Peter McKinnon’s recent YouTube video entitled The Valley really struck me. It was highly relatable, and not just because it was filmed in Arizona and Utah. There were several interesting takeaways, and a lot that could be discussed. For now, I want to focus on one thing in particular: the wrench.
I think it’s important to feel a little uncomfortable sometimes. “The enemy of art is the absence of limitations,” Orson Welles famously stated. Oftentimes restricting ourselves in some way will propel us forward or allow us to achieve what we otherwise could not, as we have to approach the situation differently than we are comfortable doing. That perspective shift is where growth happens. Wrenches are good.
If you haven’t yet seen the video, go ahead and watch it now.
“I mentioned I’ve been shooting for 20 years,” Peter McKinnon states at about the eight-minute mark. “Digital gets a bit—maybe not even digital, it’s not even the way to say it—just photography itself just gets a bit monotonous after two decades. There’s a formula that you can follow, and it works—you’ve got a style and you’re used to it and you’re used to everything. So it’s nice to throw a wrench into that mix, and that wrench—for me—that’s film. Really needing to understand what feels like an entirely new craft in so many ways with so many facets to it—it really puts you on your toes. It takes you out of the comfort zone and forces you to see the world through a new perspective.”
“There’s something that connects you with nature,” he continues. “There’s something that connects you to the landscapes you’re standing in when you’re out there loading a roll of film that you’re going to shoot [but] that you can’t see after. There’s something that just feels like true photography. And that feeling I plan on chasing for as long as I can.”
Initially, I saw this through the eyes of a long-time film photographer. Yeah, there is something about loading the roll of film and not knowing what you’ve got until much later that connects you with the scene. But then I saw it through my eyes when I neared the 20-year mark (there’s something about that date…), which was a handful of years back. I desperately needed a wrench, as I was feeling burnt out and uninspired. That wrench for me was Film Simulation Recipes. Shooting straight-out-of-camera was the limitation that I needed to be propelled forward. It’s what rejuvenated and inspired me (still does!), and what I plan to chase as long as I can. For Peter it’s film, for me it’s JPEG Recipes—which, incidentally, do have some similarities.
Mitchell Mesa – Monument Valley, AZ – Fujifilm X-T1 – Velvia Recipe
Of course, Peter McKinnon still edits his film photographs. He spot-removed the horse poop, for example. He very obviously used masks to brighten up the subjects. Nothing wrong with that, as it’s his art. For me, though, post-editing just sucks the life out of me. It’s just not my thing anymore, after having done it for so long without any enjoyment. Thankfully, using Film Simulation Recipes allows me to not worry about editing, and focus more on capturing.
I also saw Peter’s video through my current eyes. For several months now I have been feeling that I need some new limitation—a brand new wrench—to force myself to see through a new perspective. And this video was the aha moment. I grabbed my Fujifilm X100V, turned off the EVF so that it was just the optical viewfinder (no image preview), and turned off the rear LCD. Then I determined not to review my pictures until later, sometime after I was done photographing. This would emulate to an extent that film experience Peter talked about, and that I kind of miss (now that I don’t shoot much film anymore). Doing this, I load the Film Simulation Recipe that I want to use into the camera (or, choose one of the seven that I already have saved), capture some photographs, and then I don’t know what I have until sometime later. It’s definitely a different approach than what I’ve been doing, but so far so good. I think I’m going to appreciate this new wrench.
I just started doing this. Below are a few of the first handful of exposures captured using this technique. The Recipe is one that’s not yet been published, but is coming soon, so stay tuned for that. I can only do this on my X100V and X-Pro1, and not my other models, since it requires an optical viewfinder. Maybe this will be a good excuse to buy the X-Pro4 whenever Fujifilm decides to release that someday in the future. In the meantime, this is how I will approach photography whenever I’m out with my X100V. I think it’s the wrench I need right now.
Pink Arm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
Empty Cage – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
Twin Palms & Concrete – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
I just became aware that Fujifilm Middle East is currently conducting a photography contest just for straight-out-of-camera pictures! Use either the factory-default film sims or Film Simulation Recipes. No editing allowed, only camera-made JPEGs.
Third prize is a $500 coupon for Fujifilm gear, second prize is a $1,000 coupon, and first prize is a $2,000 coupon… enough for a Fujifilm X-T5 or X-H2! If you reside in one of those 11 qualifying countries, definitely consider entering this competition.
One of the judges is Fujifilm X-Photographer Bjorn Moerman. If you’ve ever watched any of the SOOC Live YouTube videos, you’ll instantly recognize him, as he regularly tunes-in and participates in the show. You’ve likely seen several of his phenomenal pictures; a few are found in the latest Viewers’ Images slideshow published just today! Many of his amazing photographs are straight-out-of-camera using Fuji X Weekly Film Simulation Recipes (including all of those seen in the SOOC Live videos). Sometimes in photography competitions you have to wonder about who the judges are and if they’re actually qualified for that role, but not in this case, especially since Bjorn is one of them.
I love the idea of this competition, and I hope that it catches on. Shooting straight-out-of-camera JPEGs is becoming a more and more popular approach, and Fujifilm photographers are on the leading edge of it. Fujifilm North America should definitely do a SOOC photo contest, too—I think it would be a huge hit, while also spreading the word that Fujifilm cameras are capable of capturing incredible pictures that don’t require editing. For many people, that realization is a game-changer, making photography more enjoyable, more efficient, and more accessible.
I’m not a wedding photographer. I’ve photographed a couple of weddings in the past—many years ago—and I have no desire to jump into that genre. Good wedding photographers are sometimes the first there and last to leave. It’s not uncommon to work 12, 14, or even 16 hours on the big day. Then there are thousands of exposures to cull through, and then edit. That might be an additional 24, 28, or even 32 hours of work! That’s not my cup of tea. For others, though, this is their thing, and they love what they do. Their passion is capturing incredible memories of other people’s weddings.
The shift to a faster turnaround must be frustrating for many in the industry, but it’s actually an opportunity. The article states that some wedding photographers are trying to get some social media type content into the hands of their customers within 48 hours. But why that long? Why not much quicker? Why not as the wedding is happening? If you can do that, you have a huge leg-up on your competition.
I cohost a live YouTube series with official Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry. She does a lot of business photography. Recently she was hired to photograph a corporate event, but they wanted to have the pictures available to share on their social media platforms immediately, in real-time as the event was happening. How did she do this? First, she used Fujifilm gear combined with my Film Simulation Recipes, and shot JPEGs. The pictures looked good straight-out-of-camera, and no editing was needed. Every so many minutes she downloaded the pictures off the camera and uploaded them onto a cloud drive that the customer had access to. Within 10 or 15 minutes of the pictures being captured, the customer was able to share them across the world. This went so well that a week later she was hired to do it again for a different corporate event. I do believe this is the future of event photography, including wedding photography.
Maybe real-time photo sharing isn’t something you’re ready to offer, but if your pictures look great straight-out-of-camera, and further manipulation isn’t needed (or only lightly needed), you can speed up your turnaround significantly. Instead of providing the client with a small batch of photos within 48 hours for social media sharing while they wait up to six weeks for the rest, you can deliver the whole wedding the next day or maybe two. This is, of course, in theory. I’m not aware of anyone who is actually doing this right now. A few different wedding photographers have told me that they are using my Film Simulation Recipes on their Fujifilm cameras, and delivering some of the pictures either same-day or next-day to the client, while providing the rest of photographs at some point later on. I do think, if you’ve got good settings dialed into your camera, and you’re especially careful to get everything right at the time the pictures are captured, that delivering unedited JPEGs of the wedding to the couple is possible, and nobody will be the wiser that you didn’t actually spend hours post-processing RAW files.
This is something I’ve talked about before. Back in December I published Want to be a Wedding Photographer? Your Opportunity Awaits! and earlier this month I posted The Future of Photography is Unedited, where I touched on this topic. I keep bringing it up because I see this shift happening, and those who already have a simplified workflow using Film Simulation Recipes are ahead of the curve, and are primed for success in this changing environment. I want to make sure that you are aware of it, in case you want to take advantage of the opportunity.
I don’t do wedding or event photography, but there are still plenty of advantages to shooting JPEGs. Despite having way more photographs to cull through and share, I was able to publish my pictures of the Central Coast of California tour much quicker than Ken Rockwell did, because my workflow is much quicker than his. That’s a pretty meaningless example; I don’t have a lot of strict photographic deadlines. Perhaps a better case is this: on December 8th of last year, Nathalie, myself, a group of guests, and those who tuned-in, created a Film Simulation Recipe during the Let’s Get Festive holiday-special SOOC Live broadcast—this is the first and (as far as I’m aware) only time a Fujifilm Recipe has been made live on YouTube. Within minutes of its creation, I (and others) had captured a picture using the new Film Simulation Recipe and shared it with all those watching. The very next day I published the Recipe, which the live audience named Mystery Chrome, on this website (and the Fuji X Weekly App), complete with 24 example pictures. That’s my best quick-turnaround example.
Even though I don’t have the need to publish pictures immediately after they’ve been captured, I do sometimes share a photo quickly through text or social media, which is never a problem because I don’t post-process my images. What’s more meaningful to me is that I don’t spend hours and hours sitting at a computing fiddling with files, which saves me a ton of time, making me more productive, while also freeing up time for other things (such as writing blog posts and spending time with my family). It’s changed my life, no hyperbole. I think it can and will change event photography and even wedding photography. It will just take some pioneer photographers to give it a try, which could be you.
Not post-processing your pictures is called one-step photography, a term coined by Edwin Land and perpetuated by Ansel Adams in his book Polaroid Land Photography. “The effect of one-step processing on both amateur and professional creative photography,” Adams stated, “has been revolutionary.” With film, step-one is capturing the picture in-camera and step-two is developing and printing it in a darkroom; however, Polaroid cameras removed the second step, creating a one-step process, which greatly simplified the photographic workflow. With digital, step-one is capturing the picture in-camera and step-two is post-processing in software like Lightroom; however, Film Simulation Recipes remove the second step, creating a one-step process, which greatly simplifies the photographic workflow. “The process has revolutionized the art and craft of photography,” Adams concluded. It still is, for those who embrace the one-step approach.
Next week—on July 27th—Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry and I will be chatting about travel photography in our upcoming SOOC Livebroadcast, including showing your pictures and answering your questions. I hope that you can join us!
The Q&A shows, which are the Part 2 of our monthly topics, are always a lot of fun. They’re more relaxed and interactive. Your participation makes them great—your role is vital! If you don’t have next week’s broadcast on your calendar, be sure to mark it now. I’ve included it below so that you can easily locate it.
Two weeks ago was the Part 1 episode, where Nathalie and I introduced the theme of travel photography. We discussed all sorts of considerations and gave many tips. If you haven’t yet seen that show, you’ll want to take some time to watch it. I’ve included the broadcast below, and you can also find it on the SOOC Live YouTube channel.
In that episode we challenged you to shoot with one or more of these four Film Simulation Recipes: 1970’s Summer, Elite Chrome 200, Fujichrome Provia 100F, and Kodacolor VR. Additionally, if you want an even greater challenge, you can try to get good results from one or more of these Recipes in unfavorable light. And if you want to go boss-level, the third challenge is to print and frame one of your pictures that were captured with these Recipes. To summarize: Level 1 is to use the Recipes listed above, Level 2 is to shoot those Recipes in less-than-ideal light, and Level 3 is to print and frame one of the pictures you captured during the first two levels. Got it?
We invite you to share your results with us and the SOOC Live community. Please upload your images (click here) captured with our four recommended Recipes to be potentially featured in the next episode and also included in the Viewers’ Images slideshow. Don’t forget to include the Film Simulation Recipe name in the file name, so that we know which Recipe you used. The deadline for submission is Tuesday the 25th, which means that you still have a little time, but not a lot, so don’t procrastinate. I look forward to seeing your pictures!
Last month’s Viewers Images slideshow was delayed a little due to a few unfortunate and unforeseen circumstances. If you haven’t yet watched it, I’ve included it below. Thank you to everyone who participated!
Photography is moving in a clear direction, and it is unedited. Let me explain.
There’s a new photography trend on the iPhone. Instead of using the front-facing camera to take selfies, people are taking screen shots of the preview from the selfie camera. Why? What’s the difference? The pipeline for the image preview and the actual photographs are different on the iPhone. Most notably, Apple applies an HDR processing to the exposure (but not the preview), which creates a less-contrasty picture. If you are going to apply a filter to the photo and edit it, having a flatter starting point makes sense; however, if you are not editing, one might prefer the more-contrasty image preview. Aside from that, it can be frustrating that the preview doesn’t match the photograph.
My RitchieCam iPhone camera app uses the same pipeline for both the image processing and the preview, so it doesn’t have this issue. The preview you see will be the picture you get. No need to screenshot, which produces a much-lower resolution image. Those using my camera app (instead of the native iPhone app) won’t need to go through the hassle of the screen shot (plus cropping out the non-image part); instead, they’ll have better quality pictures with an analog-inspired aesthetic to post to social media.
Photo by Amanda Roesch – iPhone 13 Pro – RitchieCam App – Standard Film filter – unedited
Of course, we’re not talking about photographers here, but snap-shooters, as I doubt that anyone who would self-identify as a photographer is taking screenshots instead of using the camera. It shouldn’t be surprising that they’re uninterested in picture manipulation, and just want good results without fuss. Maybe they don’t know how to edit pictures, and the idea of doing so is very intimidating, so they have no interest in learning. It could be that they don’t want to spend their time with picture editing, and just want to share (either through text or social media) their snaps quickly—the easier the better, but the pictures still need to look decent. Others don’t edit because doing so seems less authentic; Photoshop is a bad word, and picture-manipulation equals people-manipulation. Let’s not forget that the vast majority of photos captured across the world are by amateurs, so their opinions, preferences, and trends do matter.
For the advanced-hobbyist or professional, surely photo manipulation is a requirement, right? There’s a growing movement towards reduced (or even eliminated) photo editing. First, the less time spent sitting at a computer equals more production and/or more time with friends and family. For a lot of people, for every hour out with a camera photographing means two hours in Lightroom or Capture One fiddling with the RAW files; if those two hours can be reduced by 50% or more (especially more), that’s a huge win! Second, shooting camera-made JPEGs affords the advantage of knowing exactly what you’re going to get before even pressing the shutter. Don’t like what you see? Simply make a few quick adjustments until you do, then take the picture. Not having to pre-visualize in your mind the finished photo, but seeing it right there in the viewfinder in real time, is a game-changer for many. Third, getting great (often analog-like) results straight-out-of-camera can be a much more fun photographic process, especially if you don’t enjoy sitting for hours at a computer post-processing pictures.
I used to shoot RAW and edit, but thanks to Fujifilm cameras and Film Simulation Recipes, I now use unedited (or sometimes lightly-edited) camera-made JPEGs. I will crop or straighten when needed, which is the majority of my post-processing; occasionally I will adjust the brightness a notch, but very rarely do I manipulate any further than that. Most of my pictures are unedited, even to a strict definition. This has changed my life, no hyperbole! My post workflow takes minutes instead of hours, which has made me a much more productive photographer while simultaneously improving home-life, because I can now spend more time with my wife and kids. That’s amazing!
Pacific Poppies – Montaña de Oro SP, CA – Fujifilm X-E4 – Pacific Blues – unedited
For example, on a recent trip to the California coast, during the downtimes—such as while at lunch, as a passenger in a car, or at night before bed—I transferred the JPEGs from my cameras to my phone, cropped if needed, and uploaded to cloud storage. A few minutes here and there meant that, by the time I got home, my workflow was essentially already complete. For most photographers, once back home the work would just be getting started, with many hours sitting at a computer.
But, but, but… surely the unedited camera-made JPEGs are not good enough for serious photography, right? You couldn’t do true professional work like this, could you? You can’t print very large and still look stunning, can you? Actually, yes—you can! I know because several successful professional photographers have told me that this is how they now do their paid work. You’d be surprised by just how many are doing some or even all of their pro photo work completely unedited or just lightly edited.
It’s not just photographers who benefit from a simplified workflow, but clients. Because of social media, people often desire to have a quick turnaround on their professional photographs. The newlywed couple doesn’t want to wait two weeks for the wedding pictures to be done, and in fact their parents wished for them that very day! If you can deliver the images quickly, you have a clear advantage over your competition.
In fact, Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry told me about two recent corporate events where the client wanted the photos as the event was happening! Periodically, every so many minutes throughout the day, she would download the straight-out-of-camera images from her camera to her phone, then upload them to a cloud location that the client had access to. As the event was happening, they were able to share the pictures to their social media accounts. Delivering real-time results to the client is going to be the future of event photography. Nathalie was able to do this thanks to the Film Simulation Recipes that she had programmed into her Fujifilm cameras.
Whether it is professional, hobby, or snap-shooting, photography is slowly and stubbornly moving towards less editing. It is easier and quicker and more fun, the disadvantages of it are disappearing, and the stigmatization is dissipating. More and more, people want great results without fuss. Editing is no longer a requirement, especially if you have gear that will deliver solid out-of-camera pictures, such as Fujifilm cameras or the RitchieCam app.
The next battle will be AI. Technology allows one to simulate a photograph with a string of words, or add to an image what wasn’t there—all with a similar ease to shooting camera-made JPEGs. It will come down to authenticity. I believe that as tech pushes us towards an augmented or even fully artificial reality, society will push back with an equal and opposite force towards the genuine. People will generally prefer authenticity over artificial, but it will be a divide. Camera makers should carefully consider how to move forward through all of this, and how they can improve their straight-out-of-camera experience. Fujifilm has a clear advantage, which materialized in the recent explosion in demand for the X100V. A simplified workflow with less editing or even no editing is the future of photography, and the future is now.
Fujifilm couldn’t make enough copies of the camera to keep up with the newfound demand. The X100V was out-of-stock everywhere. The backorder list quickly grew long. A large camera store told me months ago that if there were no new orders, and at the current rate that Fujifilm was manufacturing the X100V, it would take them six months just to fulfill all of those backorders; however, the backorder list was growing faster than Fujifilm was delivering new cameras.
Some of those who did have an X100V—even a used one—were selling them at significantly inflated prices. I saw one listed at $1,000 above MSRP in one instance. And people were actually buying them! The price for older versions, such as the X100F, but going back all the way to the 12-year-old original X100, also increased and became more difficult to find. Even other Fujifilm series, such as the X-E line (and even Ricoh GR), saw a bump in demand as people looked for alternatives to the X100V.
Yellow Kayaks, White Trucks – Pismo Beach, CA – Fujifilm X100V – Superia Premium 400
It’s been about nine months since the craze began and it hasn’t slowed. The X100V has been an in-demand model during that time, but Fujifilm just can’t keep up with it, due to things like parts shortages and balancing manufacturing demands with the also-hot-selling X-T5. Ideally Fujifilm would have been able to truly capitalize on their fortuitous situation, but they really haven’t. Perhaps the only thing that Fujifilm has been able to do is continue to limp the manufacturing of this model a little longer than they originally anticipated, delaying the discontinuation date by as much as a year.
When you look at the history of the X100-series, a release pattern emerges. The X100S came out about two years after the original X100, the X100T came out about two years after the X100S, and the X100F was released about two years after the X100T; however, the X100V was released three years after the X100F, and we’re already beyond the three-year-mark since the X100V came out. I believe that Fujifilm would have liked to have announced the next X100-series camera, which I’ll call the X100Z, back in February, but that obviously didn’t happen. I anticipate that it will be February 2024.
Why didn’t it happen in 2023? The X100V is selling faster than they can be made. What’s the hurry in releasing a successor? I do believe the issues that plagued not only Fujifilm but also most of the tech industry are still problematic to an extent, and this gives Fujifilm more time to get their parts supply and manufacturing operations back on track. I bet Fujifilm is hoping to make just enough copies of the X100V to give a glimmer of hope that one can be obtained with enough patience—and that the buzz continues for a bit longer—but not so many that the demand is deflated when the X100Z (or whatever Fujifilm will call it) is announced in eight months or so. Honestly, Fujifilm should release one or two limited-run special-edition X100V versions between now and then.
Flare over a Log– Prefumo Canyon, CA – Fujifilm X100V – Fujicolor 100 Gold
The X100-series doesn’t change much with a new release. The improvements are just enough to make you desire the new model, but are never groundbreaking. There’s not going to be a redesign. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. What can we expect in an X100Z? What do I wish for?
I do believe the biggest “upgrade” will be the 40-megapixel X-Trans V sensor and processor. While I actually prefer the 26-megapixel sensor in general (as 40mp is overkill for most people), as I’ve thought about it, this sensor makes a lot of sense in an X100 because of the Digital Teleconverter, something I used far more frequently on my recent trip to California’s Central Coast than I had at any point in the two years prior. The X100V has 35mm full-frame-equivalent lens, and the Digital Teleconverter, which is a digital zoom with some smart upscaling, produces a 50mm-equivalent or 70mm-equivalent picture, adding versatility to the fixed-lens camera. There is a noticeable loss in quality when set to 70mm, but it’s still surprisingly good; however, the 40mp sensor would make this feature better and more practical for routine use. In fact, Fujifilm could even add 80mm if they wanted. The one thing I’d like Fujifilm to fix with regards to the Digital Teleconverter is scale the faux Grain, because Strong/Large Grain looks massive when using the 70mm option, but it should appear to be the same size as if the Digital Teleconverter wasn’t used.
The new sensor and processor will bring several improvements to the spec sheet for both stills and video. Autofocus will see a boost. In an age of diminishing returns, I don’t think any of that makes a big difference, but the marketing department will still use it to promote the camera and reviewers will still use it to get clicks and likes.
Playing with Waves – Cambria, CA – Fujifilm X100V – Kodak Tri-X 400
Will the X100Z have IBIS? Fujifilm has made some significant strides with their In-Body-Image-Stabilization, but I’d be mildly surprised if the new model has it. The argument is that the Ricoh GR III has IBIS, and it’s a much older and smaller camera, so why can’t the X100-series? First, IBIS isn’t really needed in the GR III and it’s pretty mediocre anyway, so it’s often overstated as a feature in that model. I do think it makes more sense in the X100-series than in the Ricoh, but if it makes the body larger or more expensive, Fujifilm will have to carefully consider the potential consequences of that. I think, with the higher-resolution sensor, a digital stabilizer for video would be sufficient.
What I would love to see in the Fujifilm X100Z are more film simulations and JPEG options. Of course that’s what I’d love to see, since I make Film Simulation Recipes. What I don’t think Fujifilm or the photography community in-general realizes is that the ability to get analog-like results straight-out-of-camera is what’s largely driving the interest in the X100V. While many long-time Fujifilm photographers purchased the X100V, for a lot of people the camera is (or would be if they could find one in stock) their first Fujifilm—whether they mainly shoot Canon, Sony, Nikon, etc., or it’s their first “real” camera—and it makes a lot of sense because it doesn’t require investing in a whole system. They can get their feet wet with something fun, and maybe later they’ll jump into the deep end. In the meantime, they’ve got a cool camera that doesn’t require sitting in front of a computer to get great results. Not only does this drive camera sales, but it is also a big reason why many end up sticking around and not moving onto something else.
Spooner Cove – Montaña de Oro SP, CA – Fujifilm X100V – Fujicolor 100 Gold
So what would I like Fujifilm to add to the X100Z? Obviously Eterna Bleach Bypass and Nostalgic Neg. will be included, but I think Fujifilm should strongly consider introducing a new film sim with this camera. Some ideas are Fujicolor Pro 400H (that with overexposure behaves similarly to the film), Fujicolor Pro 800Z (would make a lot of sense if they name the camera X100Z), Fujichrome Sensia, Fujichrome Fortia, cross-process, infrared, Instax, Neopan 400CN, etc.—there are still a ton that Fujifilm could and should do. Some JPEG options that I’d like to see are mid-tone adjustments (additional to Highlight and Shadow), black-point (a.k.a. fade, to lift blacks), split-toning (for both B&W and color pictures), more Grain options (Weak, Medium, Strong; Small, Medium, Large, Extra-Large; plus maybe various patters?), and maybe even a tint slider for the major colors to tweak their rendering? I think Fujifilm has to be careful balancing new features with simplicity, so that the many options don’t become overwhelming—in other words, pick a couple of things to add and not everything, as much as I’d love to have everything.
The X100Z will be a very successful camera for Fujifilm, and for a lot of people standing in the long line for an X100V, this new model can’t get here fast enough. There won’t likely be a huge difference between the two versions—just the new sensor and some new features, but it will nonetheless be a nice refresh. While it might seem to be a long ways off, Fujifilm will announce this camera in the not-too-distant future, and it will be here before you know it. In the meantime, I’ve included below a video published today by Leigh & Raymond Photography that discusses this very topic.
Arches National Park, Utah — iPhone 11 — RitchieCam App — Analog Gold filter
“I’ve been working on my photos from October rather than reviews….”
—Ken Rockwell, February 2, 2023
I just stumbled upon that quote from Ken, which was followed by an iPhone photo from October (that’s why this article begins with an iPhone picture). I bet a lot of you can relate to his statement. When you photograph a lot, your post-processing workflow can get backed up quite a bit. I have thousands of unprocessed RAW files that have been sitting on a now-obsolete computer’s hard drive for at least seven years now. I get it: you’ve got stuff to do, and your limited time is being pulled every which way, so something’s got to give.
I discovered that there’s a better way. There’s no need to get four or five months behind. There’s no need to let your photographic work back up so much. You can can accomplish so much more with the time that you’ll save. What is this better way? It’s really simple: shoot JPEGs, and skip the picture editing step (called One Step Photography, as explained by Ansel Adams in his book Polaroid Land Camera). More and more photographers are embracing this approach.
The reason why it’s important to shoot with Recipes is because the settings have been fine-tuned to produce a particular aesthetic that doesn’t require editing. The images look good straight from the camera, as if they had been post-processed or perhaps were even shot on film. Except they weren’t, which saves you a ton of time, money, and hassle. If you aren’t shooting with Recipes, you are most certainly doing some amount of post-processing, whether you shoot RAW or JPEG. There are some people who do still edit their camera-made-using-Recipes JPEGs, but they’re doing much less editing than they otherwise would be. The point of using Film Simulation Recipes is to edit less or (preferably) not at all, which has a huge upside, but it does require Recipes that produce excellent results, and a little extra care by the photographer in the field, since “I’ll fix it in post” isn’t really an option.
If Ken had used a Fujifilm camera programmed with Fuji X Weekly Recipes, surely he would not be busy right now post-processing pictures captured way back in October. Instead, he’d be writing those reviews that have been delayed, or out on some other photographic adventure. The October exposures would have been completed in October, or maybe early November at the latest. If he had used RitchieCam, there would be no need to process his iPhone images with Skylum software, because they would have been ready-to-publish the moment they were captured. Ken, you should try my iPhone camera app. And you should shoot with Fujifilm cameras more often.
With the Canikony brands, shooting awesome straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) JPEGs isn’t as easy or prevalent. Sure, it can be done, but it is much more often done with other brands because of things like the Fuji X Weekly App, which contains approaching 300 Film Simulation Recipes for Fujifilm cameras, so no matter your desired aesthetic, there’s a Recipe for you. Download the Fuji X Weekly App for free today (Android here, Apple here), and consider becoming a Patron subscriber to unlock the best App experience. Ken is sitting at a computer right now fiddling with files, since he didn’t shoot with Fujifilm cameras programmed with Film Simulation Recipes.
People seem to either love or hate Ken Rockwell. To be clear, this article is not bashing him. I’ve actually had correspondence with Ken, and he seems like a very nice guy. I think his “real” personality is much more kind and genuine than his online persona, which can sometimes come across as abrasive and perhaps even offensive. If you hate him, I would suggest that you reach out to him with an open mind and heart, and try to get to know him a little, because your mind might get changed, even if just a bit. Personally, I have found some of his articles, insights, and commentary to be quite helpful; however, I certainly don’t agree with everything that he says, and I take his words with a grain of salt (as you should with mine). He’s very successful at what he does, so he’s obviously doing something “right” even if I don’t fully agree with what it is.
All of that is to say, if you don’t want your workflow backed up for months because you have so many exposures to edit, and you’d rather spend your time doing something else—including capturing more photographs—then SOOC JPEGs might just be the thing for you. If you don’t own a Fujifilm camera, consider picking one up. Download the Fuji X Weekly App. Select a few Film Simulation Recipes to try. Let your RAW editor subscription expire.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Season 2 of SOOC kicks off this Thursday, March 10th, at 9 AM Pacific Time, 12 PM Eastern.
SOOC is a monthly live video series, with each episode focused on a different film simulation recipe. It is a collaboration between Tame Your Fujifilm (Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry) and Fuji X Weekly (Ritchie Roesch). SOOC is a fun and educational experience where we not only talk about Fujifilm camera settings, but also answer your questions and give tips and tricks. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow. It’s an interactive show, and your participation is essential, so I really hope to see you there!
Well, this is going to sound crazy, but I turned my Fujifilm X100V into a disposable film camera. No, I didn’t disassemble my digital camera, rip out the sensor, and adapt a film spool. Instead, I configured my X100V to capture pictures that appear as though they were captured with a cheap throwaway film camera. Why? I’ve done crazier things before, including distressing a camera, so it shouldn’t be too shocking that I’d do this—perhaps it was just a matter of time.
The inspiration for this project has been building for awhile. I have a picture displayed on my dresser that’s over 20 years old—it’s my wife and I, captured sometime shortly after we got married. A friend took the picture with a disposable camera. I can tell that it was a Fujifilm QuickSnap camera by the color palette, which is clearly Fujicolor. The picture is special to me because it’s a very personal (and happy) moment that’s been frozen in time through photography. It’s nothing more than a snapshot captured on a cheap camera, and would be completely meaningless to almost anyone else. I have a box full of these type of pictures, mostly 4″ x 6″ prints. You might have a box like this, too—snapshots that are meaningful to you.
Bread Truck – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Fujifilm developed the QuickSnap camera, a “one-time-use” 35mm film camera, in the mid-1980’s (Kodak released its version, called FunSaver, a couple years later), and it was an instant hit. These “disposable” cameras were extremely popular in the 1990’s and 2000’s. They came preloaded with 27 frames (a 24-exposure roll of film, but you got three extra shots), and were point-and-shoot. You’d push the shutter-release and advance the film, but otherwise there typically weren’t any other controls, so anyone could use these cameras—no skill required. Once you exposed all of the frames, you’d take the camera to the 1-hour lab, where they removed the film for development and recycled the camera. 60 minutes later you’d have a packet of 4″ x 6″ prints.
Cheap digital point-and-shoots made a dent in disposable camera sales, but it was really the cellphone camera that rendered them obsolete; however, you might be surprised to learn that you can still buy disposable cameras today. Thanks to the Lomography movement and an increased interest in film photography, there’s enough of a market for these cameras to continue to exist in 2022. I briefly considered purchasing one, but instead of that, I decided to capture QuickSnap-like images on my Fujifilm X100V.
In these two “SoundBites” (as we’re calling it) from Episode 06 of SOOC, Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry and I discuss Color Chrome Effect & Color Chrome FX Blue features on Fujifilm X-Trans IV cameras. These are short snippets from the show, and it gives you an idea of the type of content that’s found in a SOOC broadcast. If you missed Episode 06, I’ve included it below, so you can view it in its entirety if you’d like.
If you’ve never watched, SOOCis a monthly live video series that’s interactive. It’s a collaboration between Nathalie and I. We discuss film simulation recipes, camera settings, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow.
The film simulation recipe used in both videos is Kodachrome 64. If you don’t have the Fuji X Weekly App, be sure to download it for free today!
In this “SoundBite” (as we’re calling it) from Episode 06 of SOOC, Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry and I discuss three film simulation recipes that are good for portrait photography. This is a short snippet from the show, and it gives you an idea of the type of content that’s found in a SOOC broadcast. If you missed Episode 06, I’ve included it below, so you can view it in its entirety if you’d like.
If you’ve never watched, SOOCis a monthly live video series that’s interactive. It’s a collaboration between Nathalie and I. We discuss film simulation recipes, camera settings, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow.
In this “SoundBite” (as we’re calling it) from Episode 05 of SOOC, Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry and I discuss three film simulation recipes that are good for urban photography. This is a short snippet from the show, and it gives you an idea of the type of content that’s found in a SOOC broadcast. If you missed Episode 05 and/or Episode 06, I’ve included them below.
If you’ve never watched, SOOC is a monthly live video series that’s interactive. It’s a collaboration between Nathalie and I. We discuss film simulation recipes, camera settings, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow.
Evergreen Tops – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4 – “Kodak High Definition Plus 200”
This Kodak High Definition Plus 200 film simulation recipe was a fun one to make. My wife, Amanda, was looking through an old box of pictures when she came across a group of prints that she thought looked interesting, so she showed them to me. The images were captured in the Sierra Nevada mountains, largely in the Sequoia National Forest, in 2006. I had no idea what film I used, but after locating the negatives, I discovered it was Kodak High Definition Plus 200. The pictures were printed on Fujicolor Crystal Archive paper. Not surprisingly, Fujifilm paper produces a different aesthetic than Kodak paper, so if this film had been printed on Kodak paper the pictures would look a little different. Back then, the rule of thumb for best results was that Kodak negatives should be printed on Kodak paper, Fujifilm negatives should be printed on Fujifilm paper, etc., but obviously I broke that “rule” with these travel pictures.
Kodak High Definition Plus 200 was a color negative film that was also sold under the name Kodak Royal Supra 200. At the time, Kodak claimed that it was the sharpest and finest-grained ISO 200 color negative film on the market. Originally there were ISO 100, 200, 400 and 800 varieties, but since this film line was introduced right at the beginning of the decline of film, it didn’t take Kodak long to discontinue all but the ISO 200 and 400 versions, and even those didn’t last all that long. I shot a few rolls of the film, and after digging through that photo box, I found two sets of negatives, both exposed around that same timeframe. I honestly don’t remember all that much from the experience, but it was fun to rediscover these long-forgotten pictures and recreate the aesthetic on my Fujifilm X-E4 camera.
A picture of Kodak High Definition Plus negatives, captured with this recipe.
A picture of Kodak High Definition Plus 200 prints, captured with this recipe.
A poor quality scan of one of the prints. Sorry. I really need to buy a better scanner.
For ISO 200 color negative film, Kodak High Definition Plus 200 was indeed pretty sharp and fine-grained. It was moderately vibrant (just a little above “true to life”) and contrasty but not overly contrasty. From what I can tell, it didn’t have as large of an exposure latitude as some of Kodak’s other color negative films. It was warm, but seemed to lean more towards green than red when printed on Fujicolor paper. Obviously, how the film is shot, developed, printed and/or scanned will affect how it looks (I apologize for my poor quality scan above, which doesn’t do the picture justice whatsoever, but I wanted to share it anyway). This recipe mimics how I shot the film in 2006, printed on Fujicolor paper. It is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: 0 Shadow: +1 Color: +2 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: 0 Clarity: -3 Grain Effect: Weak, Small Color Chrome Effect: Weak Color Chrome Effect Blue: Weak White Balance: 4800K, -2 Red & -7 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Kodak High Definition Plus 200 film simulation recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4 & Fujifilm X100V:
Walking Bridge – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Hollow Building – Bountiful, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Leaves that Left – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Flag & Evergreen – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Green Pine Needles – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Red Roof – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Lonely Table – Orem, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Night Shopping Carts – Draper, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Pillow on Couch – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Fake Succulent – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Evening Clouds Over Wasatch Mountains – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Disappearing Light on Francis Peak – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Episode 06 of SOOC was today! I want to thank everyone who tuned in and participated! It was a long show, but I hope a good one. If you missed it when it was live, you can still catch it above.
SOOC is a monthly live video series, with each episode focused on a different film simulation recipe. It is a collaboration between Tame Your Fujifilm (Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry) and Fuji X Weekly (Ritchie Roesch). SOOC is a fun and educational experience where we not only talk about Fujifilm camera settings, but also answer your questions and give tips and tricks. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow.
In this month’s episode we discussed the Cross Process film simulation recipe, and we took a look at your wonderful pictures captured with this recipe. We also introduced the next recipe: Kodak Gold 200. I look forward to seeing your pictures captured with it!
In this “SoundBite” (as we’re calling it) from Episode 05 of SOOC, Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry and I discuss how digital noise and faux grain affect an image on Fujifilm cameras. This is a short snippet from the show, and it gives you an idea of the type of content that’s found in a SOOC broadcast.
If you’ve never watched, SOOC is a monthly live video series that’s interactive. It’s a collaboration between Nathalie and I. We discuss film simulation recipes, camera settings, and answer your questions. Basically, we’re trying to help you master your Fujifilm camera, with a focus on simplifying your photographic workflow. Episode 06 is this Thursday, December 09, at 9 AM Pacific, 12 PM Eastern. Be sure to tune in!
I love getting an analog aesthetic right out of camera! Fujifilm X cameras offer many great tools to get film-like results straight-out-of-camera without the need to edit. By adjusting the JPEG parameters, you can create various looks that I call film simulation recipes—I have published nearly 200 of them! These settings save you time, simplify the photographic process, and make capturing pictures even more enjoyable.
“By making it possible for the photographer to observe his work and his subject simultaneously,” wrote Edwin H. Land, co-founder of Polaroid, “and by removing most of the manipulative barriers between the photographer and the photograph, it is hoped that many of the satisfactions of working in the early arts can be brought to a new group of photographers.”
Ansel Adams called it One-Step Photography, and added, “The effect of one-step processing on both amateur and professional creative photography has been revolutionary. As with all art forms, we must accept the limitations of the medium as well as revel in the advantages.”
Land and Adams were specifically talking about Polaroid pictures, but I think it applies similarly to Fujifilm X cameras and film simulation recipes. The “manipulative barriers between the photographer and the photograph” have been removed! Now you just have to decide which recipe you want to use, like picking which film to load, and start creating, without worrying about how you’re going to later manipulate the pictures, because the straight-out-of-camera pictures are pretty darn good, and don’t require manipulation. Sure, edit if you want—there’s nothing wrong with that—but you don’t have to if you don’t want to, and there’s nothing wrong with that, either. Ansel Adams called it “revolutionary” and said to “revel in the advantages.” There’s freedom in this.
All of the pictures in this article are unedited (except for perhaps some minor cropping) straight-out-of-camera JPEGs that I recently captured using a Fujifilm X camera and a film simulation recipe.
Digital photography is convenient. You can review your pictures immediately after they’re captured—no waiting for rolls of film to come back from the lab. You can manipulate the images as much as you’d like in software to achieve any aesthetic that you can dream of. You can get extremely clean, sharp, bright, and vibrant pictures with extraordinary dynamic range that just wasn’t possible in the film era. Perfect pictures are prevalent today—a wonder of contemporary photography, no doubt.
Sometimes I think that digital photography is too good, too flawless, too sterile. Perfect pictures can be perfectly boring. Pulitzer-Prize winning author John Updike stated, “Perfectionism is the enemy of creation.” I think that statement is true in multiple aspects. For example, if you are working hard to create perfect pictures, you will not create very many images. I think, also, that creativity is rarely born out of perfectionism. Creativity is serendipitous. It’s not calculated. Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) wrote, “Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.”
With film photography, mistakes happen fairly frequently. You don’t know what you have until you have it sometime later. There are a lot of variables that can affect the outcome, which are sometimes out of your control. Occasionally you accidentally and unknowingly discovery something extraordinary. There’s a lot of uncertainty, and when you fortuitously stumble upon something interesting, there’s a lot of joy in that. Film photography is imperfect—it has flaws—and, because of that, it is rewarding. This is one reason why there’s a resurgence of interest in analog pictures.
Film photography is inconvenient. The serendipity of it is fascinating, but I prefer the instant reward of digital. I’m not patient enough anymore for analog. Don’t get me wrong, I shot film for many years. I prefer how film looks, but digital is more consistent, convenient, cheaper (after the initial investment is made), and quicker, so I choose digital. But what if it is possible to get the best of both worlds? What if you could get the “film look” from your digital camera? What if you could do it without editing. Straight-out-of-camera. No Lightroom or Photoshop needed. Would you try it?
What exactly is the so-called film look? That’s actually a difficult question to answer, because one film can have many different aesthetics, depending on how it was shot, developed, scanned and/or printed, and viewed. There have been hundreds of different films available over the years, each with unique characteristics. Film can have so many different looks that it could take a lifetime to try and describe them all.
Most simplistically, the film look can be defined as a picture that looks like it was shot on film, but really the answer is more elusive than that. The best way to understand it would be to look at pictures captured with film. Find prints from the 1990’s or 1980’s. Photographic paper (and film, too) fades over time, so the further back you go, the more likely it will appear degraded. Maybe that’s something you prefer? There are as many different film looks as there are tastes, and there’s certainly not a one-size-fits-all answer to what exactly film looks like.
Captured on Elite Chrome 200 color reversal film that has faded.
The biggest difference between film and digital is how highlights are handled. With film, there’s a gradation to white that’s often graceful, but with digital it is much more abrupt. Shadows can also sometimes be more gradual and graceful with film than digital, but definitely not to the same extent as highlights, and definitely not always. Another difference is that film grain is usually considered more beautiful and artful than digital noise. With film photography, there are sometimes surprises that stem from gear (or film) imperfections that don’t typically happen naturally with digital capture. Beyond that, digital images can be effectively manipulated in post-editing to resemble film photographs, especially in the era of Lightroom presets and software filters.
There are two responses that I expect to receive. First, someone will say, “Shoot film if you want the film look.” Nobody is going to argue against that, but this article is not about merely getting the film look—it’s about getting the film look from your digital camera, because digital is more convenient. Second, a person will argue, “I can easily get this look with software, so why bother doing it in-camera?” Getting the look straight-out-of-camera saves time, simplifies the photographic process, and makes capturing pictures even more enjoyable. There’s no right or wrong way to do things—I’m just discussing one method, which you may or may not appreciate. If you enjoy post-processing, that’s great! I personally don’t enjoy it, so I go about things differently, which works for me.
1. Shoot A Fujifilm Camera
Fujifilm X-E4.
Fujifilm X-T30.
Fujifilm X100V.
Step One to achieve the film look from your digital photos without the need to edit is to buy a Fujifilm camera. Which one? It doesn’t matter. If you already own one, you can skip ahead to Step Two.
Why do you need a Fujifilm camera? Why not a Canon, Sony, or Nikon? Because Fujifilm has, in my opinion, the best JPEG engine in the industry. They’ve used their vast experience with film to give their digital cameras an analog soul. In other words, Fujifilm has made it easier than any other brand to get a film look out-of-camera. Could you do it with another brand? Sure—I created JPEG settings for film looks on Ricoh GR cameras. You can do something similar with other brands, but, in my experience, Fujifilm gives you more and better tools to do this. The best brand for achieving a film look that doesn’t require post-processing is Fujifilm, so that is why you need a Fujifilm camera.
I’ll recommend the Fujifilm X100V or Fujifilm X-E4, both of which I own and use often. I also own a Fujifilm X-T30, Fujifilm X-T1, and Fujifilm X-Pro1, and those are very capable cameras, too. Additionally, I’ve shot with a Fujifilm X100F, Fujifilm X-Pro2, Fujifilm X-T20, Fujifilm XQ1, Fujifilm XF10, Fujifilm X-T200, Fujifim X-A3, Fujifilm X-E1, and Fujifilm X-M1. It doesn’t matter which model you buy, but, if you can afford it, I would go for one the newer models (X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, or X-T30 II), because they have more JPEG options, and it’s possible to get more looks out of those cameras. Don’t worry if a new camera is out of your reach, as there are many quality used options that are affordable.
Film simulation recipes are JPEG camera settings that allow you to get a certain look straight-out-of-camera. They’re basically a customization of the stock film simulations that come with the camera, adjusted to achieve various aesthetics. I’ve published over 175 film simulation recipes for Fujifilm cameras, most based on (or inspired by) classic film stocks. They’re free and easy to use. I even created a film simulation recipe app for both Apple and Android! If you have a Fujifilm camera, you should have the app on your phone. Film simulation recipes go a very long ways towards achieving a film look in-camera. Programming a recipe into your camera is kind of like loading a roll of film, except that you can capture as many frames as you wish on each roll, and change the film anytime you want.
There are a lot of wonderful options to choose from, including Kodachrome 64, Kodak Portra 400, Kodak Tri-X 400, Fujicolor C200, Fujicolor Pro 400H, AgfaChrome RS 100, and so many more! There are nearly 200 of them on this website, plus some more on the Community Recipes page. No matter your Fujifilm X camera, there are some great film simulation recipe options for you to use. I even have a number of unusual recipes, like Cross Process, Expired Slide, and Faded Negative, intended to mimic some alternative analog aesthetics. The three example pictures above are unedited (aside from, perhaps, some minor cropping), just to give you a brief taste of what recipes look like.
3.Use Diffusion Filters
10% CineBloom.
5% CineBloom.
5% CineBloom.
As I already mentioned, the biggest difference between digital images and film photographs are how highlights are handled (and, to a lesser extent, shadows). Diffusion filters help with this. They take the “digital edge” off of your pictures by bending a small percentage of the light that passes through the filter, which causes it to be defocused. The images remain sharp, but a slight haziness is added, especially in the highlights, which produces a more graceful gradation to white.
There are various types of diffusion filters by a few different brands. I recommend Black Pro Mist filters by Tiffen or CineBloom filters by Moment. You want the effect to be subtle, so I suggest a 1/8 or 1/4 Black Pro Mist—I used a 1/4 in the picture at the very top of this article—or a 5% or 10% CineBloom, which I used in the three pictures above; however, I have seen some good results with the stronger options (1/2 Black Pro Mist and 20% CineBloom). A slight effect from a diffusion filter in the right situations can subtly improve a photograph’s analog appearance.
I love using vintage lenses on my Fujifilm cameras, because they often have flaws that give pictures character. Some of the charm of analog photography stems from imperfect gear—that serendipity I mentioned earlier is often from flawed glass. Modern lenses are precision engineered and meant to give you perfect pictures. But they can be too good and too sharp. They’re great if you photograph test charts, but vintage lenses often have seemingly magical qualities that make real-world pictures better, and definitely more film-like. A lot of time you can find these old lenses for pretty cheap, but you do need an adaptor to attach them to your Fujifilm camera.
If you don’t want to buy used gear and adaptors, a great alternative is to get yourself some inexpensive manual lenses, like the Pergear 50mm f/1.8, 7artisans 50mm f/1.8, and Meike 35mm f/1.7. There are, of course, lots more manual options like these, many of which have flaws and character similar to vintage lenses, except that they’re brand-new and don’t need adaptors. Manual lenses are trickier to use, especially if you don’t have much experience with them, but I find them to be a rewarding, delivering wonderfully imperfect photographs.
With digital photography, you have many tools to make sure your focus is spot-on; if you are unsure that you precisely nailed it, you can immediately review the image and zoom in to make sure, and retake if necessary. With film photography, not only are the focus tools much more limited, you don’t even know if you got it exactly right until the film comes back from the lab. If you study classic photography, you’ll notice that many iconic pictures didn’t spot-on nail the focus. You’ll even notice this in old movies and television shows, too. It was common, and nobody cared. It has become a small part of the film look.
Worry more about composition and storytelling, and less about getting perfect focus. In fact, my recommendation is to not review the LCD after each shot to check. Take the picture, and if you got focus perfect, great! And if you didn’t, don’t let the imperfection bother you, but celebrate that a little softness can be a part of the analog aesthetic. A little blur is not always bad, especially if the picture is otherwise interesting or compelling.
One of the big differences between digital and film is that film has lovely silver grain while digital has ugly noise. Grain can be ugly, too, but digital noise is generally regarded as undesirable, and usually it is, while grain is general regarded as artful. Fujifilm has programmed their cameras in such a way that the noise has a more film-grain-like appearance than other brands. It’s definitely not an exact match to any film grain, but it’s certainly better than typical ugly noise. So why not incorporate it into your pictures?
A lot of photographers are afraid to use high ISOs. Back in the film days, I remember that ISO 400 was considered to be a high-ISO film. Some people thought you were nuts if you used an ISO 800 or 1600 film. ISO 3200 film was only for the most daring, or for use under extreme circumstances. Early digital cameras were pretty bad at higher ISOs, too, but camera technology has made incredible progress, and now cameras are pretty darn good at high ISO photography. I routinely use up to ISO 6400 for color photography, and even higher for black-and-white. Those ultra-high ISOs just weren’t possible or practical 10 or so years ago. Now combine high-ISO photography with Fujifilm faux grain (found on X-Trans III & X-Trans IV cameras), and the pictures begin to appear a little less digital and a bit more film-like.
Transparency film often requires a very precise exposure because there’s very little latitude for overexposure or underexposure. Negative film often has a much greater latitude—generally speaking it can tolerate more overexposure than underexposure. Each film is different. But here’s the thing: you don’t know if you got it right until later when the film is developed. In the moment you don’t know for sure if the exposure is really correct. With experience you can get pretty good, and exposure bracketing can help (not something you want to do all of the time because you’ll go through your film too quickly), but it’s almost a guarantee that you’ll end up with a few overexposed or underexposed frames. Sometimes this can affect the aesthetic or mood of the image, and by chance your picture is actually more interesting because of your mistake—that analog serendipity again. If you discover something you really like, you might even begin to do it on purpose (like overexposing Fujicolor Pro 400H by several stops).
Your digital camera has many great tools to help you get the exposure perfectly correct, which is great. And if you don’t get it right, you can know right away, and capture another exposure if need be, or fix it later by adjusting the RAW file. However, purposefully not getting the exposure just right, whether by overexposing or underexposing, is a good way to mimic the film experience, and sometimes you’ll get an unexpected result, which can be a very happy accident. I wouldn’t do this all of the time, but occasionally it is a fun and fruitful exercise.
Step One, which is using a Fujifilm camera, and Step Two, which is using film simulation recipes, are the most critical of these seven tips. You could use Ricoh GR cameras instead of Fujifilm, but I definitely recommend using Fujifilm. Step Three through Step Seven are optional, and they aren’t necessarily intended to be used all together or all of the time, although you certainly can if you want. Pick a couple of them—perhaps diffusion filter and vintage lens or high-ISO and underexposure—and see what results you get.
There are two things that I’d like for you to get out of this article. First, you don’t need software or editing apps to achieve an analog aesthetic. You can do it in-camera. All of the pictures in this article are unedited (except for some minor cropping). This saves you a whole bunch of time, and you might even find the process more fun. Second, I hope that this article inspires you to try something new. Don’t be afraid to experiment. Mistakes can be highly rewarding, and you might even discover something extraordinary.
A few more example photograph:
Vintage Color recipe & 1/4 Black Pro Mist filter.
Fujicolor Pro 400H recipe & 1/4 Black Pro Mist filter.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Episode 04 of SOOC is this Thursday, October 21, at 10am Pacific Time, 1 PM Eastern!
SOOC is a monthly live video series, with each episode focused on a different film simulation recipe. It is a collaboration between Tame Your Fujifilm (Fujifilm X-Photographer Nathalie Boucry) and Fuji X Weekly (Ritchie Roesch). SOOC is a fun and educational experience where we will not only talk about Fujifilm camera settings, but also answer your questions and give tips and tricks.
I’m very exciting to announce a new project that I’ve been secretly working on for the last several months: Ritchie’s Ricoh Recipes! This is similar to Fuji X Weekly film simulation recipes, except for Ricoh GR cameras. Obviously, Ricoh and Fujifilm cameras are much different, so the recipes are much different, too; however, I’m very pleased with how these turned out. If you own a Ricoh GR, GR II, or GR III camera, you’ll want to check it out!
Why Ricoh GR? I often get requests to make recipes for other camera brands, but the top asked-for brand is Ricoh. At first this might seem strange, since Canon, Sony, and Nikon (and probably a few other brands, too) are much more popular than Ricoh, but there are three factors that make this seemingly unlikely camera a popular request. First, a surprisingly large number of Fujifilm photographers also own a Ricoh GR camera. Why? Because Fujifilm and Ricoh are both popular options for street, travel, and documentary photography, and Fujifilm doesn’t offer a great alternative to the GR (the X70 has long been discontinued, and the XF10 was a little underwhelming). Second, Ricoh GR photographers are more open to using straight-out-of-camera JPEGs due to the camera’s film heritage and the film-like experience of shooting JPEGs. Third, Ricoh has included many useful and creative JPEG options on the GR cameras—it’s easier to create recipes that you’d actually want to use than with some other brands.
I don’t know the percentage of Fujifilm photographers who also use a Ricoh GR, but it has to be a fairly significant number based on the requests that I’ve received. Many of the messages are to the effect of, “I love using your recipes on my X-Pro2, and I’d really like to do something similar on my Ricoh GR III.” While this project is for a different camera brand, I’m hoping that it is largely for the benefit of the Fujifilm community. I believe that many in this audience will find it a useful resource.
Ricoh Recipes are different than my Fujifilm Recipes, not only in how they look but in how they’re organized. Choose either GR/GR II or GR III. Within each camera category are four recipe Collections. Within each Collection are five recipes. In other words, there are 40 recipes, 20 for the GR/GR II and 20 for the GR III.
A Ricoh Recipes App (similar to the Fuji X Weekly App) is in the works for both iOS and Android, and should be available before the end of the month. With any luck, it could be available as early as the middle of September. On the app, for Ricoh Recipe Patrons, will be eight bonus recipes (one for each Collection). Be sure to check out Ritchie’s Ricoh Recipes Blog. Follow me on Instagram, too! Please be patient with the website (and app), as it is all still very much a work-in-progress, and far from finished.
I’ve been trying really hard to prevent this new project from interfering with Fuji X Weekly. I have a whole bunch of upcoming things for this website, which I think you’ll appreciate. There are many film simulation recipes in the works. If you don’t own a Ricoh GR camera, don’t worry, there’s a lot of great things happening for Fujifilm, so stay tuned. If you do own a Ricoh GR camera, I hope that you enjoy trying these new recipes for your camera!
There’s no right or wrong way to do photography. One technique or method might work for one person but not another. Whatever works for you is what you should do. With that in mind, I can think of three ways that you can approach using film simulation recipes on your Fujifilm camera.
The SOOC live video series that Nathalie Boucry and I are doing focuses on one of those approaches: straight-out-of-camera JPEGs. Shoot JPEG (or RAW+JPEG) with your recipe of choice, and use the unedited or lightly edited pictures (crops and very minor adjustments) that come out of the camera (which is one-step photography). This is probably the most common way to use film simulation recipes, and this is the method that works for me, as it saves me a lot of time (which allows me to be more productive), and I find it to be more fun. Shooting RAW and using X RAW Studio is a similar approach, although it does add a step to the process.
The photographs at the top of this article, which I captured over the last two days, are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs (aside from some minor cropping on a couple). The recipes that I used for those pictures (the top three are one, the bottom two are another) are future recipes that will be published on this website (and the app) soon. The entirety of my post-processing workflow was simply this: 1) transfer the pictures from the camera to my phone, 2) crop the pictures that needed to be cropped, 3) upload them to my online storage. Done.
Another option is to shoot RAW with a recipe and post-process the pictures using a software like Lightroom, Capture One, RAW Power, Exposure, etc., etc.—the software will apply its interpretation of many (but not all) of the JPEG settings to the RAW file (obviously each program is a little different). This gives you a head start with your editing, as you’re already 70% “there” when you start, and you just need to finish it. This is a great way to speed up your workflow without losing the flexibility of RAW.
Another approach is a mix of the first two: shoot JPEG (or RAW+JPEG) and edit the JPEGs using a software like Lightroom, Capture One, VSCO, Exposure, etc. This might sound like an odd approach at first (why not just shoot RAW if you’re going to edit?); however, if you like the way the straight-out-of-camera JPEGs look, and feel only minor refinements are required to achieve the exact aesthetic you desire, this is a good option. The JPEG is 90% “there” and just needs small adjustments to finish. This is my wife, Amanda’s, preferred approach. This is also what Vuhlandes describes in the video below.
Whether you rely strictly on straight-out-of-camera JPEGs, or you edit your JPEGs, or you post-process your RAW files, film simulation recipes can be used on your Fujifilm camera to help you get the look that you want. There’s not one path that is right for everyone. What’s important is that you find the method that works for you. Hopefully, no matter your preferred process, there’s something on this website that you have found helpful in some way to your photography. If so, let me know in the comments! Also, tell me how you use film simulation recipes—which of the three method works best for you. Or, if you have a different approach that I didn’t mention, I’d love to hear it.
