I started a new 365 Day photo project, which I’m calling 52 Weeks of Photography, back on Christmas Eve. Even though it is a year-long undertaking, I’m taking it one week at a time. This is the fourth week, the fourth set of seven images, which means that I’m 1/13th finished. While there’s a long ways to go, it’s crazy that 28 days are already in the books.
The reason why I’m doing this photo-a-day project is because I noticed some gaps in-between my images last year. I didn’t pick up my cameras daily. On several occasions, four or five days passed by without a single picture created. Twice in 2024, I skipped a whole week. I want to rectify this, and get back into the habit of daily photography. I also want to elevate the quality of my craft in 2025, and am hoping this will help with that.
Shadow & Light – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II & 80mm f/1.7 – PRO Negative 160C
The plan is to capture a year’s worth of notable images, either personally or artistically. Ansel Adams famously stated, “Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.” It’s important to keep expectations realistic, but I’m also trying to avoid thoughtless snapshots just to fulfill the day’s requirement. I want to push myself to be better, and hopefully that will happen. Not every photo will be great—in fact, most won’t—but I hope they are all at least decent enough to be shared without embarrassment.
This week was a bit up and down. Some days were far more productive than others. With that said, I find myself getting back into the habit of always having a camera on me, making sure to grab one before leaving the house. I used to do that, but kind of fell away from it in 2024.
Below are the fourth set of seven pictures from this 52 Weeks of Photography project.
Tuesday, January 14th, 2025
Air Dancer – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES & 35mm f/2 – Aerochrome v3
Red Palm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v3
This is a brand new Aerochrome-like Infrared Recipe. It’s not for “normal” cameras; you must have a full spectrum X-Trans IV or X-Trans V model, which requires an expensive and invasive procedure from a third-party vendor like LifePixel, Kolari Vision, or Spenser’s Camera (to name a few). Otherwise, the Fujifilm X-T4 ES (“Extended Spectrum”) is a full spectrum camera (is sensitive to light outside the visible gamut) briefly offered by Fujifilm to the general public. As of this writing, I believe that you can still buy the Fujifilm X-T4 ES from B&H, but it requires a phone call or in-person visit, and cannot be ordered from the internet.
Aerochrome v3 sits in-between—and bridges the gap between—Aerochrome v1 and Aerochrome v2; however, it is notably different from both, and even has some surprising commonality to Cotton Candy Chrome upon close inspection. That’s because it uses the Classic Negative film simulation instead of Velvia, which gives it a more pronounced analog feel, but also is more of a negative film look than slide film (real Aerochrome was a slide film). In that sense, this might be viewed as the least accurate version, but it’s also very easy to appreciate the aesthetic of this Aerochrome v3 Recipe, which is just lovely. While v2 is my personal favorite, I think some of you are really going to like this one. Because X-Trans V renders blue more deeply on some film simulations, including Classic Negative, if you have a full spectrum converted X-Trans V camera, set Color Chrome FX Blue to Weak instead of Strong.
Iowa Water – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v3
Aside from having a full spectrum camera (like the X-T4 ES), this Recipe requires three filters: True Color Infrared Autumnizer (Turquoise), Hoya G(XO) Yellow-Green filter and Tiffen Yellow 2 #8 filter. The True Color Infrared Autumnizer (Turquoise) filter is simply a QB19 Blue filter and LB18 Green filter combined into one, and can be found on AliExpress. If you choose to use a QB19 and LB18, then you’d have four filters instead of three. I was a little hesitant to buy the Autumnizer (Turquoise) filter (because I had never purchased anything from AliExpress before, and saw mixed reviews regarding the platform), but thankfully the process turned out to be smooth. The Autumnizer is intended for infrared photography, while the Yellow-Green and Yellow filters are for B&W film. I’m not sure if the order matters, but I have the Yellow filter first (closest to the lens), the Autumnizer next, and the Yellow-Green last (furthest from the lens).
Filters: True Color Infrared Autumnizer (Turquoise), Hoya G(XO) Yellow-Green & Tiffen Yellow 2 #8 Film Simulation: Classic Negative Dynamic Range: DR400 Grain Effect: Strong, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong White Balance: Daylight, +9 Red & +8 Blue Highlight: -1.5 Shadow: -0.5 Color: +4 Sharpness: -1 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -2 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: -1/3 to +1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Aerochrome v3 Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T4 ES:
Air Dancer – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Four Lamps – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Tree Fingers – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Bright Tree, Dark Tree – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Pink Leaves – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Hidden Craftsman – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Two Palms in the Suburbs – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Little Flag – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Backlit Infrared Joy – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Joshua, Indoor Infrared – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Jon, A Cut Above the Rest – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Not Abbey Road – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Brick Staircase & Jeep – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Brick Staircase – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Parking – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Nike Walk – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Buckeyes – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Chicken – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Cardinal – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Lonely Chair – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Sunlit Bougainvillea Branch – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Desert Bricks – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Cool Cat – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Skyjack – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Descending Stairs – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Red Yucca in the White Sand – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
A few weeks back, in-between Christmas and New Years, I briefly stopped in White Sands National Park in southern New Mexico for a couple of hours. Since it was the holiday season, the park was very crowded. There were so many cars, and people were everywhere! It was difficult to capture images without someone somewhere in the frame, and it was nearly impossible to find scenes without footprints.
The 10 frames in this article were made during about a two hour window in White Sands National Park using my Fujifilm X-T4 ES camera with a Fujinon 35mm f/2 lens and the Aerochrome v2 Recipe. It was partly overcast. Winter probably isn’t the best time to do infrared photography at this location, since much of the vegetation is dormant. Still, I came away with a couple good pictures, so I’m happy. But I know that I need to revisit the White Sands—hopefully next time I can dedicate a little more time to it. In the meantime, I hope that you enjoy these pictures.
Pink Brush – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Yucca on a Sand Hill – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Yucca & Brush – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Yucca at the Top of a Hill – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Yucca Hanging Over – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Bush in the Sand – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Desert Yucca – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Yucca & Brush – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Infrared Yucca – White Sand NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Aerochrome v2
Fujifilm GFX100S II – PRO Negative 160C except with D-Range Priority Auto
Someone pointed out to me that D-Range Priority Auto behaves differently on his Fujifilm X-T5 than he thought it would. I don’t use D-Range Priority Auto all that often, and it’s been awhile since I’ve done any sort of serious testing with it, so I took the opportunity to see what’s going on. I was quite surprised by what I found.
D-Range Priority (abbreviated DR-P) was a feature first found on old Fujifilm EXR models (this was before X-Trans) that utilized pixel-binning, and it worked much different than the current iteration of it. The modern version of DR-P was introduced in 2018 with the X-H1 and X-T3, and is modeled after a feature called Hypertone found on Fujifilm’s Frontier scanners. DR-P is used in lieu of the Dynamic Range (DR) settings and the Tone Curve (Highlight and Shadow).
Like the DR settings, DR-P is ISO dependent. DR-P Weak requires the same minimum ISO as DR200, and DR-P Strong requires the same minimum ISO as DR400. DR-P Auto should work the same as DR-Auto, and seemingly it does, but upon closer review it is significantly divergent. At least it is now. The way it works has evolved over time, largely unnoticed.
Fujifilm GFX100S II – PRO Negative 160C except with D-Range Priority Auto
Someone reported to me awhile back that they couldn’t get their X-T5 to choose DR-P Strong with DR-P Auto selected. With my X-Trans IV models, in DR-P Auto, the camera will almost always choose DR-P Weak, and only DR-P Strong in extreme high-contrast situations, with both bright highlights and deep shadows. The camera will do it, but not very often. I assumed that this person probably just hadn’t encountered the right situation where the camera would choose DR-P Strong. I can see now that my assumption was wrong.
Let’s backtrack a bit. D-Range Priority works a certain way on the X-H1 and X-T3/X-T30 (at least when the X-T30 was released and I tested DR-P on it back then …it might work differently today after firmware updates, I’m not certain). On those cameras, DR-P Auto will choose DR-P Weak most of the time, and DR-P Strong only in extreme situations. DR-P Weak is the same as DR200 with both Highlight and Shadow set to -1. In the set of three very identical images below, captured with a Fujifilm X-H1 this morning, one is DR-P Auto (which chose DR-P Weak), one is in-camera reprocessed as DR-P Weak, and one is in-camera reprocessed as DR200 with Highlight and Shadow both set to -1. They look exactly alike.
Now let’s fast forward a little. DR-P Auto works a little different on my Fujifilm X100V and X-E4, but not exactly as I remember it working, or as I expected it to. I’m not certain if the way it works changed after some firmware update, or if my memory of it is incorrect (it could go either way). Let’s take a look at a photograph that I captured today on my X-E4 using DR-P Auto, which chose DR-P Strong. I then reprocessed the image in-camera.
Fujifilm X-E4 as shot in DR-P Auto, which selected DR-P Strong
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR-P Strong—surprisingly, it’s not the same.
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR-P Weak; it’s getting closer, but not identical.
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR200 + Highlight & Shadow set to -1; it’s divergent from all of the above images.
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR400 + Highlight & Shadow set to -2. This is identical to the as-shot photograph.
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR200 + Highlight & Shadow set to -2. This is identical to the reprocessed DR-P Weak image.
On the X-H1, DR-P Auto is more straightforward than on the X-E4; on the X-E4, it did not behave as I expected it to. While I could get it to choose DR-P Strong, it didn’t actually create a DR-P Strong image, or even a DR-P Weak image; instead, it created an image identical to DR400 with Highlight and Shadow set to -2 (“DR-P Medium”?). DR-P Weak is the same as DR200 with Highlight and Shadow set to -2; however, on the X-H1, DR-P Weak is identical to DR200 with Highlight and Shadow set to -1. Clear as mud?
Now let’s look at the newer cameras. On X-Trans V, as well as the latest GFX, it works even differently. Check out this set of photographs:
Fujifilm GFX100S II as shot in DR-P Auto, which selected DR-P Weak
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR200 + Highlight & Shadow set to -1. It’s identical to the above photograph.
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR-P Weak.
As you can see, the camera is not using DR-P Weak when in DR-P Auto. Like the X-H1, it is using DR200 with Highlight and Shadow set to -1; however, unlike the X-H1, DR-P Weak is not the same as DR200 with Highlight and Shadow set to -1. On the newer models, DR-P Auto is actually “DR-P Extra Weak” (if such a setting existed, which incidentally is the same as DR-P Weak on the X-H1). DR-P Weak is actually more like DR200 with Highlight set to -2 and Shadow set to -3 (if such a setting existed—in other words, it can’t really be replicated). Also, no matter how hard I tried, I could not get my X-T5 or GFX100S II cameras to choose DR-P Strong when in DR-P Auto; only DR-P Weak (except that the picture is “DR-P Extra Weak” instead of DR-P Weak).
Fujifilm GFX100S II shot with DR-P Strong and in-camera reprocessed to DR-P Weak
Same image, except reprocessed in-camera using DR400 + Highlight & Shadow set to -2. This is the closest I could get the shadows, but the highlights are divergent.
So what is the practical application of this? Since we know on the newer models—X-Trans V and the latest GFX—that the picture you get using DR-P Auto is the same as DR200 with Highlight and Shadow set to -1, you can replace any Film Simulation Recipe that calls for those settings (such as PRO Negative 160C) with DR-P Auto. There isn’t necessarily a practical advantage to doing that, except if you accidentally overexpose the frame, you can recover it by reprocessing the file in-camera with DR-P Weak. Below is an example of that:
Fujifilm GFX100S II as shot in DR-P Auto, overexposed
Same image, simply reprocessed in-camera with DR-P Weak with no other adjustments
I’m not really sure how to conclude this other than to say that D-Range Priority Auto works differently depending on what generation of camera you have. DR-P Weak and DR-P Strong are also a little divergent. I reached out to Anders Lindborg to ask his opinion and see if he had any insights on DR-P Auto, since he’s researched this topic pretty extensively. “The answer is actually in the manual,” he told me. “It says, ‘When an option other than Off is selected, Highlight Tone, Shadow Tone, and Dynamic Range will be adjusted automatically.'” On the newest models, that means Highlight and Shadow both set to -1 and Dynamic Range set to DR200 …and nothing else, unless you reprocess as DR-P Weak. Unfortunately, if you want to shoot with DR-P Weak or DR-P Strong straight-out-of-camera, then don’t use DR-P Auto. I suppose you could look at this way: DR-P Auto is actually DR-P Weak, DR-P Weak is actually DR-P Medium, and DR-P Strong is still DR-P Strong. I hope this somehow clears things up for those confused by it.
Below are a few pictures I created in preparation for this article, using my Fujifilm GFX100S II with the PRO Negative 160C Recipe (except for DR-P Auto in lieu of the DR and Tone Curve settings).
I started a new 365 Day photo project, which I’m calling 52 Weeks of Photography, back on Christmas Eve. Even though it is a year-long undertaking, I’m doing it one week at a time. This is the third week, the third set of seven images. I’m pretty excited to do this, and hope you appreciate following along on this journey.
The reason why I’m doing this photo-a-day project is because I noticed some gaps in-between my images over the last year. I haven’t been picking up my cameras daily. On several occasions, four or five days passed by without a single picture created. Twice in 2024, I skipped a whole week. I want to rectify this, and get back into the habit of daily photography. I also want to elevate the quality of my craft in 2025, and am hoping this will help with that.
Dry Leaves in the Green Grass – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II & 80mm f/1.7 – Reala Ace
The plan is to capture a year’s worth of notable images, either personally or artistically. Ansel Adams famously stated, “Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.” It’s important to keep expectations realistic, but I’m also trying to avoid thoughtless snapshots just to fulfill the day’s requirement. I want to push myself to be better, and hopefully that will happen. Not every photo will be great—in fact, most won’t—but I hope they are all at least decent enough to be shared without embarrassment.
I used my Fujifilm X-T4 ES full spectrum infrared camera a lot during this seven day period. IR photography is a ton of fun, so I grab the X-T4 ES frequently. Unfortunately, that only delays other projects that I’m working on, so I need to be a little more deliberate about the gear I’m choosing, and do a better job at spreading the love between my various cameras.
Below are the second set of seven pictures from this 52 Weeks of Photography project.
Tuesday, January 7th, 2025
Dogs out a Truck Window – Laveen, AZ- Fujifilm X-T4 ES & 35mm f/2 – Agfa 400S
Wednesday, January 8th, 2025
Bicycles on a Dirt Road – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II & 80mm f/1.7 – Velvia Film
Thursday, January 9th, 2025
Golden Hills – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II & 80mm f/1.7 – Velvia Film
Godox sent me their new iM30 flash to try. I have a number of Godox flashes, including the Lux Junior, Lux Cadet, and Lux Master. Of those, the Lux Master is the most capable, but also the largest and heaviest. The Lux Cadet has a cool retro look, but I like the Lux Junior the most because it is smaller, and a tend to prefer compact gear. The iM30 is significantly smaller than the Lux Junior, so is it an ideal flash to pair with compact Fujifilm X-series gear, like my Fujifilm X-E4? Let’s find out.
Surprisingly, the Godox iM30 uses two AAA batteries. In one sense this is good, because you can easily carry a spare pair of AAA batteries, and if not, they are easy to find. You could also get yourself some rechargeable batteries and a charger. Personally, I would have preferred an internal rechargeable battery with a USB charging port. I’m not sure how many flashes you can get from a pair of copper-tops because I’m still on the original two after about 50 activations, and I have no idea if the batteries have a lot of life left or if they’re nearly depleted; however, Godox suggests that you can get about 230 flashes, so I might have a long ways to go.
Without a doubt, I can say that the iM30 is for those who want a compact flash. It is 2″ deep, 2.4″ wide, and 1.8″ tall (including the hotshoe mount). It weighs only 0.17 pounds without batteries, and 0.23 pounds with the batteries. It’s not the smallest flash I’ve ever used, but it is certainly one of the smallest. It looks great on cameras like the Fujifilm X-E4. Recycle time is just under four seconds.
The oddity of this flash is that it is cheap, so you might think that it is for beginners, but that is not true. While it is fairly simple, beginners might find it challenging, and perhaps even frustrating. You have to have some prior experience with flashes to use the iM30 effectively (or this might be your opportunity to learn). Also, the lowest setting, which is designated as 1/64, is sometimes too strong, and I wish that there was a lower power option.
My Fujifilm X-E4 – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 + Godox iM30 & Lux Master – Pacific Blues
For only $35 on Amazon, the Godox iM30 offers cheap thrills. There’s a lot of fun that you can have with it. For instance, it can be used as a secondary flash triggered by a primary flash. While you can’t use colored gels with the iM30 (without tape, anyway), you can shoot through a color correction or B&W film filter. That’s what I did for the above photo. I had a Godox Lux Master attached to the camera (and set to its lowest power), and the iM30 off to the side with a Tiffen 47B filter placed in front of the flash, giving a splash of blue to the otherwise warm scene. Is it ideal for that purpose? No, but it certainly can be done, and without spending a lot of money.
If you want a compact flash and have experience with flashes, and also don’t want to spend much money, the Godox iM30 is for you. It can be a lot of fun, and the opportunity to use it creatively is certainly there. It’s not my favorite Godox flash, but I can see bringing it on trips simply because it doesn’t take up much space in the bag. I do plan to use it in the coming months, but I don’t anticipate it being a tool that I reach for frequently.
Example photos, all camera-made JPEGs captured using the Godox iM30 flash on my Fujifilm cameras:
Backyard Boy – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X100VI + Godox iM30 – Nostalgic Americana
Did you know that you can photograph invisible light? Full spectrum infrared cameras can see beyond what you and I can perceive with our eyes, providing a unique way to view the world.
Lightwaves within the visible spectrum are between about 380-780 nanometers, but there is light outside of what the human eyes can see. On one end is Infrared, also called Thermal Radiation, which is from 780nm to 1 millimeter (700nm to 780nm is sometimes referred to as near-IR). On the other side is Ultra Violet, which is from 380nm to 10nm. Camera sensors are sensitive to these lightwaves, so manufacturers place a filter over the sensor to block the invisible light. If not for this filter, your pictures would look abnormal compared to what your eyes see. Full spectrum cameras don’t have this filter, and are sensitive to the full range of lightwaves.
Above: Full spectrum images without filters, photographed on a Fujifilm X-T4 ES.
Fujifilm has made several full spectrum cameras. First was the S3 Pro UVIR in 2006, followed by the IS-1 (infrared version of the FinePix S9100) in 2007, then X-T1 IR in 2015, then GFX100 IR in 2020, and finally the X-T4 ES (“Extended Spectrum”) in 2024. Typically, Fujifilm does not offer these models to the general public; instead, they are strictly only for “forensic, scientific, and cultural preservation applications.” The X-T4 ES is the first full spectrum model that Fujifilm has sold to the general public, albeit quite quietly. As of this writing, I believe that the only place you can buy the Fujifilm X-T4 ES is from B&H, but it requires a phone call or in-person visit, and cannot be ordered from the internet. If that changes, I’ll be sure to let you know.
For those unable to buy a Fujifilm X-T4 ES (which is a standard X-T4 just without the infrared/UV filter over the sensor), you can convert any Fujifilm camera to full spectrum. It requires an expensive and invasive procedure from a third-party vendor like LifePixel, Kolari Vision, or Spenser’s Camera (there are others, too). Sometimes you can find an already converted camera for sell. You can also get a specific infrared filter over the sensor in place of the removed filter, but that is a much more limiting approach than a full spectrum conversion, and you have to know that you’ll be happy with your filter choice before committing to it, or else you might find yourself regretting your decision. The easiest option—if you can find it, which might be a big if—is the X-T4 ES. I hope that Fujifilm makes this model (or something similar) more easily available to purchase.
One consideration for full spectrum cameras is the lens. Many lenses suffer from IR hotspots, and can perform less than optimally when used with a full spectrum camera. Many lenses are good wide-open at maximum aperture, but as you stop down the hotspot appears. The Fujinon 35mm f/2 is good at all apertures, and that is the one that I most commonly use with the X-T4 ES. There are several databases (here, here, here) for which lenses are good for full spectrum cameras, and which ones to avoid.
Another consideration is filters. You don’t need a filter to use your full spectrum camera, but you can use various filters, such as the Kolari Vision IR Chrome, to control the wavelengths of light that hit the sensor. You can achieve many various looks by the filters you use in conjunction with the camera settings, including film simulation and white balance. These filter and camera setting combinations are called Full Spectrum Film Simulation Recipes, which allows you to achieve striking photos without editing. As of this writing, I have published five Recipes: Aerochrome v1, Aerochrome v2, PurpleChrome, Cotton Candy Chrome, and Agfa 400S. More are in the works, so stay tuned for that.
Capturing the invisible light spectrum is extremely fun and rewarding because it transforms an ordinary scene into something truly extraordinary. The world becomes a fanciful place filled with unexpected colors. It’s like a crazy dream, except that it’s real, if only you could see it—full spectrum cameras allow you to peel back the curtain and take a peek.
Interestingly, you can actually do infrared photography with non-converted Fujifilm cameras, because the X-Trans sensors are sensitive to near-IR light. My Full Spectrum Film Simulation Recipes won’t work, because those require a full spectrum camera like the Fujifilm X-T4 ES, but nonetheless you can still do IR photography with a 720nm IR filter (which blocks most visible light) on a regular, non-converted model. It’s fun to try! Since most of the light is blocked, you will be using high-ISOs and/or longer exposure times. If you do this, be warned: you might get bit by the IR bug, and find yourself converting a camera, or searching out an X-T4 ES.
Above: B&W IR photo from a non-converted Fujifilm X-E4 & 720nm filter.
Bicycles on a Dirt Road – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Velvia Film
My 15-year-old son, Jonathan, has shown a strong interest in photography for a few years now, so for Christmas my wife and I got him a camera. He just began a high school photography class this semester. Jon told me that one of the first lessons was on composition, including leading lines.
A couple days ago, Jon and I were walking down a dirt road out in the desert with our cameras, so I took the opportunity to talk with him about leading lines. I told him that lines are great for taking the viewer on a journey through the picture. Lines that come from the corners (or near the corners) tend to lead into the frame, while lines that are from the edges (top-middle, bottom-middle, left-middle or right-middle) tend to lead the viewer’s eyes out of the frame. Leading lines are great, but they must lead to something to be effective; leading lines that lead to nothing are disappointing and boring.
Desert Road – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Agfa 400S
I pointed out the road that we were walking on, showing that the sides of the road, or even the tire tracks in the dirt, are lines. They can be used to take the viewer from the bottom corners into the middle of the frame somewhere. But you have to think about what the viewers are going to find when they get to the end, as there should be something for them to discover.
In the Desert Road image above, the lines take the viewer from the bottom of the frame to the base of the darker mountain in the middle-left of the picture, then up the ridge of the closer hill towards the top-right; your eyes might follow the ridge of the distant hill to the left, or they might leave the frame altogether. It would have been more interesting if a hiker, bicyclist, car, coyote, etc., were at the end of the road just before it disappears around the corner. Or a brightly lit saguaro partway up the closer ridge contrasted with the shadow behind. The image itself is ok, but if the viewer had found a surprise element on their journey through the picture, it would have been much more compelling.
Sunset Bicyclists – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-S20 – Kodak Negative – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
As we were heading back to the car to go home because the sun had dipped below the ridge, we came across a row of drainage pipes that I suppose will someday serve a purpose. I told him that those could be used as leading lines, too. I noted that there was a dark spot in the road at the end of the pipes, and told him that if only there was something there in that spot, it could make for an interesting picture.
We hadn’t seen another person the entire time, so I didn’t expect anything interesting to happen, but then two bicyclists showed up. I told Jon to wait, that this was a fortuitous opportunity, and be ready to compose his picture. We waved to the two men as they pedaled by, then we set up our shots.
Jon Composing His Shot – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Kodak Film
My picture is Bicycles on a Dirt Road at the very top, and Jon’s is Sunset Bicyclists two images above. I used the pipes to take the viewer from the bottom-right to the bicyclists at the middle-left. Jon used the lines in the dirt road to lead to the bicyclists, and the pipes served as a secondary element. Even though we photographed the same thing at the same time while standing next to each other, our pictures are much different. Two photographers will rarely see the same scene exactly the same way, because each person has different experiences, emotions, perspectives, etc., to form and execute their visions.
There are a several quick takeaways from this article. First, look for and use lines to thoughtfully direct viewers through your photographs, and try to give them a little surprise if you can. Second, your photographs are your unique voice, and as such are meaningful and important; however, you want to communicate your voice as strongly as possible with each shutter click—it takes much practice to develop strong photographic communication. Next, good pictures often involve some level of luck, but you can greatly increase your chances by being out with your camera—luck has a way of finding you if you give it the opportunity. Finally, if you are a straight-out-of-camera photographer, choose the most appropriate Film Simulation Recipe for how you want the scene to look. It takes some level of experience (oftentimes, trial-and-error) to figure that out, and each person has their own tastes and styles, so what works for one might not for another. I chose Velvia Film (one of the Film Dial Recipes… I use this approach even without the dial) because I wanted a bright and vibrant picture; Jon chose Kodak Negative because he wanted a warm retro aesthetic.
Monochrome Founders – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Agfa 400S
This is my first B&W Film Simulation Recipe for Fujifilm full spectrum cameras, like the Fujifilm X-T4 ES (“Extended Spectrum”). It’s not for “normal” cameras; you must have a full spectrum X-Trans IV or X-Trans V model, which requires an expensive and invasive procedure from a third-party vendor like LifePixel, Kolari Vision, or Spenser’s Camera. Otherwise, the Fujifilm X-T4 ES is a full spectrum camera (is sensitive to light outside the visible gamut) briefly offered by Fujifilm to the general public. As of this writing, I believe that you can still buy the Fujifilm X-T4 ES from B&H, but it requires a phone call or stopping by in-person, and cannot be order from the internet.
The reason why it took me so long to publish a B&W Recipe for full spectrum IR cameras is because I had trouble creating one that I was fully satisfied with. I experimented with many different filters and settings, but just couldn’t find the right combination that produced the results that I desired. Initially, this was another one of those failed experiments, until I added a third filter (QB2), and instantly fell in love with the aesthetic that this Recipe creates.
Water in the Desert – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Agfa 400S
The emulsion that this Recipe is most reminiscent of is Agfa AviPhot 400S, which is also sold under Rollei Retro 400S, Rollei 400 IR, Japan Camera Hunter Street Pan 400, Astrum Foto 400, and Svema Foto 400. This film was made for aerial surveillance—hence: AviPhot, which is short for “Aviation Photography”, and “S” for surveillance—and is both infrared and UV sensitive, although only a little. In order to get good IR results, the film requires a 720nm filter and adding two or three stops to the exposure.
This Agfa 400S Film Simulation Recipe doesn’t use a 720nm filter; instead, it requires three filters: Kolari Vision IR Chrome, Tiffen Deep Yellow 15, and QB2 blue. The QB2 was given to me and I have no idea what brand it is, but here are some that I found online: JTSF, PMP, Nantong, Shanghai Longway, Tangsinuo. This is a fairly uncommon filter (that’s why none of the name brands make it), but it is used by some in the IR world (my Cotton Candy Chrome Recipe also uses the QB2 filter). I’m not sure if the order matters, but I have the Deep Yellow filter first (closest to the lens), the IR Chrome next, and the QB2 last (furthest from the lens).
Tree in Grey – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES – Agfa 400S
While this Recipe was designed on and intended for the Fujifilm X-T4 ES camera, it should be fully compatible with any full spectrum converted X-Trans IV (except the X-T3 and X-T30) and X-Trans V models. For a grainier look, use higher ISOs, such as 6400 and 12800 (Water in the Desert is an ISO 12800 image). For a cleaner look, use lower ISOs.
Filters: Tiffen Deep Yellow 15, Kolari Vision IR Chrome, & QB2 Blue Film Simulation: Acros+R Monochromatic Color: WC 0 MG 0 (Off) Dynamic Range: DR200 Grain Effect: Strong, Small Color Chrome Effect: Off Color Chrome FX Blue: Off White Balance: 2500K, +9 Red & -2 Blue Highlight: +4 Shadow: +4 Sharpness: -1 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -2 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 12800 Exposure Compensation: -1/3 to +1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Agfa 400S Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-T4 ES:
Sunlit Jon – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Sunglasses – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Flower Girl – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Photographer Jon – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Hand in Hand – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Dogs out a Truck Window – Laveen, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Dramatic Light – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Lamp Post – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Second Floor Windows – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Neighborhood Eucalyptus – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
White Tree – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Grey Saguaro – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
17th Green – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Closed Umbrella in Monochrome – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Second Floor – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Sunlit Stucco – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Empty Cart – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Shade – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Coffee Work – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Open Umbrellas – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
White Bougainvillea 1 – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
White Bougainvillea 2 – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Palm Fronds – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
V Tree – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Evening Light – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Tis but a Scratch– Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Desert Road – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
Last Light on the Peaks – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T4 ES
I started a new 365 Day photo project, which I’m calling 52 Weeks of Photography, back on Christmas Eve. Even though it is a year-long undertaking, I’m doing it one week at a time. This is the second week—the second set of seven images. I’m pretty excited to do this, and hope you appreciate following along on this journey.
The reason why I’m doing this photo-a-day project is because I noticed some gaps in-between my images over the last year. I haven’t been picking up my cameras daily. On several occasions, four or five days passed by without a single picture created. Twice in 2024, I skipped a whole week. I want to rectify this, and get back into the habit of daily photography. I also want to elevate the quality of my craft in 2025, and am hoping this will help with that.
The plan is to capture a year’s worth of notable images, either personally or artistically. Ansel Adams famously stated, “Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.” It’s important to keep expectations realistic, but I’m also trying to avoid thoughtless snapshots just to fulfill the day’s requirement. I want to push myself to be better, and hopefully that will happen. Not every photo will be great—in fact, most won’t—but I hope they are all at least decent enough to be shared without embarrassment.
Below are the second set of seven pictures from this 52 Weeks of Photography project.
A year ago, I published an article entitled My Experience Obtaining a Permit to Film in a National Park (you probably need one, too), which detailed my ordeal getting a permit to film a YouTube video at the Grand Canyon National Park. It was my first time going through the process, and I found it to be unnecessarily arduous and frustrating. The article got some attention, and I was even interviewed by the press regarding this topic.
The good news is that you probably no longer need a permit to film in a National Park, unless you are an actual production crew or are doing something that requires special permission. Just this last weekend, the President signed into law the Explore Act, which allows most people to freely film within the National Park Service. Essentially, the Explore Act allows photography and filming without a permit for parties of five or fewer people as long as it involves allowed activity in a National Park, regardless of whether those documenting are receiving compensation for their work.
Because my small YouTube channel was monetized, a year ago I needed a permit, even if the video I made didn’t earn hardly anything (and cost way more to make than it earned). Even the potential of one penny of Adsense revenue meant I was a for-profit film production crew, and as a for-profit film production crew a permit was required to film, even if I were merely recording on my cellphone or a GoPro. Today, that’s not the case at all. As long as you have five or less people and you’re doing normal things that tourists are allowed to do, you can film, and can skip the permit process. This is definitely a win for small creators.
I understand why not everyone is celebrating. The National Park Service has two equal missions that oppose each other: conservation and access. They have to preserve the land, and they have to open the land to visitors. To best conserve requires closing the gate to visitors, and to best allow access greatly risks conservation. They have to walk a fine line, which is not easy to do, and not everyone will be happy. The law—as it was on Friday prior to the Explore Act—leaned more towards conservation (even if awkwardly and ineffectively), and now, as of Saturday, it leans more towards access. There are some who prefer preservation over people. I get it, and am sympathetic towards that; however, I believe that this was the right thing to do, and I’m quite happy to see this new law on the books.
Unfair Comparisons – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Astia Summer
I’m planning to do a number of comparison tests between the JPEGs from the Fujifilm GFX100S II and my X-series models, like the Fujifilm X-T5. What’s different? What’s the same? I haven’t come to very many conclusions yet. There’s clearly a difference, but it seems so subtle it is tough to put a finger on what exactly is divergent.
For this article, I’m comparing the faux Grain between the GFX100S II and the X-T5. This isn’t a carefully controlled scientific test. When my wife (on the X-T5) and I (on the GFX100S II) captured these images, we did not intend for them to be used in any sort of comparison test. I chose these because they were made in the same location (White Sands National Park in New Mexico). They were captured with the new Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired Recipe, and reprocessed in-camera with the Astia Summer Recipe. I chose those two Recipes because of their Grain: Weak/Small and Strong/Large.
Fujifilm X-T5 – Astia Summer – Grain Weak/Small
Fujifilm GFX100S II – Astia Summer – Grain Weak/Small
Fujifilm GFX100S II – Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired – Grain Strong/Large
You cannot tell much at all from the above photos. From examining the pictures more closely, I can state that the size of the faux grain is a little larger in the X-T5 JPEGs than the GFX100S II, but you can’t really tell without cropping in. So let’s crop in!
In the first set (identified simply by “Crop”), I’ve made the pictures roughly the same size. If you look carefully, the Weak/Small Grain is slightly more visible in the X-T5 pictures, but it’s not overtly obvious. In the second set (identified by “Bigger Crop”), I’ve tried to match the Grain, and I had to crop much more deeply on the GFX100S II pictures to do so. These are significant crops, and you’d have to print large to view them this big. I think if a Grain size Medium existed on GFX, that would more closely match Grain size Small on the X-series.
Below is a repeat, except for with Strong/Large Grain. I think if a Grain size Medium existed on the X-T5, it would more closely match Grain size Large on the GFX100S II.
Bigger Crop – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired – Grain Strong/Large
I don’t know that it makes any practical real-world difference, but the size of the Grain—whether Small or Large—is not identical on GFX as it is on X-series cameras. It’s not scaled the same. It’s smaller on GFX and larger on X-series, specifically when comparing the 100mp images from the GFX100S II to the 40mp images from the X-T5. There are also likely variances between the 26mp APS-C sensor and the 50mp GFX sensor.
The way to look at this, I suppose, is that film grain appears more fine on medium-format film than 35mm. The difference in silver grain between—say—120 film and Advanced Photo System Type-C film is much, much more significant than the difference in Grain between GFX and X. I think you’d expect the Grain to be more “fine” on GFX—and that’s what you find—but it isn’t nearly as much of a difference as with actual film.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Red Rock at Sundown – Sedona, AZ – Fujifilm X-T50 – Reala Ace
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 used 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 in 2024.
It’s quite fascinating comparing this list to last year’s. First and second place are the same, but otherwise there’s a lot of change, with several not making the Top 25 this year. I could have guessed the Top 10, maybe the Top 15, but I was surprised by a couple near the bottom—I didn’t think they’d make the cut, but here they are!
Dumbo Crowd – New York City, NY – Fujifilm X-T50 – Reala Ace
Those Recipes with Kodak brand names in the title—Kodachrome, Portra, Gold, Tri-X, etc., etc.—are usually the most popular. Classic Chrome is the king of film simulations, as the majority of the most-viewed Recipes are based on that film simulation, including the first four, as well as 12 of the Top 15.
Without any further delay, below are the most popular Recipes of last year!
Top 25 Most Popular Film Simulation Recipes of 2024
A Classic Chrome based Recipe for X-Trans IV cameras that is the long-time most popular Film Simulation Recipe for Fujifilm cameras. It was #1 last year, too.
Reggie’s Portra, a popular Classic Chrome based Recipe for X-Trans IV cameras, is the most versatile Portra Recipe. It was #9 last year—it saw a significant rise in 2024.
This Recipe uses the Classic Negative film simulation (and not the Real Ace film sim), and is for X-Trans V cameras. While it was published in 2023, it did not crack the Top 25 last year. Those Recipes published during the year are at a notable disadvantage compared to the long-established ones.
This particular version of Pacific Blues is compatible with X-Trans IV models, but there is also an X-Trans V version. It fell two spots since last year.
A Classic Chrome based Recipe for X-Trans IV and X-Trans V cameras, published in February of this year. It has quickly established itself as one of the essential Fuji X Weekly Recipes to try.
This is the long-time most popular B&W Recipe on Fuji X Weekly. It’s based on the Acros film simulation, and has compatibility with X-Trans III, X-Trans IV, and X-Trans V models. It fell two spots compared to 2023.
Vintage Kodachrome, which is based on Classic Chrome, is one of the older Film Simulation Recipes on Fuji X Weekly, and is compatible with X-Trans III cameras. It was ranked #5 last year.
Bright Summer—another Classic Chrome based Recipe for X-Trans IV—is sometimes called Preetra 400, because it is modeled after Preet’s aesthetic (Preet himself is the one who gave it that nickname, btw). It didn’t crack the Top 25 list last year, but grew significantly in popularity in 2024.
It is probably unfair to include the Film Dial Recipes in this list because it is not one Recipe, but 14; however, the Vibrant Arizona article is technically four Recipes, so there is a precedence for its inclusion. Published in May, this is the newest Recipe in this list.
A Classic Negative based Recipe that’s compatible with X-Trans V cameras (there’s also an X-Trans IV version). While it was published 18 months ago, it didn’t crack the Top 25 last year.
This version of Kodak Portra 160 is for X-Trans IV cameras, but there are also versions for X-Trans II, X-Trans III + X-T3/X-T30, and X-Trans V. It’s another Recipe that was published in 2023, but didn’t make the Top 25 list last year.
This is an Eterna-based Recipe for X-Trans V cameras; however, it’s simply an adaptation of the X-Trans IV version that has been around for awhile. This version was published in April of this year.
Young Yucca – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm GFX100S II + 80mm f/1.7 – Fujicolor PRO 160C Warm
It’s officially 2025! Happy New Year’s Day, everyone!
I started a new 365 Day photo project, which I’m calling 52 Weeks of Photography, back on Christmas Eve. This article is simply the introduction of the project, and the first set of seven images. I’m pretty excited to do this, and hope you appreciate following along on this journey.
This isn’t the first time that I’ve done a 365 Day photo project—I did one from August 2018 through August 2019. I developed the habit of picking up a camera daily, and my photography improved from start to finish. Also, I captured some photographs that I wouldn’t have otherwise, a few of which I was quite happy with. There is definitely a benefit to doing this type of thing. Professional athletes and musicians practice daily, so why shouldn’t photographers?
The reason why I’m doing this now is because I noticed gaps in-between my images. I haven’t been picking up my cameras daily. On several occasions, four or five days have gone by without a single picture created. Twice in 2024, a whole week passed. I want to rectify this, and get back into the habit of daily photography. I also want to elevate the quality of my craft in 2025, and am hoping this will help with that.
Full Service – Idalou, TX – Fujifilm X-T5 + 56mm f/1.2 – Superia Negative
I’ve set some ground rules for myself. I’m taking things one week at a time. That’s a little easier mentally than looking at it as one whole year chunk. If I mess up on a week, I’ll simply extend the project by a week; however, I’m also giving myself two grace days. I’d actually like to finish this on Christmas Day, which is 367 days from the start. If I miss two days, that’s perfectly ok. If I miss three to seven days, this project will be extended by one week. I think it’s good to build-in some breathing room, because life happens.
My hope is to capture a year’s worth of notable images, either personally or artistically. Ansel Adams famously stated, “Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.” It’s important to keep expectations realistic, but I’m also trying to avoid thoughtless snapshots just to fulfill the day’s requirement. I want to push myself to be better, and hopefully that will happen. Not every photo will be great—in fact, most won’t—but I hope they are all at least decent enough to be shared without embarrassment.
Below are the first set of seven pictures from this 52 Weeks of Photography project.
Half Moon Over Central Park – New York City, NY – Fujifilm X100VI – Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired
This new Film Simulation Recipe came about after someone shared with me some photographs they captured with a roll of long-expired Kodak Gold Max 400 film. Kodak introduced this color negative emulsion in 1987 under the name Kodacolor VR-G 400. Later, they renamed it GC 400, Gold 400, Ultra Gold 400, Gold Max 400, Max 400, Max Versatility 400, then Ultramax 400, which is still available today. Over the years the emulsion has been updated a few times, but it is still essentially a 1980’s Kodacolor film.
Even though the roll was long-expired, it looked pretty good. Sometimes expired film has a much different aesthetic than a fresh roll, and sometimes it’s only subtly different. In this case, it seemed more muted and grainy than Ultramax 400, and with a little different color cast, but overall not overtly divergent. The photographer did edit the scans a little, which I’m sure affected the outcome. I wasn’t able to perfectly match it, but I feel this was pretty close. I also found some examples of expired Kodak Gold Max 400 film online, and this Recipe seems to similarly match those images fairly well but not perfectly.
What I love about this Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired Recipe is that it has an obvious analog vibe. The pictures captured with it just seem film-like to me. You could probably convince some people that you didn’t use a digital camera. These photographs don’t look like typical camera-made JPEGs.
Sand Trail – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired – Photo by Amanda Roesch
This Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired Film Simulation Recipe is compatible with all fifth-generation X-Trans cameras, which, as of this writing, are the Fujifilm X-H2s, X-H2, X-T5, X-S20, X100VI, X-T50, and X-M5. You can use it on newer GFX cameras, too. I have a couple of photos at the bottom that were captured with a GFX100S II, and it seems pretty close to the X-Trans V rendering.
Film Simulation: Reala Ace Dynamic Range: DR400 Grain Effect: Strong, Large Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome FX Blue: Strong White Balance: 6700K, +1 Red & +4 Blue Highlight: -1.5 Shadow: +1.5 Color: -2 Sharpness: -2 High ISO NR: -4 Clarity: -3 ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +2/3 to +1 1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this Kodak Gold Max 400 Expired Film Simulation Recipe on a Fujifilm X100VI, X-T5 & X-S20:
Oh – New York City, NY – Fujifilm X100VI
Street Portrait – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Model Photography – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Two Ladies and a Dog – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Light on a Dark Building – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Pentax Photographer – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Bench Corner – Philadelphia, PA – Fujifilm X100VI
Three Story Home – North Bergen, NJ – Fujifilm X100VI
Alien Dunkin’ – Roswell, NM – Fujifilm X-S20 – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
Tractors is dumb – Tularosa, NM – Fujifilm X-S20 – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
Family Boating – Clinton, CT – Fujifilm X100VI
Three Leaves in the Water – Clinton, CT – Fujifilm X100VI
Flag on a Windy Day – Roswell, NM – Fujifilm X-S20 – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
Wood Fence – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-S20 – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
Christmas Sand – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T5 – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Roesch Kids – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T5 – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Dry Brush – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm X-T5 – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm GFX100S II:
Yellow Brush, Pink Sand – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm GFX100S II
Brown Leaves – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm GFX100S II
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 350 more on the Fuji X Weekly App! Consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience and to support Fuji X Weekly.
The main reason why I purchased a Fujifilm GFX100S II camera a couple of weeks ago was for XPan photography. For those who don’t know, XPan cameras were a joint venture between Hasselblad and Fujifilm in the late-1990’s through the mid-2000’s, right at the pinnacle of film. XPan models were interchangeable-lens rangefinder cameras that used approximately two frames of 35mm film to capture panoramic pictures in a 65:24 aspect ratio.
You can crop images from any model to the XPan ratio without much trouble, but composing it in-camera is different than doing it after-the-fact because you can better visualize the outcome. Also, I prefer straight-out-of-camera photography over sitting at a computer editing, but that’s just me. All GFX models, including the GFX100S II, have the 65:24 aspect ratio built-in; however, X-series cameras do not (in my opinion, Fujifilm should add the XPan ratio to all of their 40mp cameras via a firmware update). If you are serious about XPan photography and you use Fujifilm cameras, GFX is the preferable route.
Sand Wall – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Velvia Film
Since the 65:24 aspect ratio cuts out about half of the resolution, having a high-megapixel sensor is important. With that said, you can’t truly appreciate XPan when viewing on a computer or your phone. XPan from a GFX100S II isn’t going to look any more impressive than (for example) an XPan crop from a Fujifilm X-T10. These pictures need to be printed to be appreciated, and that’s my goal. I plan to print a couple of these to see what they look like, and if I create any in the future that are worthy, I hope to make some really large prints that are two-feet tall by five-feet-five-inches wide. For that, the 100mp sensor of the GFX100S II is essential.
All of these photographs, which were captured yesterday and the day before in New Mexico, were made using a Fujifilm GFX100S II camera with a Fujinon 80mm f/1.7 lens. These pictures are camera-made JPEGs using a few different Film Simulation Recipes. Over the coming days and weeks I’ll be testing various Recipes to see what works best on GFX, and I’ll be sure to share the results with you, so stay tuned! In the meantime, I hope that you enjoy these 10 XPan images.
Merry Christmas to you and your family! I hope that you are surrounded by love this holiday, and you create many warm memories …and photographs.
2024 has been an incredible year! It seems a bit surreal. I’ve told the story before, so forgive me for repeating it.
I started Fuji X Weekly in 2017, with the intention of writing one (or more) articles per week. Initially it was a journal or long-term review of the X100F, but it evolved into all things Fujifilm, with an emphasis on JPEG camera settings (Film Simulation Recipes). The website grew organically. In the early days I did literally nothing to promote it—people came by word of mouth, or they stumbled on it via Google. I’m always amazed how people found Fuji X Weekly back then.
Lightning Strikes Antelope Island – Fujifilm X100F – A photo from Day One of Fuji X Weekly
Eventually this website (and apps) became a full-time job, and I was faced with a decision: quit my day-job, or quit Fuji X Weekly. I could no longer do both. Even though I was not earning enough at that time to support my family with Fuji X Weekly profits, after much consideration and prayers, I took a leap of faith, and put in a two-week notice with my employer, leaving my job just before the holiday season, which was quite scary. That was three years ago.
I got a surprise phone call from Fujifilm back in January. They said that they wanted to work with me in 2024, but they didn’t yet know what that would mean exactly. I was super excited, but since people say all sorts of things, I didn’t count on it. I told my wife, “If it happens it happens, and if it doesn’t, that’s ok.”
NAB Photowalk Group 3– New York City, NY – Fujifilm X100VI – Nostalgic Americana
But very quickly things began to happen. First, they asked me to be a part of a film simulation project, which resulted in this webpage. Then they sent me a preproduction Fujifilm X-T50 to try prior to its announcement. I was invited to a Creator’s Retreat in the Catskill Mountains with a number of incredibly talented photographers and videographers, followed by a release event for the X-T50 on a rooftop in Manhattan. Fujifilm then asked me if I’d like to co-lead a series of photowalks over the summer, in Denver, San Diego, Nashville, and Philadelphia. They also asked me to co-lead two photowalks for their Create With Us event in Austin, and three at The NAB Show in New York. That was followed by a couple more photowalks: Ann Arbor, and back to Philadelphia. If someone had told me a year ago that all those things would happen in 2024, I would not have believed them.
I’m extremely grateful and honored that Fujifilm reached out to me, and brought me along for an incredible ride. Fuji X Weekly has been an amazing journey from the beginning, but 2024 was the best year yet. I’ve met hundred and hundreds of wonderful people (some of you reading this), and worked with unbelievably talented creators. Also, in October I launched a protective case for Fujifilm X100-series cameras in collaboration with Evergreen Cases. I don’t yet know what 2025 will bring—it could be even greater than 2024—but for right now, I’m appreciative for where I’m at on this journey. The view is good from right here, right now.
Thank you for being a part of all this! It’s because of you—the greatest community in all of photography—that any of these amazing things happened. You all are why Fuji X Weekly continues to exist. It’s truly an honor to be helpful in some way to your photography. I hope that you are having a very merry Christmas right now!
In a recent interview, Theo Georghiades, general manager of Fujifilm Imaging Solutions UK, told Amateur Photographerthat there is a possibility of a Fujifilm film camera coming in the future. Some have called this a “bombshell revelation”, but is it really?
Theo was asked, “Would Fujifilm ever consider launching a film camera again, especially if it had the retro look of an X100VI?”
He responded, “I’ve been with Fujifilm for 25 years, so have learned to never say never—but I don’t know. There is without doubt a massive resurgence in film as we see from film sales. Go down to the markets around Westminster in London and you can see the popularity of film cameras again. And it’s the same in Japan, as I found on a recent trip. As I say, I’ve learned to never, ever say never! However, any business needs to analyze the prospects for a long-term opportunity over a short-term fad.”
I’m not sure how some have interpreted this to mean Fujifilm is in development of a film camera (outside of Instax), but some have insinuated that. Others are taking a more pragmatic interpretation, that Fujifilm simply hasn’t shut the door on a film camera, which is probably the more accurate analysis.
My guess is that Theo was speaking off-the-cuff, and didn’t mean to make any official statements on this topic. In other words, a large grain of salt should be taken. Perhaps there has been water-cooler talk of the possibility, perhaps not even that. I think he is simply saying that Fujifilm does unexpected things sometimes, so you just never know what they might do in the future, but there are no current plans at this time.
If I were Fujifilm, this is what I would do: rerelease the Fujica Compact Deluxe. They already have the designs. Maybe modernize the light meter, but mostly it should stay the same. I’m sure it would sell well enough to justify manufacturing it. But time is of the essence, so if they want to do this, they should be quick about it. If they hesitate, the market for 35mm film cameras might decrease by the time it hits the shelves. You’ve got to ride the waves while they’re high and before they crash.
Fujifilm currently makes “digital film” cameras, which isn’t the same thing, but in some ways it’s better. In my opinion, the X-series bridges the gap between the positive aspects of both film and digital photography. It’s still apples-to-oranges, and I’m not suggesting otherwise, but there is enough crossover that it’s worth pointing out, and even celebrating. I have no idea whether or not Fujifilm will release a 35mm film camera, but I’m extremely happy with my X-series gear. Still, it would be really cool if they did make a brand-new film camera, so I hope they do.
Flowers & Fruit – Austin, TX – Fujifilm X100VI – Fujicolor Blue
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 used 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 10 most-viewed Classic Negative Recipes on the Fuji X Weekly website so far in 2024.
It’s close enough to the end of the year that there is unlikely to be much movement, if any, between now and January 1st, so I thought it would be a good time to begin looking at year-end statistics. When I share the Top 25 most popular Recipes of any given month, the results are pretty predictable: color Recipes dominate, especially those that mimic Kodak film stocks and use Classic Chrome. On the suggestion of a Fuji X Weekly reader, I’m going to share some Top 10 articles for Recipe categories where few are likely to crack the Top 25 overall. I started with B&W, followed that up with Fujicolor, then Eterna Recipes; X-Trans III was next; now we’ll look at Classic Negative based Recipes.
Two Boats – Clinton, CT – Fujifilm X-E4 – Pacific Blues
This list looks similar to Top 10 Fujicolor Recipes because many of those use the Classic Negative film simulation. In my mind, when I decided to do this one, I thought it would be a little more divergent. Since I had pretty much finished putting this together when I realized the similarities, I decided to publish this list anyways. I hope you don’t mind a little redundancy.
Without any further delay, below are the most popular Classic Negative Recipes of 2024!
Top 10 Most Popular Classic Negative Film Simulation Recipes of 2024
This is one of the most popular Recipes (even briefly #1) of 2024, so I wasn’t surprised in the least to see it at the peak of this list. It uses the Classic Negative film simulation and not the Reala Ace film sim, and is for X-Trans V cameras.
Pacific Blues used to be the highest ranked Classic Negative based Recipe until I published Reala Ace. This particular version of Pacific Blues is compatible with X-Trans IV models; you’ll find the X-Trans V version a couple spots further down.
This is an App Patron Early Access Recipe, which means that right now it is only available in the Fuji X Weekly App to Patron subscribers. Eventually it will be available free to everyone, but that might take awhile. This Recipe is compatible with X-Trans V cameras, and is very new, published in late October.
Fujifilm released a new set of firmware updates, which they had promised would come before the end of the year: one for the X-T5, one for the X-T50, one for the X100VI, one for the X-S20, and one for the GFX100S II. This is simply an autofocus fix for the bug introduced earlier in the year that was partially fixed already, and should be fully fixed now. Unlike the firmware updates last month for the X-H2s, X-H2, and GFX100 II, this one doesn’t include F-Log2 C or some of the other improvements that were given to those cameras, only the AF fix. It’s possible those things might still come in a future firmware update, but I’m not sure.
I haven’t yet updated any of my cameras, because I always like to wait awhile—you never know if there will be some unexpected issue. For example, Sony famously released a firmware update earlier this year that cost their customers $700 to fix. A good rule of thumb is to wait a week or two to see if any issues arise. Most of the time there is not an issue, and I don’t suspect any problems with this one specifically, but since it does happen every once in awhile, it’s prudent to wait at least a few days, and if something major comes up, it should be well known by then.
I’m sure that you’ve read about the AF woes somewhere, or seen a YouTube video or two about it; however, in my opinion it has been largely overblown and misunderstood. Let me explain why.
First, most people weren’t affected. Some were, for sure, but not the majority; however, the large vocal outcry caused a bit of hysteria, which made it seem like a much bigger issue than it actually was—essentially, trolls took over the Fujifilm corner of the internet for awhile. A few different people told me something to the effect of, “I didn’t know my camera was broken until I saw it demonstrated on a YouTube video, and now I’m mad because I paid a lot of money for it.” It didn’t affect them personally and they would have never known without someone telling them, but since they did know, they were pissed. A lot of people got angry over something that had no negative implications for them personally, only the idea that it possibly could.
Second, Fujifilm’s AF can perform very different depending on the specific lenses used and the specific settings programmed, and if you are using lenses and/or settings that are not ideal for the specific situation, you might get less than ideal results. An example of this comes courtesy of Camera Conspiracies, as Kasey discovered that his prior criticisms of Fujifilm’s AF—including the bug—were at least partially user-error by him. I suspect that is true of a lot of the criticisms, but people tend to get offended when you suggest that the gear isn’t the primary problem. Perhaps something can be said of the intuitiveness of the AF system—there’s certainly room for improvement—however, a lot of the blame that was directed at the camera wasn’t fully the camera’s fault, but largely the lens and/or setting choices made by the one using it.
Third (and this is related to second), some people seem to want AF to automatically focus precisely as they wish it would without any input from the user. It’s like if you put your exposure triangle into full-auto, and then complained that it didn’t choose the specific aperture, shutter speed, or ISO that you wished it had. Autofocus doesn’t necessarily mean that you should set-and-forget it; like with the exposure triangle, a little control can go a long ways. After all, we’re photographers, not merely button pushers. I see people all of the time create wonderful images and videos with the gear that supposedly has sucky AF, and it isn’t a limiting factor for them (proving that it isn’t sucky after all). As Ansel Adams famously stated, “The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”
Fourth, I think some people have unrealistic expectations of how Fujifilm’s AF should perform, ignoring that the Canikony brands have been developing autofocus systems since the 1960’s and ’70’s, have significantly larger R&D budgets for it, and have even prioritized AF over image quality in recent years. Of course theirs is better, but that does not mean Fujifilm’s AF is bad, because it is not—far from it. If you could take any current Fujifilm model back in time 15 years, you’d shock the camera world with seemingly impossible technology. Photography has been around for nearly 200 years, and videography for over 135 years, and not just since the invention of our incredibly capable modern gear. People created amazing photos and videos in the past with their subpar gear (as compared to what is available today), so literally nothing should stop you from doing so with your superior gear. If something is stopping you, it is only you, and you have the power to change that.
Thankfully, Fujifilm’s AF has been fully fixed. Can it be improved? Sure, just like everything else, there is always room for improvement (there is no such thing as a perfect camera). Those who continue to moan about it are either haters, constant complainers, or trolls, or they are experiencing user-error and are blaming the gear instead of themselves. It’s beyond time for all that negativity to end—I’m sick of it, and I know a lot of other people are, too. Let’s get back to enjoying our gear, and creating awesome content with it.
