Forget RAW and go ACROS

[infrequent]

Interesting comparison of all the SOOC monochrome options in the Fuji X cameras as well as post-processing. Looks like that gen III sensor is the real deal, especially for the ACROS simulation mode.

http://www.hendriximages.com/blog/2017/3/19/forget-raw-and-go-acros-the-definitive-review

 

[user237428934]

The fact that no external RAW converter can achieve a similar analogue film-like look is for me an additional incentive to focus on using JPEG´s

Seriously? Waste of time reading this.

 

[Dogman]

Looking at the comparison sections of the whole photo, I preferred the look of in-camera JPEG w/o grain. Nice smooth creamy tones. I presume that's pretty much the same results as when shooting Raw and using Lightroom to convert to B&W.

I don't get the purpose behind trying to make monochrome digital look like B&W film. Most attempts to make digital simulate film just makes the image look artificial. Digital B&W has its own look and characteristics that are really quite beautiful.

 

[MaxElmar]

Yeah, about that Acros simulation... It doesn't look like Acros to me. Why mess around with a simulation anyway? If I want a film look I use film. Fake film is fake.

 

[DKimg]

+1 for the simulation not looking like actual Acros film. I'll stick to Acros film until it's completely discontinued....

 

[infrequent]

Seriously? Waste of time reading this.

That statement is somewhere between objective fact and a mere opinion. Hope you don't reject everything on such grounds.

 

[infrequent]

Yeah, about that Acros simulation... It doesn't look like Acros to me. Why mess around with a simulation anyway? If I want a film look I use film. Fake film is fake.

Noted. Please bear in mind that every shooting mode in the Fuji x cameras are a simulation including the standard look that tries to mimic Provia 100. Also do folks make such statements for the Leica Monochrom?

 

[infrequent]

I don't get the purpose behind trying to make monochrome digital look like B&W film. Most attempts to make digital simulate film just makes the image look artificial. Digital B&W has its own look and characteristics that are really quite beautiful.

Yeah this is a sentiment I can get behind. Looks like there is a market demand that is driving this. Note the popularity of apps that mimic films these days. Or the cult like popularity of the Ricoh GR cameras for specifically the high grain mono look. Either way I am glad that an option is available for those who seek it.

 

[Ranchu]

Raw is for squids.

 

[infrequent]

Raw is for squids.

Haha! Even there I prefer fried calamari.

P.S. Almost the national food of Australia.

 

[user237428934]

Hope you don't reject everything on such grounds.

Of course I do, if the conclusion is so wrong.

The guy compared three in-camera bw settings with the LR Acros preset. If the conclusion was: "I like the in-camera Acros setting best", that would be ok.

But the conclusion was: "no external RAW converter can achieve a similar analogue film-like look" and that was not even part of his "definitive review" because he didn't compare raw converters.

The Acros preset int the Fuji cameras is not bad at all but it's wrong to believe that this is THE Acros film look.

 

[infrequent]

Fair enough Tom. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

The Acros film sim is really nice. No experience with the film, so can't compare, but shooting with it is great fun.

 

[fjolnir]

Afaik main draw of the acros sim is the grain simulation, which is really fantastic at higher ISOs, obviously that can't be reproduced in a raw processor that doesn't do the same kind o noise processing. Depending on the picture, I sometimes use the in camera raw processor to get it 90% of the way and then apply curves,dodges&burns on the computer.

I wish Fuji would just release a desktop raw processor that could do it though..

 

[infrequent]

The Acros film sim is really nice. No experience with the film, so can't compare, but shooting with it is great fun.

That seems to be the general opinion that I have seen.

P.S. Love those concert shots on your Flickr. Beautiful colour. Do you find the EVF only aspect of the X-E1 limiting at all compared to say an X-100 or X-Pro?

 

[infrequent]

I wish Fuji would just release a desktop raw processor that could do it though..

That would be nice but I doubt Fuji will go that route for two reasons: [1] this is clearly some secret sauce, and [2] fits right into their marketing that you can get the look SOOC without too much post-processing.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

That seems to be the general opinion that I have seen.

P.S. Love those concert shots on your Flickr. Beautiful colour. Do you find the EVF only aspect of the X-E1 limiting at all compared to say an X-100 or X-Pro?

Oh hey thanks! Yeah, that's the main thing—I've sinced switched to an XPro-2 but the EVF X cameras work great, if you don't mind not having an optical finder. I also prefer the larger size of the XPro models.

 

[Out to Lunch]

Even with the Fuji x100t without ACROS you get interesting b&w results when applying the yellow and red filters. I've learned to avoid noise reduction in post-processing.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Looking at the comparison sections of the whole photo, I preferred the look of in-camera JPEG w/o grain. Nice smooth creamy tones. I presume that's pretty much the same results as when shooting Raw and using Lightroom to convert to B&W.

I don't get the purpose behind trying to make monochrome digital look like B&W film. Most attempts to make digital simulate film just makes the image look artificial. Digital B&W has its own look and characteristics that are really quite beautiful.

I really disagree. For me, the beauty in B+W film is partly in the grain. Grainlessness is just dull. In the analogy i've been making for a while, Grain is like the brush strokes in a painting. Take them away, and it's a poster.

I do agree that a lot of grain simulation isn't so great, but it's getting better. I really like AlienSkin Exposure, and i think it's best to use it on a flat, unmanipulated file first, and then to do curves/corrections and such, so that the grain is also affected — the same way the grain on a film negative would be. Too many people apply grain afterward, and that's just not how it works in analog. Then, if feeling ambitious, i'll layer a scan of real film grain on top — with all of its inherent randomness.

Why try to make monochrome digital look like B&W film? Digital capture gives certainty. You know if you got the shot. No need to 'cover' yourself. You can move on to other compositions and ideas. There's a time savings. There's a cost savings, after you own the equipment, and depending on how much you shoot/process. There's no need to transport and clear film through security scans when traveling.... Lots of reasons, if you love the look of film and embrace the convenience of digital.

 

[jsrockit]

Wait, if you use RAW you can choose ARCOS in the "Profile" menu of LR. Why should I use the less flexible jpeg version? Wait scratch that altogether... I like post processing.