Old Skin Tone Formula vs Today's Skin Tone Formula

Hello everyone.

I would like to talk about this because a new generation of Fuji cameras will be coming out soon and can't wait to see what they will produce.   What I want to discuss mainly is skin tones.

I know that a lot of you don't know what Fuji's skin tones used to be.  Some of you have jumped to Fuji from other brands during recent years so maybe you didn't get a chance to shoot with starting with the X-E1/XPro1.  Also there are others that claim that they don't see any difference.  I personally discovered Fuji with the S5 Pro DSLR several years ago.

I had and used the S3 and S5 Pro DSLRs for years, then jumped into the X Trans series XE1, X10, XT1, X-H1, and now I have two X-T3 bodies.  I've also been shooting with Nikon for some time and have used the D200, D300, D7000 and D4.  I know that (all) manufacturers have changed their formulas for skin tones, not just Fuji, so please, I beg you not to get sensitive and aggressive about this.

The thing is this, I'm not 100% happy with Fuji's skin tones output anymore.  They are good, and they are not bad, but, they are just not as good as they used to.  The skin tones have this more flat and even skin tone color look compared to Fuji's older skin tone formula.

Note that I call it "formula" because that is what it is.  Is sure as heck (not) my RAW converter and I know is not my PP skills.  The Nikons have been the same experience.  The D200 was the best for me, the D300 completely changed, then the HORRIBLE D7000 skin tones came out.  I don't know why camera manufacturers change skin tones so much, and I'm not a camera engineer, but that's all I can tell you.

The reason why I sold the Fuji XH1 was mainly because of that, I paid way too much money for that camera (at the time) and I was not happy with the skin tones, so I got rid of that camera.

And now the present time.  I'm now shooting with XT3 and I'm seeing those more "flat" skin tone colors.  Again, maybe most of you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about, and again, I want to make sure you understand what I'm saying, I'm not saying the skin tones are bad, is just that those skin tones from the S5 Pro traumatized me so much that nothing Fuji is making right now comes close to those S5 Pro skin tones, and MAN, I really miss those skin tones.  The Fuji XT1 still remains number two after the S5 Pro.

Before my Fuji S5 Pro was on top #1 one for skin tones EVERY SINGLE TIME.  #2  has been my XE1 and XT1 and I still like these much more than my XT3.  #3 Nikon D4.  My Nikon was always last.

Then when I started buying the newer Fujis my Nikon D4 produces nicer more colorful skin tones.  The cheeks and lips show a nicer color compared to my XT3.  Again, the T3 is not bad, is just VERY different and have this more flat and even skin tone look.

Again, this is not about a brand or one camera being better than the other, is just that thru these last several years the fact is that Fuji has changed it's skin tone formula and to be sincere I'm not crazy about it.  To be honest, I don't see Canon or Sony's skin tones looking worse.  I know Pentax skin tones look pretty darn good as well.

I love Fuji and there are several reasons why I still shoot with it and I'm also happy because I got my XT3 bodies at a really good price, but man that love for skin tones is just not there anymore.  So sorry guys I apologize but that's just the way I feel based on how my brain translates skin color tones.

I am not going to post any samples because I have done it in the past and it is pointless and I know what some will say.  The best thing to (see for yourself) is to shoot and PP with those cameras yourself and that is where you will see the difference in front of your monitors.

Once in a while all camera manufacturers have changed skin tone formulas so I am wondering how the new next gen Fuji's skin tones will look like.

While the SOOC jpeg results do vary a bit from generation to generation, It doesn't look the film sims themselves change much, but some of the ancillary processing does. With some tweaking of the jpeg settings (saturation, highlights, shadows etc) you should be able to get close. Even more important, you may have to play with the Auto-WB shift and Exposure Compensation to really dial in the look.

With RAW files, the Camera matching profiles (in Lightroom, anyway) can vary significantly from from one model camera to another (the X-T3 being more different than the others). Any of them can be tweaked and saved as a new profile to closely match any of the other camera/profile combos with a little know-how. If you want your X-H1 (or whatever) files to look more like what you get with your older cameras, it's absolutely doable - especially if you're just try to match another Fuji.

If you can make a Sony look like a Fuji, you can make one Fuji look like another Fuji.

A Sony RAW with a custom profile to match the X-T2 (Classic Chrome)

Personally I prefer the more modern CMOS “flat” look as a starting point, with high dynamic range i can lift shadows or recover highlights etc. Isn’t that where things are heading ? ….. more sticky AF, higher MP, more dynamic range, better noise performance…oh.. here are some presets/profiles/luts for LR/C1 (slap them on! 😅 + add some grain = magic🎩)

I have the X-E1 and Leica M9 (CCD), the raw files (i.e Adobe interpretation) is not a true reflection of the scene, but rather a much more “vivid” and ”contrasty” starting point … great if I am lazy with editing... I think that’s what you are missing ?

if yes, then I think you would appreciate this article / sample comparison (sample model pictures)

https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/22/leica-m10-vs-leica-m9-vs-fujifilm-s5-pro

I also did a comparison a while ago X-E1 vs X-E3 here -

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4633121

(liked the X-E1 raw files, didn’t really cared much about the SOOC.. there is a difference, but not major)

Personally my biggest struggle is … AWB, and colour cast due to the scene (e.g. reflections)+ so many other variables (e.g optics) that impacts WB.

As already highlighted colorchecker is the best in a professional setting… But i am just too lazy, and ruins the moments when I am taking my family pictures (candid family photos > getting WB right in camera)

Raymond L wrote:

Personally I prefer the more modern CMOS “flat” look as a starting point, with high dynamic range i can lift shadows or recover highlights etc. Isn’t that where things are heading ? ….. more sticky AF, higher MP, more dynamic range, better noise performance…oh.. here are some presets/profiles/luts for LR/C1 (slap them on! 😅 + add some grain = magic🎩)

Hahaha! that "flat" look is the very first reason why I got rid of my Nikon D7000 I just couldn't stand it so I sold all my Nikon stuff from that time. Someone in the Nikon DX forum started posting some photo showing the differences in skin tones and boy oh boy did I fall in love with the Fuji S5 Pro.

Some say that the best skin tones lasted thru the XT2 and after that they are no longer the same. Is a real shame and till this day a major turn off because the skin tones don't make me feel the same anymore. That original "magic" is no longer there. When tweaked the skin tones do look indeed very nice, but they are not the same anymore.

Before that's all we would talk about, even in other forums, and everyone would admit that Fuji's skin tones were "superior", well, at least they were very "pleasant" as some would say. Was all that "subjective"? You tell me, but the difference was indeed there,

IMHO, I feel that Fuji has been experimenting with different things, and I hope the next generation cameras will have more of that previous "magic" added to the skin tones whether in jpeg or RAW.

I have the X-E1 and Leica M9 (CCD), the raw files (i.e Adobe interpretation) is not a true reflection of the scene, but rather a much more “vivid” and ”contrasty” starting point … great if I am lazy with editing... I think that’s what you are missing ?

I can't read you mind so I'm not sure what type of contrasty starting point you refer to. What I'm referring to is that the original skin tones (mainly the person's face) had different and beautiful color tones on the face, even if the person was not wearing make up. The colors were incredibly and beautifully well balanced and spread throughout the person's face, unlike Fuji's newer bodies that produce a much more flat look kind of like Thanos.

Today's Fuji's don't produce those skin tones with blushed cheeks and those nice colorful lips with other amazing smooth tones around people's face. To me that stuff was pure art and I have no idea how Fuji did it in the past but that stuff is no longer present and I really really miss that. So yes man it was indeed pure magic. No other brand had that in their cameras.

Yes the color output from Fuji cameras is indeed very nice but to be honest Is really hard to believe that other brands produce bad or worse skin tones than today's Fujis.

if yes, then I think you would appreciate this article / sample comparison (sample model pictures)

https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/22/leica-m10-vs-leica-m9-vs-fujifilm-s5-pro

Pretty cool thanks!

I also did a comparison a while ago X-E1 vs X-E3 here -

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4633121

(liked the X-E1 raw files, didn’t really cared much about the SOOC.. there is a difference, but not major)

Personally my biggest struggle is … AWB, and colour cast due to the scene (e.g. reflections)+ so many other variables (e.g optics) that impacts WB.

As already highlighted colorchecker is the best in a professional setting… But i am just too lazy, and ruins the moments when I am taking my family pictures (candid family photos > getting WB right in camera)

Below is one of my favorite photos ever. Is my kid. She has zero makeup on her. Today's Fujis don't produce this. Not even close.

Batdude wrote:

Raymond L wrote:

Personally I prefer the more modern CMOS “flat” look as a starting point, with high dynamic range i can lift shadows or recover highlights etc. Isn’t that where things are heading ? ….. more sticky AF, higher MP, more dynamic range, better noise performance…oh.. here are some presets/profiles/luts for LR/C1 (slap them on! 😅 + add some grain = magic🎩)

Hahaha! that "flat" look is the very first reason why I got rid of my Nikon D7000 I just couldn't stand it so I sold all my Nikon stuff from that time. Someone in the Nikon DX forum started posting some photo showing the differences in skin tones and boy oh boy did I fall in love with the Fuji S5 Pro.

Some say that the best skin tones lasted thru the XT2 and after that they are no longer the same. Is a real shame and till this day a major turn off because the skin tones don't make me feel the same anymore. That original "magic" is no longer there. When tweaked the skin tones do look indeed very nice, but they are not the same anymore.

Before that's all we would talk about, even in other forums, and everyone would admit that Fuji's skin tones were "superior", well, at least they were very "pleasant" as some would say. Was all that "subjective"? You tell me, but the difference was indeed there,

IMHO, I feel that Fuji has been experimenting with different things, and I hope the next generation cameras will have more of that previous "magic" added to the skin tones whether in jpeg or RAW.

I have the X-E1 and Leica M9 (CCD), the raw files (i.e Adobe interpretation) is not a true reflection of the scene, but rather a much more “vivid” and ”contrasty” starting point … great if I am lazy with editing... I think that’s what you are missing ?

I can't read you mind so I'm not sure what type of contrasty starting point you refer to. What I'm referring to is that the original skin tones (mainly the person's face) had different and beautiful color tones on the face, even if the person was not wearing make up. The colors were incredibly and beautifully well balanced and spread throughout the person's face, unlike Fuji's newer bodies that produce a much more flat look kind of like Thanos.

Today's Fuji's don't produce those skin tones with blushed cheeks and those nice colorful lips with other amazing smooth tones around people's face. To me that stuff was pure art and I have no idea how Fuji did it in the past but that stuff is no longer present and I really really miss that. So yes man it was indeed pure magic. No other brand had that in their cameras.

Yes the color output from Fuji cameras is indeed very nice but to be honest Is really hard to believe that other brands produce bad or worse skin tones than today's Fujis.

if yes, then I think you would appreciate this article / sample comparison (sample model pictures)

https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/3/22/leica-m10-vs-leica-m9-vs-fujifilm-s5-pro

Pretty cool thanks!

I also did a comparison a while ago X-E1 vs X-E3 here -

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4633121

(liked the X-E1 raw files, didn’t really cared much about the SOOC.. there is a difference, but not major)

Personally my biggest struggle is … AWB, and colour cast due to the scene (e.g. reflections)+ so many other variables (e.g optics) that impacts WB.

As already highlighted colorchecker is the best in a professional setting… But i am just too lazy, and ruins the moments when I am taking my family pictures (candid family photos > getting WB right in camera)

Below is one of my favorite photos ever. Is my kid. She has zero makeup on her. Today's Fujis don't produce this. Not even close.

Thanks for sharing your favourite photo (very lovely).

Have you compared the following raw files from DPREVIEW ? maybe find an example where you "didn't" like how it looked ? I tried to find photos with portraits (obviously too many uncontrolled variables !)

X-T2 examples look great, but I think that's because of the scene has alot more "contrast", so I have tried to find "similar" or scenes that are familiar below.

X-T4 (DPreview)

Image #1 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1969063349/fujifilm-x-t4-sample-gallery/3238344790

Image #2 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1969063349/fujifilm-x-t4-sample-gallery/6428996491

Image #3 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1969063349/fujifilm-x-t4-sample-gallery/2752745709

X-T3 (DPreview)

Image #1 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/5370103067/fujifilm-x-t3-sample-gallery/1072714737

Image #2 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/5370103067/fujifilm-x-t3-sample-gallery/5145527830

X-T30 (DPreview)

Image #1 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9171169801/fujifilm-x-t30-pre-production-sample-gallery/5132379328

Image #2 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9171169801/fujifilm-x-t30-pre-production-sample-gallery/0978170878

Image #3 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9171169801/fujifilm-x-t30-pre-production-sample-gallery/9560493831

X-T2 (DPreview)

Image #1 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/3430551079/fujifilm-x-t2-samples-gallery/0274088921

Image #2 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/3430551079/fujifilm-x-t2-samples-gallery/5034027761

Image #3 - https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/3430551079/fujifilm-x-t2-samples-gallery/8884447824

I think you're right. Unfortunately those times are gone, you'll never see something like this in the future, I've been waiting for years for Fuji to come up with something nice but I lost hope. Why? It's simple - because today's photo industry is just business, they don't care about `soul`, older cameras were made with `soul`(actually something like a handmade product) and they went bankrupt (Kodak and nearly Fuji). Fuji were not making money with their `S` cameras because people weren't interested in their qualities, the same as today. So Fuji went back in ranks with the other manufacturers. I bought my S5 pro from a professional photographer and I couldn't help asking him why he was getting rid of such a camera. He said times have changed, these cameras are slow and he needs more speed operating and shooting, clients are not willing to spend too much time in front of the camera, he can miss precious moments waiting for S5 buffer to recharge. Everything was clear for me then, such cameras will never be made. I posted some comparisons some time ago, https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65506903 as you can see in the first example Fuji X-T1 is far from `S` cameras, it looks flat and digital to me. The biggest disappointment is the medium format P25, I thought a CCD MF sensor would be a dream but apparently not, at least judging by this comparison. I have also tried Kodak DCS Pro and it's not as good as Fuji S5 for skin tones, Fuji just has something of its own and it'll always be my favourite camera.

bobogdan78 wrote:

I think you're right. Unfortunately those times are gone, you'll never see something like this in the future, I've been waiting for years for Fuji to come up with something nice but I lost hope. Why? It's simple - because today's photo industry is just business, they don't care about `soul`, older cameras were made with `soul`(actually something like a handmade product) and they went bankrupt (Kodak and nearly Fuji). Fuji were not making money with their `S` cameras because people weren't interested in their qualities, the same as today. So Fuji went back in ranks with the other manufacturers. I bought my S5 pro from a professional photographer and I couldn't help asking him why he was getting rid of such a camera. He said times have changed, these cameras are slow and he needs more speed operating and shooting, clients are not willing to spend too much time in front of the camera, he can miss precious moments waiting for S5 buffer to recharge. Everything was clear for me then, such cameras will never be made. I posted some comparisons some time ago, https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65506903 as you can see in the first example Fuji X-T1 is far from `S` cameras, it looks flat and digital to me. The biggest disappointment is the medium format P25, I thought a CCD MF sensor would be a dream but apparently not, at least judging by this comparison. I have also tried Kodak DCS Pro and it's not as good as Fuji S5 for skin tones, Fuji just has something of its own and it'll always be my favourite camera.

In your scenario - have you considered buying multiple copies of the S5 and accessories (batteries/chargers) ? so you have a heap of donor bodies if one of them eventually bites the dust.

I've heard (or seen on the internet) that the color filters used in older CCD sensors such as the one in the S5 were stronger and narrower than the ones used today.

This limited the high-ISO performance of the CCD sensors.  I have a compact from those days and max ISO is 400.  And the images are fairly noisy at ISO 400, too.

Today, sensors have excellent high-ISO performance and there is plenty of performance margin to put the older, better filters back into the sensor.  Sure, instead of ISO 12,800 we might only be able to get good results at ISO 5000 (just a guess) but it would be a whole new world (or back to the old world, depending on your viewpoint).

A camera manufacturer could really stir up the industry by fixing the filters, but might have a hard uphill battle because processing software is not yet able to cope.  We could be back where the JPGs were gorgeous right out of the camera, though.  I'd like that.

Raymond L wrote:

In your scenario - have you considered buying multiple copies of the S5 and accessories (batteries/chargers) ? so you have a heap of donor bodies if one of them eventually bites the dust.

Of course, I've already done that and also bought other old dinosaurs. Strangely all these old cameras (my Fuji S2 is almost 20 years old) work without issues unlike some modern cameras which failed shortly after getting out of warranty.

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

With RAW files, the Camera matching profiles (in Lightroom, anyway) can vary significantly from from one model camera to another (the X-T3 being more different than the others). Any of them can be tweaked and saved as a new profile to closely match any of the other camera/profile combos with a little know-how. If you want your X-H1 (or whatever) files to look more like what you get with your older cameras, it's absolutely doable - especially if you're just try to match another Fuji.

If you can make a Sony look like a Fuji, you can make one Fuji look like another Fuji.

A Sony RAW with a custom profile to match the X-T2 (Classic Chrome)

Could you give me some pointers please? I have tried a few times to make my Panasonic FZ330 and Sony RX100 look more like Canon or Fuji but I have not been able to do it. I am using Lightroom 6.

Dino2000 wrote:

Batdude wrote:

Hello everyone.

.......Then when I started buying the newer Fujis my Nikon D4 produces nicer more colorful skin tones. The cheeks and lips show a nicer color compared to my XT3. Again, the T3 is not bad, is just VERY different and have this more flat and even skin tone look.....

You seem to have your answer in Nikon. Question is why Fuji?

Check out his other threads. You'll notice a theme.

Also, welcome!  I see you are a relatively new member.

Some people say Batdude has got this recurrent theme or gripe about the most hyped cameras in the business. One way or another he is clearly dissatisfied and maybe for a good reason. I only want to bring to your attention a few side by side comparisons between various cameras and Fuji S3/5 and I won't say anything more, You can do if you like.

The pictures were not modified in any way, I have no bias for older cameras I'm just amazed how beautiful, rich color they have compared to other cameras.

absquatulate wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

While the SOOC jpeg results do vary a bit from generation to generation, It doesn't look the film sims themselves change much, but some of the ancillary processing does. With some tweaking of the jpeg settings (saturation, highlights, shadows etc) you should be able to get close. Even more important, you may have to play with the Auto-WB shift and Exposure Compensation to really dial in the look.

With RAW files, the Camera matching profiles (in Lightroom, anyway) can vary significantly from from one model camera to another (the X-T3 being more different than the others). Any of them can be tweaked and saved as a new profile to closely match any of the other camera/profile combos with a little know-how. If you want your X-H1 (or whatever) files to look more like what you get with your older cameras, it's absolutely doable - especially if you're just try to match another Fuji.

If you can make a Sony look like a Fuji, you can make one Fuji look like another Fuji.

A Sony RAW with a custom profile to match the X-T2 (Classic Chrome)

They don't look the same to me, the Fuji profile has more vibrant colour.

Close enough, nothing a tiny slider tweak wouldn’t take care of. If you shot this scene a couple of years apart with two Fuji cameras it wouldn’t look exactly the same either.

absquatulate wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

While the SOOC jpeg results do vary a bit from generation to generation, It doesn't look the film sims themselves change much, but some of the ancillary processing does. With some tweaking of the jpeg settings (saturation, highlights, shadows etc) you should be able to get close. Even more important, you may have to play with the Auto-WB shift and Exposure Compensation to really dial in the look.

With RAW files, the Camera matching profiles (in Lightroom, anyway) can vary significantly from from one model camera to another (the X-T3 being more different than the others). Any of them can be tweaked and saved as a new profile to closely match any of the other camera/profile combos with a little know-how. If you want your X-H1 (or whatever) files to look more like what you get with your older cameras, it's absolutely doable - especially if you're just try to match another Fuji.

If you can make a Sony look like a Fuji, you can make one Fuji look like another Fuji.

A Sony RAW with a custom profile to match the X-T2 (Classic Chrome)

They don't look the same to me, the Fuji profile has more vibrant colour.

Close enough, nothing a tiny slider tweak wouldn’t take care of. If you shot this scene a couple of years apart with two Fuji cameras it wouldn’t look exactly the same either.

Personally I don't buy it, all different sensors have a different colour response, you may get close, but there are always differences, especially when you start shooting in the real world, as opposed to consistent controlled studio lighting.

I've processed Fuji and Sony files shot together from a wedding in all sorts of mixed lighting and they were very close - close enough that no one would ever notice that they weren't shot with a single camera.

Low incandescent light, very high ISO and still in the ballpark.