Film simulations and white balance

[BenInUK]

I have an X-T3 and would like to experiment with some of the film simulation recipes. I'm not really happy with the default jpeg looks so want to find something that I like.

The problem I find is that so many of the suggested recipes have a specific white balance setting and shift. This poses a couple of problems.

1. The X-T3 cannot save these settings in the C1-C7 slots so you have to manually set them when switching
2. These recipes become very dependent on the situation and need the right light for them to work

I just want some good looks from the jpegs that will work in a variety of settings. I would like some variations like B+W, vivid, portrait etc but I don't want something so specific that it only works under just the right light conditions.

Any suggestions?

 

[Morris0]

Try shooting RAW. Use a converter that is aware of the Fuji sims and chose the sim and white balance as you convert. In some software, you can set up presets and this will fly.

Morris

 

[yardcoyote]

I use the film simulations all the time and I only take the WB setting off Auto when the lighting situation directly requires it. I leave the change in place when necessary regardless of which simulation I am using.

I don't use any "formulas", just the simulations themselves laid on top of my own basic changes to the default jpeg settings. That's primarily Astia for the garden, the Pro Negs for general color work, and all the black and whites, from Acros to sepia. Velvia and Classic Chrome turn up occasionally as special effects. Provia is my least used sim, except on my oldest cameras that lack the Pro Negs.

You may be over thinking this.

 

[biza43]

If you want maximum control and minimum hassle while shooting, use RAW.

 

[BenInUK]

If you want maximum control and minimum hassle while shooting, use RAW.

That's exactly what I want to avoid. I've shot raw for years, I know how to use Lightroom but I hate that it turns photography into a chore. I work with computers full time so I really don't relish hours in front of the computer processing lots of images. I think for most shots it's overkill and takes too much time. I do shoot raw + jpeg in case of special exceptions where I want to make some edits but this is the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Morris0]

If you want maximum control and minimum hassle while shooting, use RAW.

That's exactly what I want to avoid. I've shot raw for years, I know how to use Lightroom but I hate that it turns photography into a chore. I work with computers full time so I really don't relish hours in front of the computer processing lots of images. I think for most shots it's overkill and takes too much time. I do shoot raw + jpeg in case of special exceptions where I want to make some edits but this is the exception rather than the rule.

I suggest you use a program such as Photoshop with ACR where you can set up one image and then batch process your whole shoot. This will give you the best of both worlds allowing you to walk away from your computer while it dose it's magic. There are probably other programs that will provide similar functionality.

Morris

 

[BenInUK]

If you want maximum control and minimum hassle while shooting, use RAW.

That's exactly what I want to avoid. I've shot raw for years, I know how to use Lightroom but I hate that it turns photography into a chore. I work with computers full time so I really don't relish hours in front of the computer processing lots of images. I think for most shots it's overkill and takes too much time. I do shoot raw + jpeg in case of special exceptions where I want to make some edits but this is the exception rather than the rule.

I suggest you use a program such as Photoshop with ACR where you can set up one image and then batch process your whole shoot. This will give you the best of both worlds allowing you to walk away from your computer while it dose it's magic. There are probably other programs that will provide similar functionality.

Morris

Hi Morris,

The problem with batch processing is it works best when you have a number of similar photos to process. If you take a variety of shots as with travel etc then it's not as useful. I know raw processing delivers the best results but if it becomes a chore then it's discourages me from using my camera.

Years ago I used to just shoot jpeg and not worry about perfection. Over the years I got into raw editing but adding this overhead just gave me reasons not to take a camera. I'm not doing anything fancy and most of the time jpeg would be sufficient. It's just now and again that the light is a bit tricky or I want to blow up an image and pay particular attention to the processing.

This was one of the main reasons for switching to Fuji, to make use of the much celebrated jpeg engine. I've just been a bit disappointed with the results so far and need to experiment to find something I like. I was going to try some of the recipes but maybe I just need to tweak some things myself like NR and shadows etc.

 

[Redscale disco]

Kevin Mullins has done some presets that all use auto white balance.

Here:

The Photographer’s Resource by Fuji Ambassador Kevin Mullins

Straightforward photography advice, from street craft to wedding storytelling, editing, and business. Camera-agnostic, field-tested.

www.f16.click

 

[yardcoyote]

Yes! You do not have to accept the default jpeg settings Fuji gives you. I shoot jpeg only and the first thing I do when I get a new to me Fuji camera is go in and turn the NR down as far as it will go. I usually reduce sharpening as well.

The does a huge amount to give me a jpeg that feels fresh to me.

 

[biza43]

If you want maximum control and minimum hassle while shooting, use RAW.

That's exactly what I want to avoid. I've shot raw for years, I know how to use Lightroom but I hate that it turns photography into a chore. I work with computers full time so I really don't relish hours in front of the computer processing lots of images. I think for most shots it's overkill and takes too much time. I do shoot raw + jpeg in case of special exceptions where I want to make some edits but this is the exception rather than the rule.

Then you have to spend a lot more time in the field fine tuning your JPEG settings; in the worst case scenario you need to adjust JPEG recipes on a shot by shot basis. Do you prefer this, or shoot RAW and adjust later?

 

[OmarCCX]

The guy is asking a JPG specific question, save the RAW talk for another day. Some of us are just burnt out on editing.

I will say, that was a big reason I got the X-S10 over the XT3, as I have found it very beneficial for my custom film sim presets. Especially with Classic negative which looks far too green by default.

However, since your camera doesn't have CNeg, and I haven't really seen much of a benefit from custom wb for recipes on other simulations, I say keep it in auto and don't worry about it. Most of the recipees I've seen drastically mess with the colors so you'd likely have to adjust the wb quite often. Sure, auto won't give you the shift here and there, but you can always add some of that to the jpg after if you're looking for a specific tone.

tldr auto is fine, dont worry about it. most recipees go too far imo.

 

[Sven44]

For me it's not a question of whether to shoot RAW, or rely on the excellent in-camera jpeg engine.

I do both; shoot RAW+JPEG, and think of the JPEG as the finished image but with the ability to perform lossless adjustments in-camera if required.

If I don't like the look, a quick press of the Q button and I'm seconds away from having another version with tweaked exposure / film simulation / white balance, whatever needed adjusting.

For me this is the best of all words - complete flexibility and control of the finished look, without all the hassle of post-processing.

Once the pictures are uploaded, I never touch the RAW file again. Well, almost never..

 

[bowportes]

Yes.

Use the in-camera converter to generate different jpeg "flavors" from a shot you really like. You can produce copies of the same shot with 5 or 6 different film sims in-camera. It's the best way to experiment.

Generally, I always shoot with NR-4 and Sharpness-2. With the ProNegative sims I boost color to about +3.

I rarely use Provia.

 

[BenInUK]

The guy is asking a JPG specific question, save the RAW talk for another day. Some of us are just burnt out on editing.

I will say, that was a big reason I got the X-S10 over the XT3, as I have found it very beneficial for my custom film sim presets. Especially with Classic negative which looks far too green by default.

However, since your camera doesn't have CNeg, and I haven't really seen much of a benefit from custom wb for recipes on other simulations, I say keep it in auto and don't worry about it. Most of the recipees I've seen drastically mess with the colors so you'd likely have to adjust the wb quite often. Sure, auto won't give you the shift here and there, but you can always add some of that to the jpg after if you're looking for a specific tone.

tldr auto is fine, dont worry about it. most recipees go too far imo.

Someone gets it! Thanks!

I find it amazing that asking about jpeg settings on a camera widely praised for it's jpeg engine still draws out the "shoot raw only" zealots. These people do more harm than good. Yes if you want technically the best results then shoot raw, but I don't think it's necessary for absolutely everything and not if it stops you taking a camera to avoid more post processing backlog. Surely the more important thing is just to use the camera and take lots of photos.

If you enjoy post production then fine, this doesn't apply to you. I actually do enjoy it but in small doses. I can't be doing with spending hours on it. In the current market I think we should be encouraging people to take more photos, not throwing up more barriers to entry.

 

[Sven44]

Yes.

Use the in-camera converter to generate different jpeg "flavors" from a shot you really like. You can produce copies of the same shot with 5 or 6 different film sims in-camera. It's the best way to experiment.

Generally, I always shoot with NR-4 and Sharpness-2. With the ProNegative sims I boost color to about +3.

I rarely use Provia.

Indeed, that's the best way to learn the differences between the film sims and see what you like.

I've done this a number of times: take a shot and then render it in the following sequence: Eterna -> Pro Neg Std -> Classic Chrome -> Provia -> Pro Neg Hi -> Astia -> Velvia, which is (roughly) in order of saturation + contrast.

You start to really appreciate the different 'moods' conveyed.

 

[Flying Fijian]

Have you tried Fuji Weekly? They have an app as well for both Apple & Android.

The newer cameras allow saving white balance shift. (xpro3, xt4, x100v, xs10, xe4)

With your xt3 you can try saving this info as part of the name eg Kodachrome 64 +2R -5B. Then you have to manually adjust it when you switch to this recipe.

 

[Redscale disco]

Have you tried Fuji Weekly? They have an app as well for both Apple & Android.

The newer cameras allow saving white balance shift. (xpro3, xt4, x100v, xs10, xe4)

With your xt3 you can try saving this info as part of the name eg Kodachrome 64 +2R -5B. Then you have to manually adjust it when you switch to this recipe.

Kodachrome 64 recipe uses Daylight white balance with that shift.



And if you use only one recipe with Daylight white balance, the camera remembers the shift.



So for example, I have two presets adapted from Fuji X Weekly. First one is the Kodachrome 64 and the other one is Kodacolor. Kodacolor uses white balance 6300K with a shift of R-1 and B-4.

Now, if every other preset you have uses auto white balance, you don’t have to worry about the white balance shift on those two. Camera will remember. The problem comes if you have for example two presets that use Daylight-base, then you have to manually make the shift.

 

[KariP]

The guy is asking a JPG specific question, save the RAW talk for another day. Some of us are just burnt out on editing.

I will say, that was a big reason I got the X-S10 over the XT3, as I have found it very beneficial for my custom film sim presets. Especially with Classic negative which looks far too green by default.

However, since your camera doesn't have CNeg, and I haven't really seen much of a benefit from custom wb for recipes on other simulations, I say keep it in auto and don't worry about it. Most of the recipees I've seen drastically mess with the colors so you'd likely have to adjust the wb quite often. Sure, auto won't give you the shift here and there, but you can always add some of that to the jpg after if you're looking for a specific tone.

tldr auto is fine, dont worry about it. most recipees go too far imo.

Someone gets it! Thanks!

I find it amazing that asking about jpeg settings on a camera widely praised for it's jpeg engine still draws out the "shoot raw only" zealots. These people do more harm than good. Yes if you want technically the best results then shoot raw, but I don't think it's necessary for absolutely everything and not if it stops you taking a camera to avoid more post processing backlog. Surely the more important thing is just to use the camera and take lots of photos.

If you enjoy post production then fine, this doesn't apply to you. I actually do enjoy it but in small doses. I can't be doing with spending hours on it. In the current market I think we should be encouraging people to take more photos, not throwing up more barriers to entry.

I am not saying that you should shoot RAW . I just wonder why PP means some time consuming avoidable effort. There was a season when i tried to Enjoy shooting only jpegs - the results i got were mostly OK except when i needed a serious print.

nowadays i shoot only raw, but i see no reason to spend much time doing PP. Nowadays i have started to use Photos in my iMac - raw photos look acceptable without any work. IF and WHEN i see something that needs ”work” i use some other software - perhaps 5% of photos are worth doing something. I can check 200 raw images quite fast - and pick 5 - 20 that i perhaps want to edit. Capture one and RAW power have most of the film simulations …

My fast edits take just something like 15 sec - sometimes Capture one is so inspiring that i use more time. If There is an image worth it. Deleting bad useless images take more time than PP

IMO shooting only jpegs causes more trouble. They are perfect only sometimes…But of course this is my personal experience. Shoot jpegs , but start to accept the facts if you want something much better. Jpegs are o k in many Jobs …

 

[BenInUK]

I am not saying that you should shoot RAW . I just wonder why PP means some time consuming avoidable effort. There was a season when i tried to Enjoy shooting only jpegs - the results i got were mostly OK except when i needed a serious print.

If I take the camera out and come back with 100 photos then it maybe takes an hour to go cull the bad shots and edit the good ones. If I put this off then the next time I come back I have two hours worth. Over time this builds up and becomes a burden. It reached a point where I would avoid taking the camera out.

nowadays i shoot only raw, but i see no reason to spend much time doing PP. Nowadays i have started to use Photos in my iMac - raw photos look acceptable without any work. IF and WHEN i see something that needs ”work” i use some other software - perhaps 5% of photos are worth doing something. I can check 200 raw images quite fast - and pick 5 - 20 that i perhaps want to edit. Capture one and RAW power have most of the film simulations …

I don't like leaving photos in raw format only. I prefer to upload to my nas as jpeg so they can be viewed on the TV or shared remotely.

My fast edits take just something like 15 sec - sometimes Capture one is so inspiring that i use more time. If There is an image worth it. Deleting bad useless images take more time than PP

Yes culling is part of it. I stopped doing this in camera because of scare stories about SD card failure but I've never had this happen so now prefer to take my chances and at least delete the obviously bad ones.

IMO shooting only jpegs causes more trouble. They are perfect only sometimes…But of course this is my personal experience. Shoot jpegs , but start to accept the facts if you want something much better. Jpegs are o k in many Jobs …

This isn't my job. I accept that I am trading absolute perfection for some convenience and my time. For me this is a good trade off.

To be perfectly honest, a lot of the times I see people over doing their edits or trying to cover up poor technique in post. If the photo is well composed and exposed correctly then that's 90% of the way there. The post production should be the icing on the cake.

 

[biza43]

The guy is asking a JPG specific question, save the RAW talk for another day. Some of us are just burnt out on editing.

I will say, that was a big reason I got the X-S10 over the XT3, as I have found it very beneficial for my custom film sim presets. Especially with Classic negative which looks far too green by default.

However, since your camera doesn't have CNeg, and I haven't really seen much of a benefit from custom wb for recipes on other simulations, I say keep it in auto and don't worry about it. Most of the recipees I've seen drastically mess with the colors so you'd likely have to adjust the wb quite often. Sure, auto won't give you the shift here and there, but you can always add some of that to the jpg after if you're looking for a specific tone.

tldr auto is fine, dont worry about it. most recipees go too far imo.

The OP was quite clear:

"I have an X-T3 and would like to experiment with some of the film simulation recipes. I'm not really happy with the default jpeg looks so want to find something that I like.

The problem I find is that so many of the suggested recipes have a specific white balance setting and shift. This poses a couple of problems.

1. The X-T3 cannot save these settings in the C1-C7 slots so you have to manually set them when switching
2. These recipes become very dependent on the situation and need the right light for them to work"

So, what you suggest will not work for him, because he clearly stated that he is not happy with auto/default WB results. It is very simple, the OP can either:

1. Spend time in the field adjusting settings to his taste;

2. Spend time later adjusting the RAW file. With some experience and initial time investment, creating import pre-sets e.g. in LR is a breeze.