Ready to Go Digital!

NickTrop

NickTrop

Veteran
Local time
3:24 PM
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
3,077
I like RF photography because I like a small quite camera that's capable of shooting in ambient light - no flash, for family candids, typically. I love the beauty of black and white film, especially people shots. And gottsta have selective focus. Must have selective focus to be able to blur out the background. To me, all these things are photographic essentials if you want the occasional happy accident of an interesting or evocative picture.

I shot with old film cameras - Japanese FLRFs mostly, because the only option of giving me this in the digital world - without spending thousands for digital RFs, were DSLRs. DSLRs were until recently big, clunky affairs usually attached to zoom lenses (not a fan, prefer fixed...) that were somewhat expensive, though their prices have come down to around $600 or so with a kit zoom lens.

Soooo, over the last couple years one camera manufacturer started to come out with a pretty darned good available light shooter - Fuji. F10, 11, 20, 30, and 31 all can do ISO 800, some say usable 1600 and their last couple "F" cameras boast a 3200 ISO rating. Finally, I have some non-DSLR options that are affordable and "rangefinder-esqe" at least in size and camera noise and ability to shoot with available light. The Fuji F31 costs - figure in real price tax, shipping, whatever, $260. Not bad - course that cost me what 3 of my Japanese FLRFs cost, two of which were CLA'd.

However, I'm stuck with the zoom lens on the camera. It's a mundane 3X 36-108 zoom, F2.8 wide open (F5 zoomed to its max) which is fast for a digital but slow compared to what I'm accustomed to using equipment that's 30-40 years old - but I'll make that concession. F2.8 is blazing in the digital point and shoot world... And besides, part of the reason I like fast lenses is for bokeh, and you just won't get that no matter what with the tiny sensor. That's why I'm happy with the F10 or 20 - no manual controls but to my way of thinking it doesn't matter so much with these things since you can't do stuff like throw the background out of focus anyway... Everything's done in post. That's why you don't "make a picture" with digital, you do a "digital capture". You're just getting the image into the sensor. The rest you Photoshop.

Now, until recently - again, gradiated "bokeh" simulations along the Z-axis in PS were nearly impossible to do. Really alls you could do was mask out a simple shape - carefully, slowly, and gaussian blur out the background. Blurred foreground objects and complicated scenes with lots of foreground objects and focus in the spacial middle - fuggetabout it. You'd be PSing all day and it still wouldn't look right - unnatural.

Enter Alien Skin "Bokeh", a Photoshop plug-in. ($200). It gives you lens selections that supposedly emulate the blur of various bokeh-renowned lenses... However, while you have some tools and a "planar" bokeh tool that gradiates the blur and this oval shaped thing-y, you still have to make masks or selections in Photoshop. I figure though, if I practice a lot, I might be able to come "close enough" in less complicated scenes with it.

Also, Alien Skin makes another plug in called Exposure ($250). This will - fairly accurately imo to be honest, emulates the look of various color print, slide, black and white, and infrared film stocks. So, I'll need this if I want to manintain the RF aesthetic I so love...

So, that's it! Film photography and RFs are now officially obsolete! Supplanted by modern technology - which is always more practical and makes things better...

Here's your shopping list...

1. A Fuji "F" series camera (hurry before they stop making them!) that gives you high ISO... Current model F31 around $275 give or take.

2. Photoshop CS2 minimum (What's this, like $600 bucks if you need to buy?)

3. Alien Skin "Bokeh" - a PS plug-in $200. Note - there are some limitations and it's not good for complicated scenes and you still have to mask and/or select stuff... Also, rendering times are pretty slow.

4. Alien Skin "Exposure" for that elusive "film look". $250.

... and lots of time futzing in Photoshop if you don't mind that sort of thing...
|
Buh-bye film! Say hello to the new "improved" digital world and modern technology!
 
Get a Lumix G1 with M lens adapter. You will be happy. Throw away your software. Use Picasa 3.0. I shot a New Year's Eve party last night - all available light photos at iso 1600. They were fine, although a bit noisy, without any noise correction. With noise correction they would probably be perfect. Don't believe what you read about this camera not making good shots at ISO 1600. With the M-lens adapter you can get all the bokeh you want - Can you say 100mm Noctilux at f1.0!

/T
 
Why would you want to make digital photos look like film photos? Nothing wrong with digital that I can see. It isn't film, but neither does Tri-X look the same as Tech Pan.
 
The Fuji 31 has no viewfinder. In daylight when the sun is behind you it will wash out the screen. If shooting quickly is important that may be a factor.
 
NickTrop said:
... Everything's done in post. That's why you don't "make a picture" with digital, you do a "digital capture". You're just getting the image into the sensor. The rest you Photoshop.

Now, until recently - again, gradiated "bokeh" simulations along the Z-axis in PS were nearly impossible to do. Really alls you could do was mask out a simple shape - carefully, slowly, and gaussian blur out the background. Blurred foreground objects and complicated scenes with lots of foreground objects and focus in the spacial middle - fuggetabout it. You'd be PSing all day and it still wouldn't look right - unnatural.

Enter Alien Skin "Bokeh", a Photoshop plug-in. ($200). It gives you lens selections that supposedly emulate the blur of various bokeh-renowned lenses... However, while you have some tools and a "planar" bokeh tool that gradiates the blur and this oval shaped thing-y, you still have to make masks or selections in Photoshop. I figure though, if I practice a lot, I might be able to come "close enough" in less complicated scenes with it.

Also, Alien Skin makes another plug in called Exposure ($250). This will - fairly accurately imo to be honest, emulates the look of various color print, slide, black and white, and infrared film stocks. So, I'll need this if I want to manintain the RF aesthetic I so love... ...
Click to expand...
Why not just take up photo-realistic painting?
 
Good plan on paper. Try it. Just don't sell your film and film gear. Guarantee you'll be back in a week. Your scheme for modifying the output is reasonable, but you'll miss out on the film gears responsiveness (focus, ease of use, viewfinder, lack of shutter lag) and miss out on a lot of pics you otherwise would've gotten: can't photoshop what you ain't got. Happy new year.
 
Hey Nick, it's JANUARY 1... New Years Day, not APRIL 1, April Fools Day! :D

If you just happen to be serious... good luck to you!
 
Oh - forgot to mention. Can't put filters on these Fuji things. Have to do that in post - so you'll need Nik Color Efex Pro 3.0 - another plug-in that simulates filter - red, yellow, polarizers, a bunch of others... set you back about $200.

Happy Photoshopping!
 
NickTrop said:
Oh - forgot to mention. Can't put filters on these Fuji things. Have to do that in post - so you'll need Nik Color Efex Pro 3.0 - another plug-in that simulates filter - red, yellow, polarizers, a bunch of others... set you back about $200.

Happy Photoshopping!
Click to expand...

Troll, troll, troll, your boat, gently down the stream...

;)
 
Another ignored fact is that post processing is extremely strenuous to the eyes. One has to look really hard to discern the differences after each action and also look constantly for long periods at fine detail on the computer screen.
 
I decided to take this thread serious so here is my remark: all those plug ins should also be compatible to Photoshop Elements. So if you don't need a specific feature of photoshop you could save a lot of money. No, does not save you any time.
 
I have not clear the reason why if you like film look you want to shot digital and if you want to shot prime lenses you are considering a small camera instead of a DSLR or a digital rangefinder.

The digital camera with the most "film-like" look that I know is the Fuji S5 and it can use all the AI series Nikon lenses (and of course all modern F-mount lenses as well), did you consider that?

Also for the software, Pohotoshop if fine but now also Gimp has become much better than the first versions and it runs free on all the popular plattforms! The money you save can be used to have a second small camera if your idea is to bring something with you at all time and a DSRL is too big!

GLF
 
NickTrop said:
....

Here's your shopping list...

1. A Fuji "F" series camera (hurry before they stop making them!) that gives you high ISO... Current model F31 around $275 give or take.

2. Photoshop CS2 minimum (What's this, like $600 bucks if you need to buy?)

3. Alien Skin "Bokeh" - a PS plug-in $200. Note - there are some limitations and it's not good for complicated scenes and you still have to mask and/or select stuff... Also, rendering times are pretty slow.

4. Alien Skin "Exposure" for that elusive "film look". $250.

... and lots of time futzing in Photoshop if you don't mind that sort of thing...
|
Buh-bye film! Say hello to the new "improved" digital world and modern technology!
Click to expand...

$1125, and say $60 an hour to PS . . . I'm persuaded. I have seen the pixels . . . :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom