RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Photo Retouching "Improving" photos, post-production, correction, etc.

This look without a film camera?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 02-04-2010, 01:55 PM
Faintandfuzzy Faintandfuzzy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Re: This look without a film camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence View Post
I wouldn't say that he overexposes a "few" stops. He might overexpose by a stop but probably not much beyond that. He might also be using transparency film which has amazing color saturation and contrast by nature. I wouldn't suggest over exposing with your digital to try to get the same effect, nor would I suggest underexposing. With digital you would want the perfect/best exposure and then if you want to amp it up, do it in post.

If you notice the sky in the 4th photo with the car and the trees, the sky still has tone in it (the yellow) which can be hard to get from a single digital shot, film has more dynamic range.

My guess is that some of these are shot using a view camera, if you look at the bike photo in the first one, you'll see how it's a really wide angle shot but has a very shallow depth of field. A normal 35mm digital won't be able to produce this look, on a large format camera (8x10 inch film) a 110mm lens would be a wide angle, but it would still have that shallow depth of field that a 110mm telephoto has. See this alec soth photo as a good example of large format: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/raim0007/gws.../alec-soth.jpg

The way you would have to fake this look in photoshop would be to do a lot of selective blurring. Stay away from gaussian blur and try to use something like a lens blur. Then you need to mask it in and out with gradients, so that it gets more blur as the landscape gets farther back in the environment. If you want me to go into detail about how to realistically mask it, let me know.

The bright wrapping around stuff I think is just coming from natural flare and you should be able to get it with digital shooting, but I think its possible just because of the physics difference between film and digital that it might look more elegant on film. I found this too: http://josevillablog.com/2010/01/int...-analog-photo/

However, I do think that - film is going to have a different feel to it than digital no matter what, and you can try to come as close to it as you can but you're just not going to be able to fake it all the way in some cases.
He actually does overexpose by a number of stops. He rates Fuji Pro 400H (his mainstay along with the 800) at 200iso. He exposes for the shadows, and depending upon backlighting, etc, will overexpose a further 1 to 3 stops.

He does not use a view camera. His primary body is a Contax 645 with a Zeiss 80mm f/2 lens….shot wide open. He does use some 35mm as well….but mainly 645. The film is scanned with a Fuji SP2500 on the “All Hard” setting to preserve the highlights and maintain good shadow detail.

The only transparency film he uses is cross processed Kodak E100S I believe, that is exposed with a Holga.

Finally, after trying for many months to achieve this look easily, I’ve returned to using film for a fair bit of work.
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 02-04-2010, 11:58 PM
tepic tepic is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 8
Re: This look without a film camera?

How's this?

Workflow:
1. Saturation +20
2. Contrast +20
3. Gradient Fill: white to transparent, radial, 90 degrees, 100% scale
4. Vignette
5. Hue 30-40, Saturation +25
6. Photo Filter: deep red, 5%
7. Vibrance +100, Saturation +9
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pex2.jpg (96.7 KB, 279 views)

Last edited by tepic; 02-05-2010 at 12:12 AM.
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 02-05-2010, 05:43 AM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: This look without a film camera?

Looking on the web, I found thjat film cameras have around 9 stops of dynamic range and around 12 stops for controlled situations. Nikon D700 and Nikon D3 have 12 stops, but don't know in wich situation.

For this look I would go for duplicating the layer and set it to overlay and probably 50% opacity and some masking.
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 02-05-2010, 07:42 AM
Faintandfuzzy Faintandfuzzy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Re: This look without a film camera?

This is the difficulty I had.....many suggestions, but no one can seem to actually post an example.
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 02-05-2010, 07:47 AM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: This look without a film camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
This is the difficulty I had.....many suggestions, but no one can seem to actually post an example.
I'm working right now, but will give you an example after work.
Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 02-05-2010, 09:47 AM
Faintandfuzzy Faintandfuzzy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Re: This look without a film camera?

Thanks Q. I'd really like to see this. Overexposing Pro 400H, and with the scanner settings used, gived this nice, creamy, pastel skintones. Blemishes pretty much vanish. The greens in background foliage just pops....without being oversaturated. Because overexposing any DSLR I've had means hot or blown highlights, this method doesn't work. And even if you could pull the highlights back somewhat, different channels saturate at different exposure levels....so color accuracy is impacted.

It would be nice to see this color and exposure look achieved, and what setting you or anyone here use. Of course, I want to avoid spending a half hour on an image to get it looking right....when I could get it without effort shooting with film in the first place.

Regards,
Reply With Quote top
  #17  
Old 02-05-2010, 11:11 AM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: This look without a film camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
Thanks Q. I'd really like to see this. Overexposing Pro 400H, and with the scanner settings used, gived this nice, creamy, pastel skintones. Blemishes pretty much vanish. The greens in background foliage just pops....without being oversaturated. Because overexposing any DSLR I've had means hot or blown highlights, this method doesn't work. And even if you could pull the highlights back somewhat, different channels saturate at different exposure levels....so color accuracy is impacted.

It would be nice to see this color and exposure look achieved, and what setting you or anyone here use. Of course, I want to avoid spending a half hour on an image to get it looking right....when I could get it without effort shooting with film in the first place.

Regards,
Man, there are not magic and quick solutions for developing RAW Files or Film Strips. It's all the same hard work that becomes quick when you achieve your workflow. Thinking which is the easiest way will take you to a dead end where you probably find some steps and actions that will never help you to release your creativity, achievable only walking on the hard path. This is the only way to achieve perfection. It ¡s not the same thing that someone tells you an story than living the story in your own flesh. The perception of things is much more deeper.

Also, the thing you point about film and RAW about saturating channels while re-expossing the image is a bit off due that film saturates more the colors when underexpossing plus, the pictures you put here are already quite unnatural in the colors. Not saying they look bad, all the opposite, but after all, every single picture would be edited, so what's the matter if the color gets saturated or not and much probably, quite different from reality, like the pics you put here.

Here is what I did in 5-8 minutes in Lightroom (and applyed my own taste). Just some adjustings such as brightness, expossure, saturation ,vibrancy, balck point, contrast and the most important to me, temperature and tint. A little move in the tint camera calibration too. I can now save these settings and apply them to batchs while I take a coffe or play some video game =D

Will do some in PS to show you a better approach.

Mart

PS: This nice picture is from the Photographer Jasz (he was around here and never know about him again).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Captura de Pantalla 4.jpg (86.4 KB, 272 views)
Reply With Quote top
  #18  
Old 02-05-2010, 11:30 AM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: This look without a film camera?

PSCS4: about 3-6 mins. Just duplicating the layer and set it to softlight sometimes is enough, but we retouchers love tweaking it all =D
Attached Images
File Type: jpg XX2O4059.jpg (70.0 KB, 217 views)
File Type: jpg Captura de Pantalla 2.jpg (22.3 KB, 230 views)
Reply With Quote top
  #19  
Old 02-05-2010, 01:55 PM
Kcupcake Kcupcake is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 21
Re: This look without a film camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quantum3 View Post
PSCS4: about 3-6 mins. Just duplicating the layer and set it to softlight sometimes is enough, but we retouchers love tweaking it all =D
Hey Quantum,

Would you mind putting what you did in each step since I cant tell blend modes and what you did to your levels? I'd love to know the basis of what you did! Thanks!!
Reply With Quote top
  #20  
Old 02-05-2010, 02:07 PM
Quantum3 Quantum3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 911
Re: This look without a film camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kcupcake View Post
Hey Quantum,

Would you mind putting what you did in each step since I cant tell blend modes and what you did to your levels? I'd love to know the basis of what you did! Thanks!!
Yeah, it's very straight foward.

1) Dup layer and set it to softlight.
2) Select the red channel and copy it.
3) Paste it over all the layesr and mask out what's not skin.
4) Levels set to luminosity to adjust contrast.
5) Levels over all the stuff to make a vignette.

Sometimes duplicating the layer and setting it to softlight is enough.

Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Adding A More Realistic Film Grain Effect gmitchel Software 14 08-15-2013 07:57 AM
Film Cross-Processing Presets for Adobe Camera Raw gmitchel Software 0 05-16-2009 03:20 PM
Nikon Camera Control Pro 2.0 (reviews wanted) Doug Nelson Hardware 8 05-03-2009 10:48 PM
Camera Raw in Photoshop chanamagoo Photoshop Help 2 01-12-2009 10:19 PM
Question on a film camera... Rudy627 Photography 2 11-29-2007 04:36 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved