations to talk about. There’s also a ton of creative potential, and various ways to use double exposures that you might not have thought of. You can get amazing straight-out-of-camera results that perhaps seem impossible to achieve in-camera, but are indeed possible.
This article contains five of my double exposure photographs. Perhaps you are surprised by some of them, as they might not appear to be double exposures. You might also be surprised to learn that they’re all camera-made JPEGs. We’re going to talk about the specifics tomorrow, so be sure to tune-in if you want learn more about double exposure photography on your Fujifilm camera.
Left the Lights On – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Fluorescent Night Recipe
I wanted to create a Film Simulation Recipe for my Fujifilm X-T5 camera that would produce a certain look when shot under fluorescent lights at night. Now there are different varieties of fluorescent lightbulbs, and the kelvin temperature can vary quite significantly between them. It’s also not uncommon to find fluorescent lights mixed with other nearby light sources. In other words, results will very depending on the exact light situation. Sometimes this Recipe will produce warm results, and sometimes cool. While not modeled after any specific emulsion, this Recipe is similar to using a Tungsten-balanced film—perhaps something similar to Fujicolor NPL 160T or Kodak Portra 100T, although it’s not exactly like either of those. This Recipe gives you one more option for nighttime photography.
What I found myself enjoying more than I thought I would is using this Fluorescent Night Film Simulation Recipe during the day. It has an obvious cool cast with pronounced blues. Still, I was pleasantly surprised that this Recipe is halfway decent for daylight use. If you are looking for a retro film-like aesthetic that isn’t warm, Fluorescent Night might be a good option for your daylight photography.
A Visit with Santa – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Fluorescent Night Recipe
This Fluorescent Night Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with all Fujifilm fifth-generation X-Trans cameras, which (as of this writing) are the X-H2s, X-H2, X-T5, and X-S20 (yes, the X-S20). You should also be able to use this on newer GFX models, but the results will likely be slightly different (try it anyway). For nighttime use, I most often selected -2/3 or -1/3 exposure compensation, and for daylight I most often used +1/3 or +2/3; however, “typical exposure compensation” is only meant as a starting point, and each exposure should be judged individually.
Film Simulation: Nostalgic Neg. Dynamic Range: DR200 Grain Effect: Strong, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome FX Blue: Weak White Balance: Fluorescent 2, -8 Red & -1 Blue Highlight: -1 Shadow: -1.5 Color: +4 Sharpness: -2 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -3 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: -2/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Fluorescent Night Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5:
Happy Girl – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Neighborhood Bougainvillea – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Bougainvillea Blue – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Bougainvillea Along Stucco Wall – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Sidewalk Potted Plant – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Potted Palm Tree – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Hairstyle Chair – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Christmas Tree & Letters to Santa – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Illuminated Door at Abandoned Building – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Broken Window – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Birria – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Circle K Gas Station – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Christmas Star – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Find this Film Simulation Recipe and over 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Spooner Cove – Montaña de Oro SP, CA – Fujifilm X100V – Fujicolor 100 Gold
When I published my Top 25 Most Popular Film Simulation Recipes of 2023 (so far…), what was surprisingly absent were any that were modeled after or inspired by Fujifilm emulsions. The Top 25 were almost entirely Kodak-like Recipes. That shouldn’t be too surprising since Kodak was the most popular film manufacturer, so the desire for a Kodak rendering is to be expected. But, personally, I really appreciate many of the Fujicolor Recipes, and their complete exclusion from the Top 25 list was a bit unexpected.
Someone suggested that I should make a new list, this one showcasing the most popular Fujifilm-like Recipes. Just like the Top 25 list, this one is based on page-view website statistics. It’s a flawed method, but the best that I have available to me. I included the overall ranking, too, just so that you can see where they stand in the big picture.
The number one most popular Fujicolor Recipe is for X-Trans III cameras (plus the X-T3 and X-T30), as is number eight. The tenth spot is an X-Trans V Recipe. All the others are for X-Trans IV cameras. Eight of these use Classic Negative as the base, one uses PRO Neg. Std, and one uses Velvia. Some of these are personal favorite Recipes of mine, while some of my other personal favorite Recipes that are modeled after or inspired by Fujifilm emulsions didn’t make this list.
Without any further delay, here are the Top 10 Fujicolor Film Simulation Recipes:
The December issue of FXW Zine is out now! Creative Collective subscribers can download it today. Not a Creative Collective subscriber? Join to gain access to this issue plus all pervious issues of FXW Zine and the many bonus articles.
Issue 25, which begins year-three of the publication—has four articles that feature three Film Simulation Recipes. There are 33 pictures (including the cover) over 24 pages. Enjoy!
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 like prime lenses. I don’t use zooms very much. In the 25-ish years that I’ve been photographing, I could count the number of zoom lenses that I’ve ever owned on my two hands, with a few fingers to spare. Probably 98% of the photographs that I have ever captured were on primes. This is all to say that I wasn’t going to comment on the upcoming Fujinon zoom, but a number of you have asked me to give my opinion.
There are several reasons why I prefer primes over zooms. Prime lenses, since their focal length is fixed, are often engineered more precisely, have superior image quality, and better build quality. They often have larger maximum apertures, too. Primes can be smaller. And I appreciate the restraint of one focal length—I think limitations often improve art. The advantage of zooms is that you can cover a lot of focal lengths with just one lens. There’s no right or wrong approach. Use what works best for you and your photography, and don’t worry about what other people think of it.
The only zoom lens that I’ve ever used that I actually like is the Fujinon 18-55mm f/2.8-4. I say that while owning the Fujinon 100-400mm, which is the most expensive lens that I’ve ever purchased. The kit 18-55mm f/2.8-4 is actually pretty darn decent for a zoom, and it’s fairly lightweight and compact, too. I had this lens on my first Fujifilm camera—an X-E1—but because I don’t like zooms I sold it, something I later regretted. A year ago I purchased an X-T5 bundled with the 18-55mm lens. Even though I like this zoom, I still only use it occasionally.
Short Train – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 & Fujinon 18-55mm f/2.8-4 – 1970’s Summer
Fujifilm will soon be discontinuing the 18-55mm f/2.8-4, and introducing a new zoom in its place: 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 R LM WR. This is according to Fujirumors, which is where I get my information on yet-to-be-released upcoming Fujifilm gear. The new lens will be more wide and less telephoto, and will have a smaller maximum aperture at the long end. It also won’t have IOS. Apparently it will be able to fully resolve the 40mp resolution of the X-T5 and X-H2. It will have internal zooming, meaning that the lens won’t extend as you zoom. The advantages of internal zooming are better weather-sealing and potentially build-quality, no zoom-creep when pointed up or down, and potentially smoother zooming.
It would appear as though there’s a lot of give-and-take with this new kit zoom. Losing stabilization might be a big deal, but maybe not if you are pairing it with a camera with IBIS. Some will really appreciate 16mm over 18mm. Some will really dislike 50mm over 55mm, and f/4.8 over f/4 (I’m one of those people). Internal zooming will be a big deal for a few and irrelevant to most. As far as resolving the full 40mp resolution, if you print very large—say, 40″x60″—you’d have to stand a couple of inches further back for the print to look as crisp with a lens that doesn’t fully resolve the resolution vs one that does. For most people and purposes, the difference is negligible and unnoticeable. It doesn’t bother me in the slightest that the 18-55mm lens can’t fully resolve all of the resolution from my X-T5, because the pictures still look excellent and detail-rich—I can’t tell the difference.
I feel like this new lens is solving a problem that doesn’t really exist, but maybe I feel this way because I don’t use zooms very often. A whole lot of copies of the 18-55mm have been made, so if you would prefer that over the new one, you should have no problems finding one for many years to come. I assume that the new lens will be excellent, but it’s not for me personally. I have no desire to buy it; however, I’m sure many will love it.
I’m very curious what the development of this lens means. Generally speaking, Fujifilm likes to introduce lenses that are intended to pair well with certain camera models. Since this lens doesn’t have IOS, it likely means it will be bundled with cameras that have IBIS. Since the lens will (apparently) resolve 40mp, Fujifilm believes some with 40mp cameras will buy it. But it’s a kit zoom, and the 50mm f/4.8 spec is unimpressive, so which camera does Fujifilm have in mind? Certainly it won’t come bundled with the X-Pro4. I could see Fujifilm offering it as an X-T5, X-H2, and X-S20 bundle—I wouldn’t be surprised if they do. But is there some upcoming model that makes a lot of sense for this new lens to be paired with? Something that’s not high-tier, that has IBIS, and a 40mp sensor? I really don’t think so. I don’t believe that we can read that much into it. My guess is that the presumed someday upcoming X-T30 II successor will come bundled with this lens, but that camera won’t be weather-sealed, have IBIS, or the 40mp sensor.
In my opinion, the upcoming Fujinon 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 is just Fujifilm making a change to the mid-tier kit zoom lens option to reflect changing desires within the camera industry—today, generally speaking, 16mm is more preferable over 18mm than 55mm f/4 is over over 50mm f/4.8. In some aspects the new lens will be better than the “old” zoom, and in some aspects it will be worse. Some will like it, and some won’t. I would suggest to Fujifilm that they should continue to manufacture the 18-55mm simultaneously with the new 16-50mm, and not discontinue it; however, perhaps that would be too many similar options to offer.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
The “new lens” part of the upcoming X100-series model is curious, because the X100V, which was the fifth iteration of the series, was the first with a new lens. So why will the X100Z (or whatever Fujifilm names it) have a new lens? The leading theories are:
The current lens cannot fully resolve 40mp, and the new camera will have the 40mp X-Trans V sensor, so a new lens is necessary to take full advantage of the high-resolution sensor. In my opinion, this makes the most sense, although (if it is the reason) I would be slightly surprised that the current lens cannot resolve 40mp.
Fujifilm will increase the maximum aperture to f/1.8 or f/1.7 to better compete against the Leica Q3.
The new camera will have IBIS, and a lens redesign is necessary to accommodate.
Fujifilm has improved the leaf shutter, which requires a redesign of the lens.
Fujifilm will eliminate the IR hotspot on the lens, and in turn will sell a full-spectrum version.
There could be some other reasons, but those are the ones I have heard. I highly doubt it will be the last one, although it would be cool if it was. Most likely it is to resolve more resolution, but nobody knows at this point, so it could be anything.
The second upcoming camera will be the GFX100S II. Wait, what? Seriously?!
So, yeah, the GFX lineup will have the 100 II and 100S II. I’m not sure what will be different about the two models, other than the 100S II will be less expensive than the 100 II, so perhaps a little less feature-rich and slightly smaller. Honestly, I couldn’t be less excited about this, but it’s probably because I’m not in the GFX system.
I’m not entirely shocked that the upcoming camera will be the GFX100S II, but it is still a head-scratcher. First, once released, it will mean that 8 out of the last 12 Fujifilm cameras will have been PASM models (2/3rds of them). The only four non-PASM cameras will have been the X-E4 (which has been discontinued and is selling for ridiculous prices), the X-T30 II (which was basically just a firmware update and has been discontinued, although you can still find it if you search hard enough for it), the X-T5, and the X100Z (or whatever Fujifilm calls it). It will also mean that 4 out of the last 11 Fujifilm releases will have been GFX models; however, the GFX50S II has already been discontinued, and presumably the GFX100S will be discontinued very soon. I do think that the GFX system needs a divergent option, as it would seem like the GFX100 II and GFX100S II will be pretty similar to each other. A GFX100R, which would be the successor to the long-discontinued GFX50R, seems like the most obvious choice, but I don’t think Fujifilm plans to release another GFX camera with traditional tactile controls.
My best guess is that the third camera will be the X-Pro4, and that it will be announced sometime in May. I have no inside information (I never do, I get it from Fujirumors like everyone else…), but based on past releases, this makes the most sense to me. I hope that I’m right, because there’s a lot of pent-up demand and eagerness for this camera. If it’s not an X-Pro4, a lot of people will be disappointed.
So where does that leave the X-T40 (or X-T30 III or X-T50 or whatever Fujifilm will name it)? It could and should still happen, but I think Fujifilm is trying to move out of that market segment. They’re focusing more on premium products, and less on lower-tier, as they believe the bottom of the market is continuously drying up. Either Fujifilm makes that series more premium (and in turn more expensive)—kind of like what they did with the X-S20—or they do a very modest update, and it might be the last model in the series. Or it could be that the X-T30 II was the last one. My hunch is that there will be at least one more, perhaps released sometime in the second half of 2024. It certainly could be the third camera and not the X-Pro4—I think a lot of people would be shocked (in a negative way) if that were the case.
Where does this leave the X-E5? I think this line is done. The X-E4 was the last. I truly hope I’m wrong about this, though, because I love the X-E cameras. If one does come, most likely it will be in 2025 and not 2024. Since there’s so much demand for the X-E4 and not much supply, it would make a lot of sense to expedite a successor, but I don’t think that Fujifilm is currently doing so.
What about the X80? The Fujifilm X70 was discontinued in December of 2016, and there has been demand for a successor ever since. I’ve noticed that the demand for an X80 has been building recently, growing larger and more vocal. Certainly the recent sales success of the Ricoh GR III should cause Fujifilm to consider it. I don’t, however, believe that Fujifilm has any current plans to release an X80. If they did, I’d be first in line to buy one!
In early 2023, Artificial Intelligence burst onto the Film Simulation Recipe scene, and, at the request of photographers across the world, AI began creating all sorts of camera settings to emulate all sorts of different aesthetics for Fujifilm models. I was on the leading edge of this, and in March published Using AI to Create Film Simulation Recipes, which included the ChatGPT-created Urban Dreams Recipe.
I didn’t stop there. In April I published a YouTube video (which you’ll find below) entitled Kodachrome X Fujifilm Recipe made by ChatGPT vs Fuji X Weekly Kodachrome II. I don’t publish very many YouTube videos (only three in 2023); however, I felt this topic was important enough to dedicate a video to it. Shortly thereafter, also in April, I published a companion article called Can AI Make a Fujifilm Recipe?, which included the ChatGPT-created Kodak Ektachrome E100VS v1 Recipe (along with the non-AI v2).
I didn’t quit there—not even close! In June, on the SOOC Live broadcasts, Fujifilm X-Photography Nathalie Boucry and myself chatted twice (for about three hours in total) about ChatGPT Film Simulation Recipes. If you’re curious about this topic, that’s probably the most informative discussion you’ll find. I’ve included both of those videos below.
Also in June, as a companion piece for those two SOOC Live episodes, I published an article entitled Shooting with ChatGPT AI Fujifilm Film Simulation Recipes. That article included two more AI-made Recipes: Soft Blue Classic and Vivid Summer Glow. I’ve published a total of four ChatGPT Film Simulation Recipes on this website. I think two are pretty good, and two are very mediocre—only the two that are “good” are in the Fuji X Weekly App.
While I’ve published four AI-made Recipes, I’ve asked ChatGPT to create probably close to 50 (using multiple accounts). Most of them weren’t good, so they never saw the light of day. I’ve talked about all of this before, but just to quickly rehash, here are some of the big issues with using ChatGPT to create Film Simulation Recipes for Fujifilm cameras:
AI will always give you an answer, but whether that answer has any value is another question entirely.
AI can’t see, and doesn’t know how the various camera settings translate to real-world use. It can only attempt to match descriptions.
If you ask it to create the same Recipe—using the same exact wording—on multiple accounts, you will get multiple answers, often quite divergent from each other.
I’ve never experienced an instance where all of the required Recipe parameters were included in the first try. Each time, I’ve had to identify the missing camera settings, and ask AI to add those to the Recipe.
AI will sometimes include nonexistent or nonsensical settings.
ChatGPT is very predictable, and will not usually stray outside of certain box. Ask it to make enough of these, and the box is easily identifiable.
ChatGPT doesn’t cite its sources, even when asked. It definitely operates unethically, and probably (in my opinion) illegally—eventually courts will make various rulings as they hear different lawsuits.
So why bring this up again? First, I’ve had several people over the last month comment that ChatGPT is a wonderful resource for Fujifilm Film Simulation Recipes. I strongly disagree with that for the reasons mentioned above, and I thought it worthwhile to discuss those reasons again for those who might be unaware. Second, someone asked if Google’s Bard AI was any better than ChatGPT at creating Film Simulation Recipes. I wasn’t sure, so I spent some time over Thanksgiving putting it to the test. So let’s find out!
Captured with the AI-made Soft Blue Classic Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X100V.
The first question I asked Bard was, “Make me a Film Simulation Recipe for my Fujifilm X-T5 that mimics the aesthetic of Kodachrome 64 film.” Well, I could tell very quickly that this wasn’t going to work out well, as the first setting it gave was the Acros film simulation. It included the nonsensical setting of Color +2 (you cannot select Color when using Acros). The settings that Bard failed to provide were Dynamic Range, White Balance Shift, Color Chrome Effect (although it did give Color Chrome FX Blue), and Clarity. I assume that it would have also missed Grain size, but it said to set Grain to Off.
Obviously that “Kodachrome 64 Recipe” will not look anything like actual Kodachrome 64 slides, even if it did somehow make sense. I asked Bard to cite its sources, and to my surprise it did! It gave me (broken) links to my website, including these articles: Kodachrome 64, Kodachrome 25, and Monochrome Kodachrome. Apparently, Bard has been trained using Fuji X Weekly (or to search for it… Bard is a Google product after all), but it’s not very good at it. In my opinion, AI should provide a bibliography of its sources upfront without being asked. Even Wikipedia does that, and apparently it’s not a reliable enough source for serious work. Bard will cite its sources when asked, which is better than nothing, while ChatGPT won’t even do that. If Wikipedia can’t be taken seriously, than AI should be taken even less so. It’s super sketchy that AI doesn’t cite it’s sources, but at least Bard will do so when prompted to.
I asked Bard to tell me why it chose the settings that it did. This demonstrates very clearly that trying to match descriptions of camera settings with descriptions of the film is an unrealistic method for achieving accurate approximations of various looks. For example, “Acros is a black and white film simulation that provides a good starting point for replicating Kodachrome’s tonal range and contrast.” And, “Kodachrome had a tendency to lift shadows, creating a slightly brighter and more open appearance. Raising the shadow setting by 0.5 replicates this effect.” And, “Kodachrome had a subtle ability to retain detail in highlights, preventing them from becoming blown out. Lowering the highlight setting by -1 helps achieve this result.” If you know even a little about Kodachrome 64 film and Fujifilm camera settings, you should have no issues identifying the problems there.
Bard’s “Kermit the Frog juggling Elmo Recipe” is not a good choice for portraits.
I didn’t stop with that one Recipe. I asked Bard to make many more. After a number of tries, I began to ask it for ridiculous Recipes, just to see what it would do. Make me a Film Simulation Recipe that mimics Kermit the Frog juggling Elmo. Make me a Film Simulation Recipe that mimics the look of digesting rotten apples that are crawling with spiders. Make me a Film Simulation Recipe that mimics the aesthetic of comedian Brian Regan hitchhiking across the Delaware River during the Clone Wars. In each case—instead of responding with “you are nuts” or “that makes no sense”—it provided me with a Recipe. It always will. For the Brian Regan Recipe, it tells me, in order to capture the essence of his adventure, I should photograph him on a rural road next to a river bank with some fog. Sounds intriguing, but there’s a problem.
You see, Bard has a bigger tendency than even ChatGPT to include nonexistent settings. Some of these are Color Chrome FX Red (which, arguably, could be just Color Chrome Effect), Color Chrome FX Green, Grain Effect Medium, WB Shift +1, and Image Enhancement On. This is in addition to the missing settings that are required for a Recipe but weren’t included, and the occasional nonsensical ones (like Color +2 with Acros). Sometimes it’s hard to make sense of what Bard provides when asked to make a Recipe.
For those wondering about Color Chrome FX Green, Bard had this to say: Color Chrome FX Green increases saturation and vibrancy of green pixels and slightly lifts green shadows for a more balanced tonal range. Use sparingly, as a subtle application of Color Chrome FX Green can produce pleasing results. Excessive use may make the image appear unnatural. Of course, there is no such thing as Color Chrome FX Green, but even if there was, it wouldn’t work as described by Bard.
The conclusion of this whole article is that ChatGPT and Bard are not good resources for Film Simulation Recipes for Fujifilm cameras. They are both capable of making Recipes (they will always give you one if you ask), but whether or not those Recipes are worth using or resemble what they’re supposed to is another story entirely. A broken clock is correct twice each day, and sometimes you can get a good Recipe by chance when using AI, but most often that won’t be the case. However, because these chatbots tend to stay within a box and don’t often stray outside of it, the Recipes that they make are often not terrible, they’re usually okay-ish. But you have to put up with the missing, nonexistent, and nonsensical settings. And you have to be alright with the unethical nature of it. My personal advice, if you want a Recipe that is more likely to give you good results, is to look no further than my website.
Someone said that AI will usually do a better job than a complete novice, but never as good as an expert. I agree with that assessment. I think if you ask ChatGPT or Bard enough times for Film Simulation Recipes, you are bound to get some that are trash, a bunch that are so-so, and a couple that are actually good. You could probably have as much luck rolling dice or throwing darts to create Recipes. That’s just the way it is. However, the technology is advancing rather quickly, and it’s only a matter of time before AI will be able to analyze pictures, have a good understanding of Fujifilm camera settings, and be able to approximate an accurate replication of picture aesthetics with the available JPEG settings. We’re not there yet, though. There’s a significant gap. I don’t doubt that the technology will get there eventually, perhaps in another five or ten years.
That will put me out of business. I understand that day is eventually coming, and that’s ok. It is what it is, as they say. The sad thing is that AI is using my own words and work against me. The more I publish, the more resources OpenAI and Google have to train their AI. It’s a type of theft. I do think that the courts will eventually rule that much of what they’ve done doesn’t qualifying as “fair use” under the law, but the damage will already have been done, and folks like me wont be compensated a dime for it. That’s the way life goes sometimes. The big guy walks all over the little guy. But, when life throws you punches, bob and weave (I’ve heard that quote attributed to Joe Frazier, but I’m not certain), which simply means that I have to evolve. As Bob Dylan sang, the times, they are a changin’. They always have been, and always will be. That’s why I spent so much time this year exploring the topic of AI Film Simulation Recipes. I had to know where Fuji X Weekly stands in all of it. This website has evolved a whole bunch since its launch in 2017, and it will continue to do so in the coming months and years. I appreciate all of those who have come along for the ride, and I look forward to seeing where this Fuji X Weekly thing goes as the future unfolds. If anything, it will be an interesting adventure, perhaps like Brian Regan’s hitchhiking escapades along the foggy Delaware River during the Clone Wars.
Working – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-E4 – Kodak Vision3 250D Recipe
This is a long-overdue adaptation of the X-T3/X-T30 Kodak Vision3 250D Film Simulation Recipe for use on “newer” X-Trans IV cameras. Kodak Vision3 250D is one of my favorite Recipes, but it’s only compatible with the Fujifilm X-T3 and X-T30; however, I’ve been using it on my X100V and X-E4 occasionally for years. It’s not hard to adapt X-T3/X-T30 or X-Trans III Recipes for use on newer models by simply selecting a Grain size (Small or Large), setting Color Chrome FX Blue (and Color Chrome Effect for X-Trans III Recipes) to Off, and Clarity to 0. In the case of this Recipe, I prefer Clarity set to -2 and not 0, but it’s acceptable either way.
Vision3 250D is a medium-speed daylight-balanced color motion picture film introduced by Kodak in 2009. It was a replacement for the similar (yet slightly inferior) Vision2 250D. Vison3 250D can be developed in ECN-2 chemistry or C-41. There is a lot of variation in how the film can look depending on a host of factors—especially how shot, developed, and scanned—but I’ve always been impressed with how closely this Recipe mimics some of the aesthetics produces by the emulsion.
This Kodak Vision3 250D Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. For fifth-generation models, which are the X-H2s, X-H2, X-T5, and X-S20 (yes, the X-S20!), you can use this Recipe, but blue will render more deeply, so it will look slightly different.
Film Simulation: Eterna Dynamic Range: DR100 Grain Effect: Strong, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome FX Blue: Off White Balance: Fluorescent 1, -3 Red & -1 Blue Highlight: +3 Shadow: +4 Color: +3 Sharpness: -2 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -2 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Kodak Vision3 250D Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4:
MartAnne’s – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Dancing Joy – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
No Fun – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Urban Daisies – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Boat on Lake Hamilton – Hot Springs, AR – Fujifilm X-E4
Rainy Rose – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Willow – Bountiful, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Afternoon Joy – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Desert Creek – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Arizona Date Palm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Bougainvillea & Palm Trunk – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Potted Flower Blooms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Park Gazebo – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4
Find this Film Simulation Recipe and over 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Suburban Abstract – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1 – “Xpro”
This Xpro Film Simulation Recipe came about after some experiments with white balance and shifts. It went through several iterations before I settled on these settings. The results remind me of cross-processed Fujichrome Sensia or perhaps Elite Chrome. Cross processing film (also called Xpro) is developing it in chemistry that it wasn’t intended to be developed in, most commonly color slide film (E6) in color negative film (C41) chemistry. Different films can give different results when cross processed. I have several other cross-process inspired Film Simulation Recipes (here, here, here, and here); this one is simply a little different aesthetic.
This was a Patron Early-Access Film Simulation Recipe in the Fuji X Weekly App, available to App Patrons for over a year. It’s been replaced by a different Early-Access Recipe, so now it’s available to everyone. It’s not one that you’ll want to use all of the time, but occasionally for a different look it is great. It’s more of a “fun” Recipe. If you are a Fuji X Weekly App Patron, be sure to look for the new Early-Access Recipe!
Storm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1 – “Xpro”
This Xpro Film Simulation Recipe is fully compatible with X-Trans III cameras, which are the X-Pro2, X100F, X-E3, X-T2, X-T20, and X-H1, plus the X-T3 and X-T30. For newer cameras, you’ll have to decide on a Grain size (Small or Large), set Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, and Clarity to 0. This Recipe can also be used on the “older” GFX models (50R and 50S), but will render slightly differently.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: -1 Shadow: +3 Color: +4 Color Chrome Effect: N/A (X-Trans III) or Off (X-T3/X-T30) Sharpness: -1 Noise Reduction: -4 Grain: Weak White Balance: 3400K, -6 Red & -9 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +2/3 to +1 1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Xpro Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-H1 and X-T30:
Associated Fence – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Green – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Structured Abstract – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Roof & Fence Lines – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Tile Roof – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Cactus Hotels – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Barrel Cactus – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Secret Garden Gate – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Don’t, This Way – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Light Bulb – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Closed Window – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Pigeon Pipe – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Pergola in the Rain – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Arizona Architecture – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Hanging Blossoms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Dark Flowers – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Light Pink with Green – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1
Find this Film Simulation Recipe and over 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Small Clouds Above the Roof – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30 – Pro Neg Recipe
This Film Simulation Recipe is one that I’ve been working on and have had programmed into my Fujifilm X-T30 for some time now. It’s been through a lot of iterations, with small tweaks here and there over the last several months, before I landed on the final settings. The idea was to create a generic Kodak-ish color negative film aesthetic, perhaps something similar to ColorPlus 200 or Pro Image 100. While I did look at both of those emulsions a number of times during the development of this Recipe, I didn’t set out to strictly emulate either of them. I think there can be similarities at times to those two film stocks, but generally speaking this Recipe isn’t a replication of either. I hope that makes sense. I do think it does a good job at producing a generic color negative film aesthetic that is by-and-large Kodak-like, with occasional similarities to both ColorPlus 200 and Pro Image 100.
Pro Neg is a Fuji X Weekly App Patron Early-Access Recipe. The Fuji X Weekly App is free, yet becoming a Fuji X Weekly Patron unlocks the best App experience! One benefit of being a Patron is you get early access to some new Film Simulation Recipes. These Early-Access Recipes will eventually become available free to everyone in time, including this new one. Patrons help support Fuji X Weekly and, really, without them there would be no App. So I want to give a special “thank you” to all of the Patrons!
Beautiful Bougainvillea Blooms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30 – Pro Neg Recipe
This Pro Neg Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-T3 & X-T30, plus all X-Trans III cameras, which are the X-Pro2, X100F, X-E3, X-T2, X-T20, and X-H1. For newer cameras, you’ll have to decide on a Grain size (Small or Large), set Color Chrome FX Blue to Off, and Clarity to 0. This Recipe can also be used on the “older” GFX models (50R and 50S), but will render slightly differently.
Find the Pro Neg Recipe in the Fuji X Weekly App! If you are a Fuji X Weekly App Patron, it’s available to you right now.
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Pro Neg Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T30:
Empty Schoolyard – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Backyard Wall View – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Hidden Triangle – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Gila River Hat – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Tree by Field 4 – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Bougainvillea Petals – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Little Cloud Between the Trees – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Twin Palms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Palm Behind Bougainvillea Blossoms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Suburban Colors – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Bougainvillea in the Sky – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Basketball Hoop at Dusk – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Hoop & Tree – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Court Cycle – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Dusk Saguaro – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
One Fallen, One Standing – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Window Reflection – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Yellow Trumpet – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Backyard Rose Blossom – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T30
Back in early-August, Pergear reached out to me and asked if I’d be interested in testing out an upcoming lens. I said sure, agreeing to provide feedback and keep quiet about the lens until it was announced sometime in the future. Two weeks later a box arrived at my door containing a TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 Autofocus lens. I eagerly attached it to my Fujifilm X-T5 and put it to use!
Before I go any further, I want to state a few important notes. To start, this is the first time that I’ve ever been given a chance to try out and provide feedback for a piece of unreleased camera gear. Heck, I’ve barely been offered gear that’s already been available! This was such a big honor, and I appreciate the opportunity given to me by Pergear. I hope it’s not the last time, or that it’s limited to just one manufacturer (Fujifilm: hint, hint). Second, my copy of the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF was a preproduction model. They told me that the production version would have a slight tweak to the mount (which, for my copy, is X-mount, if that wasn’t obvious), but the optics and functionality would be identical; however, I have some notes (and an apology) about this in just a moment. Third, I wasn’t given any technical information until after I’d finished writing this review, so I had to edit that information in as best as I could.
The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF competes directly with the Fujinon XC 35mm f/2 lens, which is the budget version of the XF 35mm f/2. Those two Fujinon lenses are, as far as I understand, optically identical, but the cheaper XC version lacks an aperture ring and weather-sealing. Going head-to-head with such a high-image-quality-yet-still-very-affordable lens seems a bit risky. Clearly, if money is no concern, one will opt for the $400 XF version (which is both smaller and better-looking); however, those on a tight budget now have two lenses to consider: the $200 Fujinon XC 35mm f/2 or the $149 TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF. At $280, the Viltrox 33mm f/1.4 AF could also be mentioned. Plus there are a number of manual focus options, including the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4, TTArtisan 35mm f/0.95, and Meike 35mm f/1.7, which I compared side-by-side in Sedona earlier this year.
From a pure technical image-quality perspective, the Fujinon options are significantly superior. The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF lens has some corner softness when wide-open, as well as vignetting. Across the entire frame, the TTArtisan is noticeably less crisp at f/1.8 than the Fujinon is at f/2. Once you stop down, things quickly improve, and the TTArtisan is quite excellent (and comparable to the Fujinon) from around f/5 or so and beyond, with nothing negative to report. There are 10 elements in 8 groups, with 9 aperture blades. The minimum focus distance is about two feet, which is so-so. The lens seems to be well built, with more metal than plastic. The filter thread size is 52mm. Of course, photography is art, and character in real-world use can be much more important than test charts and spec sheets, so we’ll move right along.
Thankfully, the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF has excellent character, especially when a bright light source is just outside of the frame. I cannot tell you strongly enough how much I love how this lens flares! However, this is where I need to apologize. You see, I told Pergear that I really love the flare produced by this lens—especially the multiple rainbow flare—and showed them some examples of it, but their response was not what I expected: they didn’t think that most of their customers would appreciate it, so steps would be taken to reduce it. I reached out to them a few weeks later to inquire what was changed to reduce the flare, and they simply replied that TTArtisan reduced the flare, but did not change any of the optics or coatings. So I don’t know what’s different between my preproduction version and the final version that’s now for sale, but apparently there is a difference, and my copy is more prone to the absolutely wonderful flare, and yours less so to some extent, if at all. I pleaded with them not to make this change, but to no avail. I hope that whatever they did change has a minimal impact on flaring, but I have no idea. The lens comes with a square lens hood (mine did not), and maybe that was their solution; I’d definitely try the lens without the hood and see what you get.
The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF doesn’t have an aperture ring. This might or might not be a big deal to you, but it is to me. In my opinion, all lenses for Fujifilm X cameras should have an aperture ring, because it’s such an integral part of the experience for the majority of Fujifilm models. However, I do understand that not everyone feels the same as I do, and that many third-party lenses are available for other systems where aperture rings are less common or essential. I told Pergear that if this lens was offered with an aperture ring, I’d definitely buy it. I hope that TTArtisan makes an aperture ring version at some point in the future. I don’t know how much that would cost, but I think $250 would be a fair price for such a lens. The minimum aperture is f/1.8 and the maximum is f/16, with 1/3 intermediate stops in-between the full stops (except for in-between f/11 and f/16, where it has only a single 1/3-stop before jumping 2/3-stop to f/16); however, you must use the command dial to adjust the aperture, which isn’t my preference. That makes the use of this lens more frustrating (and, in turn, less fun) than it should be.
There’s one issue that I want to mention cautiously, and that you must take with a big grain of salt. While the autofocus was quiet, I experienced a lot of focus-hunting and misses with the TTArtisan lens, much more than any other glass I own. My guess is that this is due to it being a preproduction model (an early one at that), and I assume that the firmware on the production version has rectified this problem; however, I cannot verify one way or the other. It’s important for me to point this out just in case it is an issue, but I hope it’s not. Most likely it’s no issue. It’s common for preproduction versions of gear to have problems that are partially or fully resolved by the time they’re released. It’s probably only a problem on my copy, which was an early model, and those being sold today have fast and accurate autofocusing, but I cannot state that with certainty. A side note is that the firmware for this lens is updated via a USB connection in the rear lens cap, but apparently requires a Windows operating system.
Is the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 lens worth buying? Despite no aperture ring and the autofocus woes of my preproduction copy, this has been my most-used lens since it arrived at my doorstep. I have used it on both my Fujifilm X-E4 and X-T5, but mostly on the X-T5. I love the character that this lens gives to my pictures. I have shared some of these images on Fuji X Weekly and on my Instagram page, and I’ve had a lot of people inquire about the lens I used (much more than usual), and I had to respond with “I can’t tell you yet” (because I agreed not to talk about it). The way this lens renders seems to pair especially well with Fujifilm’s excellent JPEG output and my Film Simulation Recipes. It’s highly desirable. In my opinion, this lens is well worth the small price-tag. With that said, I would much prefer an aperture ring, and I want the lens flare that my copy produces, which might be different than the one they’re currently selling. I hope that TTArtisan will someday offer such a version.
Pergear asked that I not show some of the pictures in this article that have the rainbow lens flare, which might not be so pronounced (if produced at all) on the final version. Some of my absolute favorite photographs captured with the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF lens have this flare. I have so many examples of it, I could have shown it in every picture. Instead, I only included a handful of those images, with the hopes that TTArtisan will realize that this unique characteristic is desirable. If you agree, please leave a comment below saying so.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and nearly 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Second, the rest is a mystery. We don’t know anything. And I certainly don’t have any inside information. Zero. I learn the same way that you do. I can only speculate. But looking at trends (both past and current) it’s not too difficult to make some reasonable guesses. Whether these guesses turn out to be correct is something that only time will tell. I’m wrong about these things often enough that whatever I speculate should be taken with a large grain of salt. This is just for fun.
I think it’s a very safe guess that one of the two remaining models will be the much-anticipated and much-hoped-for X-Pro4. When the X-H2s and the X-S20 were announced, it was at the end of May (of 2022 and 2023, respectively). Don’t be surprised if the X-Pro4 is announced next year in the second half of May. I know the phrase “first months of” makes it seem like it will be sooner than May, but I think it simply means first half of the year. While this is all speculation, I think it’s a fairly safe guess, as far as guesses go.
I don’t know what will be different on the X-Pro4 and what will be the same as the X-Pro3, but I do expect there will be one or two surprises. Fujifilm will do something that is both compelling and perhaps even controversial. I hope that it has the 40mp X-Trans V sensor, plus the XPan aspect ratio as an in-camera option. If Fujifilm were to really think outside the box, they’d throw a 50mp APS-H 4:3 aspect ratio sensor inside of it, which would allow for 25mp XPan pictures. I think most Fujinon lenses would cover APS-H, and Fujifilm could do an auto-crop to 40mp 3:2 for those lenses that can’t. I highly doubt they’ll do this, but it would certainly make headlines if they did.
A lot of people are speculating that the third camera will be an X-E5, but I don’t think it will be. Shockingly, the X-E4 was inexplicably discontinued when there was a lot of demand for it, and as a result the used market for that model has gone crazy. It would make a lot of sense for Fujifilm to rush a successor out ASAP, so as to capitalize on the demand. Still, Fujifilm has suggested that the X-E line might done, plus X-E successors typically doesn’t come out until the end of a sensor generation, which means that an X-E5 won’t likely happen until 2025 (if ever). So I would be pretty surprised if this is the third camera.
The most logical option in my opinion is the X-T30 II successor. This line has been a good seller for Fujifilm, and I think they desperately need a budget-friendly model in the lineup. If you look hard enough it is still possible to buy a brand-new X-T30 II, but it’s sold out at a lot of places, and has been for awhile. My guess is that the successor will be largely identical to the X-T30 II, with the same X-Trans IV sensor but with the X-Trans V processor (like the X-S20). It will have some autofocus and video spec improvements, but will be mostly the same exact camera as the X-T30 II. I bet they call it the X-T30 III, and not X-T40 or X-T50. I suspect it will be announced in late-March or early-April, and it doesn’t even get an X-Summit… or if it does, it’s not the headline product.
Since we don’t know for certain what the second and third upcoming cameras will be, what do you hope Fujifilm will announce next year? Really, at this point it could be anything. Let me know in the comments!
I didn’t mean to take this picture on my Fujifilm X70. I kind of like the abstractness of it.
Have you ever accidentally taken a picture? You had a camera in your hand, and it was powered on, but you didn’t mean to activate the shutter and capture an image. I’ve done this more times than I’d like to admit. Most often these accidental pictures are just deleted, but occasionally I will keep them because they’re interesting in some way, or at least more interesting than they should be. Let’s take a look!
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 just learned today that photographer John Sevigny passed away on November 9th, after suffering a massive stroke. He was 54 years old.
I first spoke with John on Valentines Day of 2022. “I hope that you won’t take this as a bitchy letter,” he wrote to me on Instagram. “I want to thank you for the hard work you’ve done. I’m a Fuji X Weekly App Patron and I hope that it helps you continue what you’re doing. But I want to be specific about things that might be improved.” The message went on and on and on. It was the longest DM I’d ever received on social media, and that record holds to this day. He gave me a ton of helpful insights and observations that could only come from someone with a huge amount of experience with analog photography and cameras in general. John offered it matter-of-factly, but also kindly. “I hope my criticisms and observations are constructive,” he concluded, “but most of all I hope you will continue doing what you do.”
“I’ve been teaching photography forever,” John later told me, “and I’ve never seen an app as absolutely didactic and liberating as yours. Everyone uses your Recipes.” John Sevigny was a photography instructor, having taught for five years at la Universidad Centroamericana Jose Simeon Cañas in El Salvador, and guest lectured at many universities, including several in the United States. He was also a working photographer, and at times was employed by newspapers and magazines, and even worked for the Associated Press. There have been over 50 solo exhibitions of his photographs.
John Sevigny had published several books. El Muerto Pare el Santo in 2010; later Hymnal, Fire from Heaven, and Callejon de Milagros. Just a few months ago, he published League of the Dead, with Anders Lindborg as the editor. Anders, you may recall, has created or co-created a number of Film Simulation Recipes published on Fuji X Weekly. His Kodak Tri-X 400 Recipe is one of the most popular—and definitely the most popular B&W—and it was through this Recipe that John and Anders connected and became friends. Working together, the two of them created the Kodak T-Max P3200 Recipe, as well as another that has not yet been published.
John liked using Film Simulation Recipes on his Fujifilm cameras. He told me a year ago that Kodak Royal Gold 400 was one of his favorites for color, but he also used a modification of my original Classic Chrome Recipe a lot, the CineStill 800T Recipe occasionally, plus sometimes a modification of the Eterna Recipe. I’m sure he used others, too. For B&W, aside from the Tri-X and T-Max Recipes already mentioned, he apparently liked the Moody Monochrome Recipe.
The last thing that John Sevigny ever told me was, “I hope you had a great time!” That was in response to my Central Coast of California trip with Ken Rockwell back in June. I wish now that I had reached out to him sometime after that. It’s a real shame that I let so much time pass, and now it’s too late. Interestingly, back in March of 2022, one month after the initial message from John, he asked me, “What’s the hardest part of running Fuji X Weekly?” That turned into a back-and-forth conversation about time management and social media, specifically that social media can take up too much of your time if you let it. I think he really liked social media, especially the connections that one can make. It’s through social media that John and I connected; however, the sometimes overwhelming busyness of it prevented me from reaching out more than I should have.
John Sevigny was a great photographer, and I’m really sad that he has passed away. Prayers for his family, who I’m sure are still deeply grieving this loss.
I hope that you’ll take a look at John’s work. I don’t know how long his website or social media accounts will remain available, so don’t procrastinate. His books are sold out as far as I can find, but if you do find one, maybe think about picking it up.
I get asked sometimes a very fair question: why use Film Simulation Recipes when Fujifilm’s factory-default film simulations are just so darn good?
Fujifilm has, in my opinion, the best JPEG output of any brand. Their film simulations are significantly influenced by Fujifilm’s vast experience with analog film, and it should not surprise anyone that they look good without any modifications. However, Fujifilm does provide a number of tools to customize and fine-tune the straight-out-of-camera results, which I believe makes them even better.
For those who don’t know, Film Simulation Recipes are settings for Fujifilm cameras that produce certain aesthetics, often modeled after classic film emulsions. I have published over 300 of them, which you can find on this website and the Fuji X Weekly App. Recipes are intended to be shot as JPEGs (or RAW+JPEG, if you prefer), and produce out-of-camera pictures that don’t require any editing, or perhaps minimal post-processing if you like. They appear as though they were edited, or even film-like. This saves a lot of time, hassle, and possibly money. It opens up photography to those who don’t know how to RAW edit, or don’t have the desire to learn, or maybe don’t even have access to editing software. This also makes photography more enjoyable to folks (like me) who have RAW-edited for years but don’t care much for it, and would rather be doing other things (like capturing more pictures!).
Golden Light in Abandoned House – North Salt Lake, UT – Fujifilm X100V – Fujicolor Reala 100
Many photographers who own a Fujifilm camera never dive into the menu to adjust the JPEG parameters. They keep it on Provia/STD and at factory defaults, which is 0, Off, or Auto. Or maybe they try the other film simulations, but they still keep everything else set to the default settings. It’s completely understandable. The results are already good, and, besides, the options can seem overwhelming and confusing. Film Simulation Recipes, which takes the guesswork out of the various options, improve upon the standard film sims, but also provide some variety. If you only ever use the default options, you are limited to (for example) a maximum of 10 looks for color photography (11 if you have the latest GFX model with Reala Ace), but there are over 300 Film Simulation Recipes, so (depending on your camera model) you could have hundreds to choose from. You can find the Recipes that produce aesthetics that best match your style and taste.
This is in no way intended to put down factory-default film simulations, or those who use them. My intention is to simply compare a default film sim photograph with a Film Simulation Recipe. Maybe you like the non-Recipe picture better, and that’s ok if you do. There are so many other Recipes to choose from, and I bet at least one would produce a look that you like more than the default film sim—for example, there are 80 Recipes in the Fuji X Weekly App that use Classic Chrome, so if you don’t like the Recipe I chose for this article, there are 79 others that could possibly be a better match for you.
Some Film Simulation Recipes are drastically divergent from the default film simulations, and some are only subtly altered. Many are intended for certain light situations (sunny daylight or artificial light, for example), while Auto White Balance is the factory standard. There’s no one single “right” Recipe or even a perfect film simulation. What matters is finding what works best for you and your photography. That could be a collection of Film Simulation Recipes, it could be a default film sim, or it might be shooting RAW and editing with the software of your choice, or any combination thereof or something different entirely. There’s no right or wrong way. For me, it’s shooting straight-out-of-camera JPEGs using Film Simulation Recipes.
Below are examples of factory-default film simulations compared to Film Simulation Recipes.
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and about 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Yellow Aspen Forest – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodak Portra 160 v2 – DR-P Auto
Fujifilm introduced a feature called D-Range Priority (abbreviated DR-P) on the Fujifilm X-T3 in late-2018. Except that’s not entirely true, as the history of DR-P goes back much further than that. You see, Fujifilm EXR cameras, which were before X-Trans and utilized pixel-binning, also had something called D-Range Priority. Oh, and on their Frontier scanners, Fujifilm had something nearly identical to DR-P called Hypertone. The origins of DR-P seem to be found somewhere in the 1990’s.
My first camera that had D-Range Priority—a Fujifilm X-T30—arrived at my doorstep in early-2019, but I haven’t utilized the feature all that much, only sparingly. I get questions about it fairly regularly, particularly after I publish a Film Simulation Recipe that uses it, so I thought I’d take a moment and explain what DR-P is, plus how, when, and why to use it.
Let’s go back to Fujifilm’s Frontier scanners, which were common in photo labs in the 1990’s and 2000’s. Fujifilm modeled their film simulations—at least in part—after scans of films with corrections applied. Those scans were likely from Frontier scanners, and one of the corrections that Fujifilm recommended was Hypertone set to Auto. One limitation of digital camera sensors compared to color negative film is dynamic range. Negative film often has a larger dynamic range than digital cameras (especially in the early days of digital). Film tends to be more forgiving to overexposure (highlights), where digital tends to be more forgiving to underexposure (shadows). Hypertone was a software trick to maximize dynamic range so that it would digitally render more similarly to printed film on Fujicolor paper. D-Range Priority is a trick to achieve a dynamic range more similar to Frontier film scans that had Hypertone enabled.
Which answers the question of why to use it. D-Range Priority maximizes dynamic range, so as to keep highlights and shadows in check, but especially highlights. It’s more difficult to blow out highlights when you use DR-P. If you want to have the greatest dynamic range so as to avoid clipped highlights and blocked-up shadows, this is your best tool.
A few notes. First, like the regular Dynamic Range options (you know, DR100, DR200, DR400, and DR-Auto), D-Range Priority is ISO dependent. In this regard, DR-P Weak is like using DR200, and DR-P Strong is like using DR400. D-Range Priority is used in lieu of the Dynamic Range settings, so you cannot choose (for example) both DR200 and DR-P Weak simultaneously, only one or the other. Also, D-Range Priority disables the Tone Curve, so you cannot select a Highlight and Shadow setting. When enabled, DR-P is the Tone Curve. Interestingly, DR400 with both Highlight and Shadow set to -2 produces similar results to DR-P Weak. DR-P Auto chooses DR-P Weak almost always, and only selects DR-P Strong when there is a very bright light source, like shooting directly at the sun. D-Range Priority Strong produces a very low-contrast image, while DR-P Weak is a little less flat, but is still low-contrast.
To choose D-Range Priority, within the IQ section of the camera’s main Menu find D-Range Priority and select Auto, Strong, or Weak. Normally, D-Range Priority is set to Off. You only enable it when you want to use it. You can also choose D-Range Priority within Edit/Save Custom Presets, and have it enabled on any of your C1-C7 (or C1-C4, depending on your model) options.
To answer the when to use D-Range Priority question, it’s important to remember what DR-P does: produce a low-contrast picture that maximizes dynamic range to protect shadows and especially highlights. If you want punchy pictures, DR-P is not what you want to use (although in high contrast situations, you might still get dramatic results). If you want light pictures that might more closely resemble film scans (particularly from Frontier scanners), then DR-P is an option that you’ll want to consider.
While D-Range Priority is a fairly recent addition to X-Trans cameras—first introduced on X-Trans IV models—it turns out to have a much longer history. For years I assumed that D-Range Priority was for emergency use in extreme situations only, so I pretty much ignored it. I have since warmed up to DR-P, and I use it much more often than I used to. I still feel it’s probably not an option to utilize all of the time, but in the right situations or for a certain look, it works really well.
At the very moment that I was finishing up my Kodak Portra 160 Film Simulation Recipe for X-Trans IV cameras, Thomas Schwab, who has created or co-created a number of Recipes on this website, sent me a modification that he made of the “old” Kodak Portra 160 Recipe (for X-Trans III plus the X-T3 & X-T30 cameras) to make it compatible with X-Trans V models. Clear as mud? Let me retry. This new Kodak Portra 160 v2 Recipe was modified by Thomas from the Kodak Portra 160 Recipe published in 2020 so as to be compatible with X-Trans V cameras. Plus he gave it a tune-up. Excitedly, I programmed this new version into my Fujifilm X-T5; however, I had several other projects going on, so it took a little time to get this one out. Thomas Schwab did a great job of updating the old version, and the results speak for themselves. I want to give Thomas a special “thank you” for his work and willingness to share!
Kodak introduced the Portra line in 1998, with two ISO 160 versions, two ISO 400 versions, and an ISO 800 emulsion (plus a short-lived ISO 100 Tungsten film, for those keeping score). Portra saw a couple of updates by Kodak, and in late-2010 the two ISO 160 versions were merged into one, as well as the two ISO 400 versions. Originally, Kodak Portra 160 came in “NC” (neutral color) and “VC” (vivid color) versions; Portra 160 NC was more popular for portraits and Portra 160 VC was more popular for landscapes. When Kodak merged the two, it fell kind of in-between the two emulsions—more vibrant than NC but less than VC. This Film Simulation Recipe is more similar to the merged Portra 160 that Kodak introduced in 2010. The film has become iconic, with its warm yet natural colors. As the name implies, it was meant for portrait photography, but is popular for many genres.
Shell Gas Station – Phoenix, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodak Portra 160 v2 Recipe
This Kodak Portra 160 v2 Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with fifth-generation X-Trans cameras, which (as of this writing) are the X-H2, X-H2s, X-T5, and X-S20 (yes, the X-S20). With one modification—setting Color Chrome FX Blue to Strong instead of Weak—this Recipe is also compatible with most fourth-generation X-Trans cameras: X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4 & X-T30 II. This can also be used on newer GFX models, but it will render slightly different (try it anyway).
Film Simulation: Classic Chrome Grain Effect: Weak, Small Color Chrome Effect: Weak Color Chrome FX Blue: Weak White Balance: Daylight, +4 Red & -5 Blue Dynamic Range: D-Range Priority (DR-P) Auto Color: 0 Sharpness: -1 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -2 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Kodak Portra 160 v2 Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T5:
Smokey Sunset – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Mountainous Contemplations – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Siblings – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Backlit Boy in Autumn – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Jonathan Using RitchieCam – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Golden Hour, Golden Trees – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Deer in the Meadow – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Yellow Aspen Tree Tops – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Yellow Aspens behind Green Pine – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Leaves & Needles – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Autumn Joy – Flagstaff, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Bougainvillea Pink – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Endless Blue & Palms – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Dusk in the Suburbs – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Frisbee Golf – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Yard Palm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Palm Behind Bougainvillea – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Two-Trunked Saguaro – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Find this Film Simulation Recipe and over 300 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Help Support Fuji X Weekly!
Nobody pays me to write the content found on the Fuji X Weekly blog. There’s a real cost to running this website. I also put a lot of my own time into writing the posts. If you’ve found something on Fuji X Weekly helpful to you and you’d like to give back, this is a good place to do it. You can donate to this blog using PayPal by clicking below. I appreciate it! Thank you for your support! Please do not feel obligated to give, but do so only if you want to.
No Cigarettes – Avila Beach, CA – Fujifilm X-E4 – Kodachrome 64 Recipe
I get asked fairly regularly which Film Simulation Recipes are the most popular. For me, this is a fascinating topic, but it’s definitely hard to know definitively. While I get a glimpse on social media, my best gauge is the Fuji X Weekly website statistics; specifically, which Recipe articles are viewed the most. I don’t collect any data on the Fuji X Weekly App, so that’s no help—although, if I did, it would likely offer the most accurate picture; however, it would still be impossible to know which Recipes people programmed into their Fujifilm cameras, or how often they use each. Perhaps a survey would be particularly useful, yet even it has its limitations. While certainly a flawed method, page-view website statics offer the best glimpse at which Film Simulation Recipes are the most popular, so that’s what I’m using for this article. These are simply the Top 25 most-viewed Recipes on the Fuji X Weekly website.
There’s a lot that can be gleaned from this exercise, but also a grain of salt must be consumed, too. For example, Vibrant Arizona actually has four Recipes in that article (two versions of two), so it would certainly rank lower if it only had one; also, it was published near the end of April, so it has a time disadvantage, as do all of the other Recipes published after January 1st. But, setting those limitations aside, there are still some fascinating trends to be explored. Some of these rankings are quite surprising to me, and others are not surprising at all.
Classic Chrome is the king of film simulations. The five most popular Fuji X Weekly Recipes all use Classic Chrome, as do 21 of the Top 25. Second place, which is Classic Negative with two, is a very distant second. Acros and PRO Neg. Std have one each. The other film simulations don’t even chart on this list. For those who use Film Simulation Recipes, Classic Chrome is clearly the film sim of choice for most.
Not surprisingly, Recipes with Kodak brand names are the most popular. 13 have Kodak in the name, eight have Portra in the name, and five have Kodachrome in the name. Kodak was the most popular film brand, so it should be expected that Film Simulation Recipes that mimic those emulsions would also be popular. What is surprising to me is that none with Fujifilm, Fujicolor, Superia, Provia, Velvia, etc., in the Recipe name made this list, as some of those are my personal favorites.
10 of these Recipes use a Kelvin White Balance, eight use Auto White Balance, six use Daylight, and one uses a Custom White Balance measurement. Almost all of them are warm, at least a little. Only one B&W Recipe made this list, which isn’t a shock to me because the color Recipes are typically far more popular than monochrome. Only one Recipe specifically intended for night photography made this list, and I’m actually a little surprised by which one and how high it ranks. 10 Recipes use DR200, nine use DR400, five use DR-Auto, and one uses D-Range Priority Strong.
Most people who use Recipes do so on X-Trans IV cameras, specifically the X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II models. Of the Top 25 Recipes, 16 of them are for those specific X-Trans IV cameras, including each of the Top 3. Six are for X-Trans III cameras plus the X-T3 and X-T30, two are for X-Trans V, and one is for X-Trans II (the very last one). But it’s a little more convoluted than that, because some Recipes (Vibrant Arizona and Kodak Tri-X 400 for sure, and probably others) are being used on X-Trans V cameras. Some of the X-Trans III plus X-T3 and X-T30 Recipes are likely being used on X-Trans IV and X-Trans V models to some extent. The majority of X-Trans V Recipes are at a disadvantage because they were published after January 1st, and there are only four fifth-generation X-Trans models anyway. I think the biggest takeaway is that the majority of people who shoot with Film Simulation Recipes in 2023 are doing so on X-Trans III and newer cameras, and X-Trans IV is the largest group within that. Recipes are not as popular on EXR, X-Trans I, X-Trans II, Bayer, and GFX models, although there are certainly many who do use them.
There are some rankings that surprise me. Vibrant Arizona is the only one published in 2023 to make the Top 25, although the fact that there are actually four Recipes in that article certainly affect its page-views. The X-Trans III version of Kodak Portra 400 requires a hard-to-get-right custom White Balance measurement, so it’s always surprising to me that so many use it. Kodak Portra 400 Warm and Bright Summer are especially warm, and their use case is more narrow than the others. If you had asked me what the second-most popular Recipe that uses the Classic Negative film sim, I would not have guessed Kodak Max 800, yet here it is! The X-Trans III version of Kodachrome II was ranked #7 last year, the X-Trans IV version of Kodachome II was ranked #8, Nostalgic Negative was #9, and Kodak Ektar 100 was #10, so those have fallen significantly, now ranked #12, #19, #24, & #16, respectively. I’m a little surprised that Classic Kodak Chrome is the most popular X-Trans II Recipe.
Anyway, I’ve held you up long enough. Let’s get to the list!
Top 25 Most Popular Film Simulation Recipes of 2023 (…so far)
There’s a lot of hype around a camera that Sony just announced: the a9 III (such an inspiring name, right? When will camera makers come up with more memorable—and, in turn, marketable—names?). What’s special about this camera is that it’s the world’s first full-frame stacked CMOS global shutter camera.
Global shutter? What’s that? Specifically, we’re talking electronic shutter, and not mechanical. Typically, CMOS sensors are read line-by-line, and not every line at once, which can cause problems like rolling shutter effect. This makes the electronic shutter less useful, as it’s more limited than the mechanical shutter; however, there are also several advantages to an electronic shutter, so sometimes it is preferable. With a global shutter, all the light sensitive sensor elements are read at the same time (not line-by-line), eliminating the disadvantages of the electronic shutter.
This is a significant step forward in camera technology, and I don’t want to diminish that, but at the same time the hype is a bit overhyped. Let me explain why.
One of the big advantages touted by those who are especially excited for this new technology is that it eliminates the need for flash sync speed. Use whatever shutter speed you desire for flash, including ultra-fast. Interestingly enough, this limitation doesn’t exist for leaf shutters, which are a mechanical shutter type found in some cameras, namely the Fujifilm X100-series. If you have a Fujifilm X100V and you are using the mechanical shutter, there’s no need to worry about flash sync speed. Granted, most cameras don’t have a leaf shutter, and leaf shutters are mechanical and not electronic; however, I found it interesting nonetheless that the global shutter solves a problem that isn’t always a problem, depending on your camera. If you don’t have $6,000 to shell out for a new camera, but you already own an X100-series model, you don’t have to worry about missing out, and you can let the FOMO rest for awhile.
Fujifilm X100F — Shutter 1/2000 — flash on
Did you notice all of the qualifiers for the “world’s first” designation? Specifically, full frame and stacked CMOS global shutter. Why do you think those needed to be added? Well, the first full frame camera with a global shutter was the Contax N, way back in 2002 (it was developed in 2000, but it took awhile to come to market). The first camera with a global shutter, in theory, was developed by Kodak in the 1970’s. You see, CCD sensors, which were common before CMOS, were technically global shutter sensors. They became outdated before advancements in camera technology allowed photographers to take advantage of that aspect of them, but, technically speaking, global shutters are far from new, they’re only new to CMOS. Actually, Panasonic made a global shutter CMOS sensor back in 2018; however, the technology is newly coming to the market just now.
The promise of the global shutter is that the disadvantages of the electronic shutter are eliminated, and the need for a mechanical shutter is reduced or eliminated. The mechanical shutter has served photography pretty well over the last 150-ish years, so it’s not exactly a high-priority item to replace (in my humble opinion), but perhaps having fewer moving parts in future camera models will extend the life of those bodies (maybe). If you have a leaf shutter camera, the advantages of a global shutter is much less significant, but if you don’t, it’s a bigger deal for sure. Of course, global shutters bring their own disadvantages (most namely, it takes more processing power to read and store everything all at once). I think it’s just a matter of time before global shutter sensors are common, and perhaps as a result mechanical shutters will be much less common in future cameras.
I’m not saying that the need for improved electronic shutters doesn’t exist, or that significant advancements in the technology shouldn’t be celebrated. I’m simply stating that what’s old is new. That the hype is a little overhyped. For most people, the Sony A9 III won’t be a game-changer, or a milestone model remembered for decades and decades to come (as some are suggesting). I’m certain it will be a great camera that many will love and it will sell quite well for Sony, but for the majority of people, the differences between global and non-global electronic shutters will make little or no practical difference to them and their photography. For some, however, it will be a big deal, and for those folks, it’s worth noting and celebrating. Don’t be surprised if the X-H3 or X-T6 has this technology (I have no idea, I’m just speculating). If you have a leaf shutter camera, such as the X100V, you’re already enjoying the benefits, at least when it comes to flash sync speed and (nearly) silent operation.
There are over 300 Film Simulation Recipes on this website and the Fuji X Weekly App. Having so many options to choose from is great, because no matter your style there’s bound to be at least one that you love, and different Recipes are sometimes best in specific situations. The only problem with having all these options is that sometimes it’s hard to know which ones to choose. There can be a paralysis of choice, or, at the very least, it can seem overwhelming.
But not to worry, I’m here to help! Over the last year I’ve been publishing articles to help with this specific problem—to be a guide of sorts through the many Recipes. There’s no comprehensive list (nor should there be, I think) of when to use each option, because whether or not a particular Recipe is great for a specific scenario is subjective. I might like one, but you might dislike it. However, I can provide some direction—something that I have been attempting to do over the last 12 months.
The problem with my method, though, is that it’s easy for my articles on this subject to get lost in the shuffle. So I thought it would be helpful to round them up, and put them into one place. That’s the intention of this article.
First up is my Which Film Simulation Recipe, When? series. If you only open one article, that’s the one to choose. I think it’s probably the most helpful out of all of them in this post. You might appreciate many of the others, too, so I would encourage you to click on more than one article to read, especially if the number of Film Simulation Recipes feels overwhelming to you, or you’re just not sure where to begin. I hope this helps with that, and you’ll have a little more confidence choosing some to program into your camera.
Find these Film Simulation Recipes and many more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
Help Support Fuji X Weekly!
Nobody pays me to write the content found on the Fuji X Weekly blog. There’s a real cost to running this website. I also put a lot of my own time into writing the posts. If you’ve found something on Fuji X Weekly helpful to you and you’d like to give back, this is a good place to do it. You can donate to this blog using PayPal by clicking below. I appreciate it! Thank you for your support! Please do not feel obligated to give, but do so only if you want to.
