Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 26 Sep 2013 (Thursday) 17:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which digital camera still has film like qualities?

 
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,733 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 7069
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 26, 2013 19:30 |  #16

The only noise I have seen that actually resembles film grain is the M Monochrome at 6400 and 10,000 ISO. I looks a bit like Tri-X processed in Rodinal. Nothing like a CMOS sensor.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
10,599 posts
Likes: 1255
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Sep 26, 2013 19:56 |  #17

Cine photographers use software to over lay grain like appearance to digital film. It is possible to do the same thing with still images. Check a company named DxO at DxO.com. Specifically their film pack at $79 can come close to film images.

All done in post however using LR or Photoshop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
43,785 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3260
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Sep 26, 2013 21:43 |  #18

gjl711 wrote in post #16328026 (external link)
The film look is more than just a picture style. That might hit things like saturation, contrast and sharpness but does not add grain.

^^

John from PA wrote:
Cine photographers use software to over lay grain like appearance to digital film. It is possible to do the same thing with still images. Check a company named DxO at DxO.com. Specifically their film pack at $79 can come close to film images.



Digital enhancement to achieve 'grain' does a poor job of imitating it. It superimposes a bit of a pattern, but film grain density varies with tonal value gradation, NOT uniform regardless of tonal value.

This is a scan of a very small section of a Tri-X frame, and you can see the lesser grain density with less tonal density

IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/grain400_zpsc19f5c5c.jpg

And then so called B&W prints made with laserjets has a very visible top surface 'layer' of black pigment ink which is especially objectionable with very high density black areas. Looks nothing like a silver halide print.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gobeatty
Senior Member
513 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2013
     
Sep 26, 2013 21:45 |  #19

Part of it depends on you, as and artist, and what you are after. Are you trying to create the look of a particular film (Velvia, Kodachrome 64, Tri-X 400)? Are you after a strong vintage look (loads of pro quality Instagramesque filters available)? Are you wanting your digital to produce images that subtly evoke a film impression (grain and tone curves)?

Just some questions that may help :-)


6D | 35 f2 | 50 1.8 | 85 1.8 | 28 - 135 f3.5 - 5.6 | 70-210 f4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 26, 2013 22:09 |  #20
bannedPermanent ban

KeyserSoze1 wrote in post #16327762 (external link)
I know this can be achieved in post but I often read feedbacks that certain cameras, some DSLR's has this film like files, like skin tones, grains and such.

Is Canon's 5D (the first one) the only DSLR left in the market that can produce files closest to film?

Qualities such as skin tones and grain varied extremely between different films. In order to really pose your question, you need to indicate what film you are talking about. Provia is much different than Velvia which is much different than Kodachrome.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Sep 27, 2013 11:13 |  #21

We chose films for their specific characteristics and how they might be applied to a particular situations. Kodachrome rendered beautiful reds and yellows, and especially in the higher ISO version (100 and 200) has a fairly strong grain structure. Velvia (ISO 50) gives nicer greens and blues, and is more saturated and is very fine-grained, as well. Some people hated Velvia for portraiture, while others made it work and had great succes with it. Both Kodak and Fuji offered several other transparency films, some tweaked to be more appropriate for portraiture, others offering higher ISO performance or increased saturation.

I used Tri-X for it's speed (ISO 400, but could be pushed to 800 or even higher) and it's neat grain stucture. But for a smoother look with richer blacks I'd use Fuji Acros (ISO 100).

Not to mention that film qualities also are highly dependent upon how the film is "souped"...

There were at least a dozen different commercially available developers that could be used to process Tri-X, for example, giving it different appearances. Some photogs even came up with their own custom chemistryl mixes. Plus time and temperature could be varied to change the appearance of the film. And there were literally hundreds of different types of printing paper and print developing process combinations that could be used to vary the end results.

More recent Canon... the 18MP models from 7D and 60D on, for example, and the 5DIII, 6D... seem to render a more randomized noise, which looks a bit more like very fine film grain than noise did in older Canon models. Even so, it's still different than film grain.

Most of the "film looks" can be emulated with digital pretty well today. Most "looks" are going to be achieved in post-processing, just as it was in the days of film, darkrooms, enlargers and chemistry. Look into plug-ins or free-standing softwares that offer the film-like effects you want... Or that are offered as filters in more comprehensive image editing s'ware... or learn to apply them yourself with Photoshop, etc. The image right out of the camera is just the starting point.... just the same as it was in the days of film.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
Sep 27, 2013 22:52 |  #22

I can't replicate the look in photoshop.

I can overlay film grain over the image. I can degrade it... I can imitate crappy washed out old prints.

But I can't imitate how film imitates high dynamic range scenes in highlights. I was shooting inside a house the other weekend. The subject was in a dim room. ISO 400 f/2 and 1/50 shutter speed. Outside was full out sun. I still get detail in the sun. It's not much, but it's there... meanwhile my main subject is exposed PROPERLY at ISO400.

If I were to try to pull this off in digital, I'd have detail in highlights and if I were to try to bring it up in PP, it would be noisy even on latest noink.

Same for shooting outside. I can shoot in full sun, expose for the faces and the highlights round off in a pleasant way. With digital I HAVE TO use fill flash.

With some subjects it's like trying to imitate a grand piano with an 8 bit sound blaster. (external link)

You might create something interesting, but it's not going to be a grand piano.

Same with electronic synthesizers in the 80s. Before they improved the sound quality a lot of keyboard stuff sounded characterstically electronic. It become its own aesthetic and a lot of great art was created using the electronic signature, to the point of it defining the music of that era and it being imitated now to give the retro feel.

I'd say if you want to specific film look, just shoot film. If you want to do black and white, do it with the tools that digital gives you and accept the results as the aesthetic of the medium.


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Sep 28, 2013 04:58 |  #23

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16330516 (external link)
I'd say if you want to specific film look, just shoot film. If you want to do black and white, do it with the tools that digital gives you and accept the results as the aesthetic of the medium.

I totally agree. Digital and film cameras are completely different tools with different sets of advantages and disadvantages.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aladyforty
Goldmember
Avatar
4,273 posts
Gallery: 345 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 7113
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Albany: Western Australia
     
Sep 28, 2013 07:44 |  #24

fuji X100


FUJI XT3 X100 XF23 F1.4 XF18-55 XF56F1.2 XF55-200 XF100-400 & CANON 5D3 EF17-40L EF50F1.8 EF135L EF70-200F4L https://500px.com/alad​yforty (external link) https://www.flickr.com​/photos/25426422@N00/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,733 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 7069
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 28, 2013 07:52 |  #25

Lowner wrote in post #16330858 (external link)
I totally agree. Digital and film cameras are completely different tools with different sets of advantages and disadvantages.

Agree with both you and Doc.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BobbyT
Goldmember
Avatar
1,202 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2005
     
Sep 28, 2013 07:56 |  #26

Check out the preset offerings from VSCO


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,733 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 7069
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 28, 2013 12:40 |  #27

Leica M Monochrom, 35 Lux FLE lens at 6400 100% crop

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/L1000104_2_zpscb61c023.jpg

Full Image
IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/L1000104.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
irishman
Goldmember
Avatar
4,098 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
     
Sep 28, 2013 13:01 |  #28

Can someone explain what yhe hell "film look" even means?


6D, G9, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 15mm Fisheye, Sigma 50 2.8 macro, Nikon 14-24G 2.8, Canon 16-35 2.8 II, Canon 24-105 f/4 IS, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, tripod, lights, other stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,733 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 7069
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 28, 2013 13:03 |  #29

irishman wrote in post #16331491 (external link)
Can someone explain what yhe hell "film look" even means?

See Wilts post....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MotorPro
Member
30 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Sep 28, 2013 16:29 |  #30

What film? Kodachrome looked totallly differant then Extachrome or Kodacolor Tri-x was differant then then plus-x and lets not ever start on all the Fuji chooses




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,266 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which digital camera still has film like qualities?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is TRAPPER77
876 guests, 192 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.