X100 colour comparison

bobbyrab said:
Just wondered Nick if you do any colour correction on the film once it's scanned?
Click to expand...


I was wondering that too because there's a definite purplish cast to the image. The X100 example is very neutral and true to life by comparison.
 
The difference in colour cast is quite something. My personal preference is for the cooler, to my eyes, more realistic cast of the X100. I'm intrigued to know what WB setting you had the x100 on. I've only had mine three days and can't properly play with it at the moment but I've been impressed by the Auto WB. It only seems to fail under quite heavy types of cast lighting and then one of the other settings appears to deal admirably with it.

Infact I've been so impressed I'm going to make a concerted effort to shoot more colour subjects.
 
First shot is Great 😎
Ouch with the second .... Reminds me of TMax film
Whem i don't wash it enough and has that purple Tinge 😛
 
Thanks for the comments

The X100 was set on Auto WB, shot in raw, but I may have clicked wb on a bit of white page from a book in Lightroom (don't think it changed much). I think the strong neutral coulous were a result of bright clear sunshine and 200 iso

The film was scanned and profiled as Portra 160. It definitely has a magenta cast. I didn't want to do much correction in Lightroom as I wanted a straight comparison, and also I have a perverted preference for a bit of such casting.

Nick
 
Not correcting the color on the film is NOT a straight comparison, the X100 is auto-correcting-which you can do with the film scan with one command.

I got that magenta cast on a lot of my film scans, so I recognize it quickly!
 
aad said:
Not correcting the color on the film is NOT a straight comparison, the X100 is auto-correcting-which you can do with the film scan with one command.

I got that magenta cast on a lot of my film scans, so I recognize it quickly!
Click to expand...

Exactly. Differences in colors between those two shots are 90% down to scanner/film profiling and scanner software. In fact, I'm sure this same frame scanned with two different scanner software would result in two pictures that would probably be just as far (color wise) apart as this scanned and x100 shot. Even if both software had canned film profile (and I'm pretty sure no software has the new Porta 160 negative film profile). And I guess OP didn't profile this particular negative roll and forget to mention it?
 
I use Vuescan
It does not have the profle for the NEW Portra 160, that is correct. I use the profile for Portra 160 VC

But horses for courses, on this ocasion I prefer the warm look, otherwsie perhaps I would have spent more time correcting it
 
Not sure what the point is Nick, really the only discernable difference between the two is the magenta cast, but that's your decision to leave it, so what are we to compere?
 
"straight from the scanner", to me, reads "i"ve let the scanner do whatever it thinks it's better". so basically a straight out of the scanner image relies on how good the autoWB works in the scanner software, getting tones right when scanning at home was a PITA, that's why I sold my scanner and started getting developed+scanned negs from the lab.

I usually do minor WB adjustments on all my film photos, as it's needed since each colour film has a different base colour. and even profiles won't do it properly, at least when I scanned here myself I sometimes tried different profiles instead of the "correct" one until I found one that was more pleasting.

The purple cast in the second shot is a bit too strong for my taste, if the white balance is tweaked the comparision between both shots will come down to how each draw, which would then be a much more fair comparision imho.
 
i am somewhat red/green colorblind, so i could never get the color "correct" by messing with software; i have to let auto color commands and such do my color shots.
and that issue is precisely why i am very interested in how well digital cameras - according to y'all's opinions - handle color. i had no idea the film shot has a magenta cast. i CAN tell you the x100 looks better to me, but i cannot define why.
i appreciate the test, Nick. and when i do get a digital cam, i will let my wife make the color settings ... 🙂
 
Nick De Marco said:
The film was scanned and profiled as Portra 160
Click to expand...

Using the profiles in Vuescan can certainly help get an image close to neutral but do realize that you can't accurately profile a scanner for color negative film anyways - defining an accurate and consistent target isn't possible. Even when trying to profile accurately around reversal film, profiles must be built around the specific scanner and not as a canned version to have a chance of being successful.


This is your film color quickly corrected ...not much difference now!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Cartridge Format. Part 1: Drop-in cartridge film formats: Prioritizing user convenience.
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
neal3k
neal3k
J
  • Featured
  • Article Article
What's happening with Photographic Film in 2025? Is this robust niche still growing?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
4K
Ljós
L
A
Question about M9 colour vs Fuji
Replies
15
Views
2K
agentlossing
agentlossing
J
  • Article Article
The Pixii Max: The first real competitor to the Leica digital M’s!
3 4 5
Replies
99
Views
9K
Godfrey
Godfrey
N
X100 black and white comparison
Replies
0
Views
2K
Nick De Marco
N
Back
Top Bottom