Einst_Stein Posted October 21, 2020 Author Share #41 Posted October 21, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 16 minutes ago, 250swb said: I think for most people that would be a combination of eye and brain and a command of the tools available, the wheel does not need to be invented twice. Unless of course a 'command' can delve into the brain and intuit all the decisions a photographer would make regarding film, developer, development time, print developer, paper contrast.... oh it's just too long a list to say why a dumb 'command' can't beat the eye and brain. The appreciation of different tonal rendering is like wine tasting. You are perfectly fine if you don't feel the itch. If you are sharing the itch, than what takes to pursue that imperfection or perfection is not measurable. Don't try to judge it by your own standard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 21, 2020 Posted October 21, 2020 Hi Einst_Stein, Take a look here How to get skin tone like classical B&W film. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
250swb Posted October 21, 2020 Share #42 Posted October 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: The appreciation of different tonal rendering is like wine tasting. You are perfectly fine if you don't feel the itch. If you are sharing the itch, than what takes to pursue that imperfection or perfection is not measurable. Don't try to judge it by your own standard. Kind of the same reasoning applies for people who think the guy who writes the software for Leica cameras must be perfect and knows what is best for them. Tell me, when in anything other than scientific film photography has there ever been a perfect 'standard'? If you don't trust your own eyes and need a 'command' that is something to deal with yourself, but it doesn't square with promoting unfounded ideas that it's impossible for other people to use skill just because you are all at sea and rowing yourself around in circles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 21, 2020 Share #43 Posted October 21, 2020 55 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: The appreciation of different tonal rendering is like wine tasting. You are perfectly fine if you don't feel the itch. If you are sharing the itch, than what takes to pursue that imperfection or perfection is not measurable. Don't try to judge it by your own standard. Then why are you asking about a simple command to substitute for or to replicate your acquired taste? Photography has always been about light and its myriad interpretations. The most important tools are between the ears. Use them. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted October 22, 2020 Author Share #44 Posted October 22, 2020 7 hours ago, Jeff S said: Then why are you asking about a simple command to substitute for or to replicate your acquired taste? Photography has always been about light and its myriad interpretations. The most important tools are between the ears. Use them. Jeff Don't know what you are talking about. Sorry! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom24 Posted October 22, 2020 Share #45 Posted October 22, 2020 14 hours ago, evikne said: One thing I've missed from most B&W profiles in LR and other places, is the "charcoal" or "matte" look that comes from a cut-off in the black tones. I love this look. It is possible to make it with the tone curve tool in LR, but it's not so easy to get it right. I've experimented a lot with this, but then I discovered the RNI film simulation profiles, that does it automatically, without touching the curve tool. The histogram clearly shows a cut-off in the shadows and highlights with this Ilford Delta 3200 film simulation profile (I've removed the grain, because I'm mostly interested in the tone curve). Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Evikne, try a luminance slider in the new Color grading panel in the new Lightroom clasic V10 (no color change - only luminance). In Shadows and Highlights wheel. It could be useful for that. Regards Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted October 22, 2020 Share #46 Posted October 22, 2020 17 minutes ago, tom24 said: Evikne, try a luminance slider in the new Color grading panel in the new Lightroom clasic V10 (no color change - only luminance). In Shadows and Highlights wheel. It could be useful for that. Regards Thank you! I will definitely try out the new tools. They look very promising. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 22, 2020 Share #47 Posted October 22, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 8 hours ago, Einst_Stein said: Don't know what you are talking about. Sorry! Tools and techniques are abundant and relatively easy to learn. The hard part, film or digital, has always been deciding when, where and to what degree to apply them. That requires the tools between your ears... your eyes and brain... there is no shortcut or substitute for those. Jeff 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01maciel Posted October 22, 2020 Share #48 Posted October 22, 2020 Am 21.10.2020 um 17:26 schrieb evikne: One thing I've missed from most B&W profiles in LR and other places, is the "charcoal" or "matte" look that comes from a cut-off in the black tones. I love this look. It is possible to make it with the tone curve tool in LR, but it's not so easy to get it right. I've experimented a lot with this, but then I discovered the RNI film simulation profiles, that does it automatically, without touching the curve tool. The histogram clearly shows a cut-off in the shadows and highlights with this Ilford Delta 3200 film simulation profile (I've removed the grain, because I'm mostly interested in the tone curve). Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Slightly OT but for DNGs I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 22, 2020 Share #49 Posted October 22, 2020 7 minutes ago, 01maciel said: But isn't it a kind of cheating? But you still have to decide if it results in exactly what you intended or whether there are other necessary actions/enhancements. Same as with actual film: a starting point is not an end point; there are myriad possible processing and rendering results. Presets and/or default import settings can make workflow more efficient, but they can’t substitute for your judgment. Jeff 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted October 22, 2020 Share #50 Posted October 22, 2020 14 minutes ago, 01maciel said: Slightly OT but for DNGs I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating? Why is it cheating? There is no right or wrong. And I think it looks great! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted October 22, 2020 Author Share #51 Posted October 22, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, 01maciel said: Slightly OT but for DNGs I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating? Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Good question for philosophers. Photography to me is to please myself or whoever the target viewers first. Does it matter “cheating” or not? Edited October 22, 2020 by Einst_Stein 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01maciel Posted October 22, 2020 Share #52 Posted October 22, 2020 vor 5 Minuten schrieb Einst_Stein: Photography to me is to please myself or whoever the target viewers first. Smart answer, I like it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted October 22, 2020 Share #53 Posted October 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said: Good question for philosophers. Photography to me is to please myself or whoever the target viewers first. Does it matter “cheating” or not? Doesn't really square with your asking for 'perfection' in wanting a dumb 'command' to tell you what is right. You've spent the entirety of this thread saying nothing is possible that meets your esoteric standards, now you drop those standards as quickly as a whore drops her draws. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted October 22, 2020 Author Share #54 Posted October 22, 2020 3 hours ago, 250swb said: Doesn't really square with your asking for 'perfection' in wanting a dumb 'command' to tell you what is right. You've spent the entirety of this thread saying nothing is possible that meets your esoteric standards, now you drop those standards as quickly as a whore drops her draws. OMG! If you cannot follow or if you dont enjoy, you don’t have to waste time any more on this thread, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted October 23, 2020 Share #55 Posted October 23, 2020 14 hours ago, 01maciel said: Slightly OT but for DNGs I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating? The very nature of .dng files is that you make choices when you get in front of the PC, and film profiles are often a great starting point when it comes to post processing. They are only what you could do using Levels and Curves anyway and if you find one that works why do all the extra work. It's also good if you have an image and you're not quite sure what to do with to go through the profiles and see if they give you any ideas, it's only what a film photographer would do in trying different contrasts of paper before making a choice. Remove the grain or keep it, that is the question. Overt grain isn't a prerequisite of film, some photographers would choose grainy films and other very fine grain. What grain can do is change the emotional response to an image, it also gives the eye something to latch onto in broad areas of otherwise empty space. I guess most photographers didn't buy a digital camera to have grain so removing it is the popular option, but as a creative option it's still valid. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted October 23, 2020 Share #56 Posted October 23, 2020 On 10/22/2020 at 5:37 PM, 01maciel said: ...I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating?... No. Philip. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotomas Posted October 23, 2020 Share #57 Posted October 23, 2020 Am 22.10.2020 um 18:37 schrieb 01maciel: Slightly OT but for DNGs I am sometimes tempted to use Film Simulation profiles as shown in the screen capture below. In this case the Kodak TRI-X 5 ++. But isn't it a kind of cheating? Hmm - IMHO it doesn't look like TRI-X at all*. So no cheating. *like all of these film-simulations I tried never looked like the films they claimed to simulate. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted October 27, 2020 Author Share #58 Posted October 27, 2020 On 10/23/2020 at 3:05 PM, fotomas said: Hmm - IMHO it doesn't look like TRI-X at all*. So no cheating. *like all of these film-simulations I tried never looked like the films they claimed to simulate. Same observation on Kodachrome and Velvia simulation! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Per P. Posted October 27, 2020 Share #59 Posted October 27, 2020 On 10/17/2020 at 9:03 AM, evikne said: If you use Adobe Lightroom, there is a lot of B&W filters to choose from, with different effects. It also includes (simulated) color filters. For example will a red, yellow or orange filter lighten up the skin tones. My favorite however, is the B&W film simulation profiles from RNI. These are very expensive, but very lifelike, because they also do advanced tone adjustments "under the hood". Like you, I have been exploring presets that emulate film. I tried a sample from RNI but could not get anything like the tones you demonstrate. Mine all seemed very very dark and required quite a serious amount of additional processing. I like Nate Johnson's X-Crome a lot, and also use some of his color presets. They work similar to RNI v.4, i.e. with sliders plus some dark magic and he doesn't seem to update them any longer, unfortunately. But they produce lovely results, to my eye, usually with just additional adjustment of exposure (and WB for the color presets). It's a fascinating game Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted October 27, 2020 Share #60 Posted October 27, 2020 8 minutes ago, Per P. said: Like you, I have been exploring presets that emulate film. I tried a sample from RNI but could not get anything like the tones you demonstrate. Mine all seemed very very dark and required quite a serious amount of additional processing. I guess the sample pack only contains one B&W profile and a few color profiles, and your image(s) probably didn't match the sample profiles very well. Once you have the full package, it is much more likely that you'll find a profile that fits. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.