This is just cheating

[NB23]

It's simply stupid! Both film and digital has its pro and con. If you like the look of film then simply use film. Neither is more realistic or better they are simply different.

This is what we all agree on: they are different.
What's stupid is to fake digital into film. You know? To say that digital is film. You know? That a D750 sensor is kodak tri-x.

 

[canuhead]

who cares

pretty much my thoughts as well

 

[Truzi]

I'd say dodging & burning would be cheating if a machine automatically did it for you. Doing it manually wouldn't be "cheating"

 

[tkamiya]

This is what we all agree on: they are different.
What's stupid is to fake digital into film. You know? To say that digital is film. You know? That a D750 sensor is kodak tri-x.

Yes, they are different and I do both.

On second point, I'm not sure if I agree 100%. Say I am a digital only photographer. All of my gear are digital. Say I don't want to get another body for a project. I don't have a darkroom and don't have mini-lab nearby. If I want to make an image that will pass as an old fashion film image just for fun or to mass consumers, what am I to do?

APUG is an enthusiast site, so I see what you are saying. But many products are made to appeal to masses. Professional photographers sell to masses. They only need to please masses' taste and senses in exchange for their money. Wedding photographers couldn't care less about what's pure or if grain looks like Tri-X or HP5.

If I can tell the consumer, "you know, I can also make this look like an "old-school" film photo for 10 dollars more, would you like that?" I think I would.

I think this kind of product does have a purpose. Perhaps not for you and I and for majority of APUG. Many consumers, hobbyists, professionals, studio/wedding clients simply don't care about details, and they are the majority.

 

[tkamiya]

It's kind of funny for me.

I like my B&W image on film and wet printed. I've tried digital. I didn't like it.
I like my color image on digital. I've tried film. I didn't like it.

Would I convert one to look like the other? No, it's stupid. Would my girlfriend know the difference or care? Nope! All she sees is an image and instinctively, subject and composition. She judges what's nice and what's not nice on the image itself, not how it was made.

 

[Chan Tran]

I think it's a stupid idea but I don't call it cheating as one should be able to do any which way to get the image one wants.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I think I'm too harsh

I think there's a romance to film that digital photography doesn't have. Can't blame digital photographers. But I think imitation is the sincerest form of flattery .

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

I'm waiting for the film that emulates digital. Might be a while :]

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Vsco is just another software filter pack in a long line of film emulators. I remember looking into and trying out alienskin exposure and exposure 2, nik color and silver fx, etc a while back. Nik silver fx was the best in my opinion, but I don't think film can be emulated yet with our current software and silver gelatin prints made by a professional printer will never be bested by any digital ink jet.

 

[digital&film]

Nik silver fx was the best in my opinion, but I don't think film can be emulated yet with our current software and silver gelatin prints made by a professional printer will never be bested by any digital ink jet.

I agree on both points.. Silver EFX is a winner, and Silver Gelatin is unsurpassed.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Just wanted to add that though I found the colour samples pretty okay, I find it absurd to emulate a B/W film, since the final result always depends on developer, development time, agitation and so on. You simply can´t put a filter on a digital file and say "that´s the character of the film" because it depends on so many variables in real life...

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Some years ago I downloaded film grain scans. Was going to photoshop it to digital pictures. And... Started to use film again.

 

[MattKing]

I have a friend who has a good body of work, spanning quite a few years, in her black and white child photography portfolio. She has a recognizable style, and her customers hire her based on that style.
She depends on labs to print her work. When she started, she shot on film, and there were good commercial printers available that would print at a reasonable cost. Then, the reasonable cost commercial printers transitioned to a lightjet workflow, so she transitioned to a film plus quality lab scans plus digital post workflow. The lab quality scans then became more problematic, so she made the decision to move to a digital capture and Silver FX workflow, with lightjet printing.
The emulation software has enabled her to maintain consistency of style while adapting to the changing realities in commercial labs.

 

[aRolleiBrujo]

I have a friend who has a good body of work, spanning quite a few years, in her black and white child photography portfolio. She has a recognizable style, and her customers hire her based on that style.
She depends on labs to print her work. When she started, she shot on film, and there were good commercial printers available that would print at a reasonable cost. Then, the reasonable cost commercial printers transitioned to a lightjet workflow, so she transitioned to a film plus quality lab scans plus digital post workflow. The lab quality scans then became more problematic, so she made the decision to move to a digital capture and Silver FX workflow, with lightjet printing.
The emulation software has enabled her to maintain consistency of style while adapting to the changing realities in commercial labs.

I wish it would resurrect my film attempts!




here i used niks with my actual film that had morphed digitally via Epson V500 Photo scanner!
Nik software by a.rodriguezpix, on Flickr

Americo J Rodriguez-6 by a.rodriguezpix, on Flickr