I totally get that Ronald… Back when I was still shooting with Canon, RAW was my default and I spent a lot of time with editing on my Mac. Since switching to Fujifilm, I mainly shoot in JPG, with RAW only as a backup on my second SD card. Just in case… X-Raw Studio is indeed very handy for applying different settings. So my workflow basically matches your description. I’m sure you’re going to like this way of working.. Good luck!!
Thanks Leon! Good to read I'm not doing something utterly weird hehehe ;-) X-Raw Studio is also handy to backup/restore film recipes. Still early days though, the photos in this post are the first ones done this way.
Well first off, thanks for the recommendation! That’s so nice of you to share my post! Seems like we were on a similar wave length with our most recent posts as I was also talking about Fuji simulations. I think these photos turned out great, When experimenting with recipes I’ve found I prefer some of the more unique or specific ones, like the Wes Anderson one, yield more interesting results when used out of “context”.
Thank you for your nice comment about the photos. The more I look at them, the more I appreciate them, I think. Interesting thought about using 'looks out of context' 🤔👍Oh and you're welcome, your article was very well worth the read!
I'm torn about this too. I tend to shoot in Velvia or Acros + Red, but also keep the Raw files. I don't have the discipline, tenaciousness, or whatever it is that it takes to open RAW files in X-RAW Studio with the camera tethered to the computer and selecting a preset after the fact. I do import both RAW and JPEGs and tend to evaluate images in Bridge using the jpegs first because they load faster and show me how intended to shoot them, but I often look at the RAWs when I want to see what the image looks like flat. Quite often if I am not sold on the jpeg, I will start from the RAW, but there are also times when Velvia or Acros film sims give me a better starting point. I don't find raws works better or worse than the jpegs coming out of my XT3 or XT50. I also like the Reala Ace I think it's called, available on the XT50 and XT5. I don't go in for custom filters like you mention that mimic someone else's idea of what film stock should look like. I'd prefer to start with something more basic and I'm pretty happy with the basic Fuji options as a starting point. Camera Raw can now open jpegs like raws directly, and that's where I do most of my post processing regardless of RAW or JPEG. Beyond that, I often use Topaz Studio 2 and some preset filters in there if I want to give it a custom look that is mine alone. The only thing you can't do in Camera Raw with jpegs is AI noise reduction, which is a big benefit of working with RAW files. Camera Raw is such a great program and I think the settings are very similar to Lightroom which I have never used because I learned Photoshop before it came around and I couldn't see the point of switching from something I was already happy with. I'd like to choose between RAW or JPEG, but when it comes down to it, I want both and I save both for any image that I keep from a given shoot. I also keep PSD files of my full size post processed images. Maybe I'm not torn, but my relationship with these file formats is definitely complicated. Your six legged horse is a curiosity.
Thank you for your elaborate insights John. I had to sit down for this :-)
The X Raw Studio process is still a bit of work, and not necessarily faster then editing manually, but at least much easier than fiddling through the menu on the camera to change parameters for different outputs (because that is possible too; not sure how crazy you must be to go that way, but alas).
I think camera raw and lightroom share a lot of the same functionality (the raw processing engine etc). No need to change if that works for you (and for sure don't listen to the software companies and camera manufactures telling you otherwise ;-). For my Fuji files I typically use Capture One (an already older version but at least it supports the X-T5) or DxO PhotoLab occasionally. Hmm yes for noise reduction, raw data helps of course, but more and more I tend to embrace the noise. I do like the Fuji JPEG renderings really, the grain / noise is okay actually. That said, I rarely go above ISO 800, unless I photograph at night :)
I agree, the 'default' Fuji film simulations are already quite nice. I do like Astia, Classic Chrome, Nostalgic Negative and Classic Negative. When editing in Capture One these are typically my starting point. The others I haven't really tried so far, maybe I need to give that a go as well.
A fast way to change film simms on an XT5 is to assign a button for it. On my XT3, I have assigned the left arrow button (left of Menu/OK) for this function and I find that even more convenient than the much maligned dedicated film simm dial on the XT50 which is a better place for the ISO dial any day of the week.
To set any button, click and hold the Disp/Back button until the screen changes. Scroll through the button locations until you find the one you want to assign a function to it.
Film Simulations is on the first screen, at least on my XT3. Once set, you can quickly change film simms on the fly without having to dig into the menus which is overwhelming.
Yes, using a button for that makes it easy. I use the Custom settings (C1 to C7) for this and swap between them using the Q-button (Quick menu).
I have this Quick Menu setup such that the Custom settings is set to the default selected 'slot' on the quick menu (top-left), making switching quite fast as well. Reason for using the Custom settings is that you can set other parameters as well (aspect ratio or white balance shift for example). Other slots in the Quick menu are to quickly override certain parameters set in the C1-C7 sets. I'm still working on getting this to my liking, but I'm already quite used to this.
JPGs are so versatile these days, too. I remember editing JPG back when Olympus first brought out their mirrorless line and being a bit offput by it. When I originally switched to Fuji in 2019, I was impressed by how much latitude there was then, especially if you are working with curves adjustments rather than aggressively spot editing. The kicker for fuji for me was that their jpg engine seemed to do nicer things with noise than the editing software did with raws. When using fuji, I leaned into it. Importing directly onto the phone, slight edits and then go. It certainly cut down time in editing.
One day, Ronald, you'll get to the last decade of editing!! Those comments certainly gave me a laugh. I try so hard to keep the pile from growing too large, but with fashion shoot after fashion shoot, it feels like it has begun to run away from me. Cheers!
Ha, I don't even do commercial work, it's all a hobby - still every time I go out a new batch of images emerge ;-) Thanks for your insights, Hanz.
Yes, I think noise (grain?) in the Fuji JPEG's is quite okay. Definitely not something I want to "correct", at least.
I remember too, when I started with (digital) photography I also struggled to appreciate the files at that time. I'm not afraid to admit that I was already a pixel-peeper back then (I don't think the term existed), but when I look at them now I think I can appreciate them better. Like you said, you need to embrace it. Sometimes if they don't look "good" (at 100%) I add more grain - this helps mask the digital artifacts you often got with these files. Now and then I quite like very grainy images :-)
My thoughts?! You’ll never catch up… the thing is workflow efficiency and implementing your vision are two different things. One is about marginal improvements when you know what you want. The other is about creating what you want. My recommendation is never consider yourself behind—ie never feel the need to catch up. Work on your craft… and sure improve workflows marginally better.
Actually, that's a good point. I shouldn't be bothered with 'being behind', it just distracts and makes editing photos feel like a tedious chore. But, easier said than done I guess ;-) Thanks Tom, appreciate your comments!
Just to add more to this… It’s all about outcomes—images you like, experiences you have, etc. What that means is if you aren’t under the gun to produce on a timeline, what’s the point of feeling like you’re behind? What should happen when you do more edits and hone your craft, is you get better at doing your craft. Your flow becomes part of the outcome. For example, I spent a week processing a complicated astrophotography image—about 30 hours of work on a single image. The frustrating thing was I was stymied by my lack of success of applying tools and techniques to get to the image I wanted in my mind’s-eye. I am not at the level I wish to be—honestly, that’s always my problem. Still, through practice, effort, and sometimes guidance, we all get better.
Yeah for me it's all self-imposed 'pressure' to get through the photos. But it's not easy to let that feeling go and just think each image I take, edit and finish is simply about getting better at what I like doing :-) Thanks for pointing it out ;-)
I'm a fujifilm shooter as well and I love using film simulations. I still edit my raws in Lightroom, but the sooc jpgs are great for sharing quickly with friends and family
I totally get that Ronald… Back when I was still shooting with Canon, RAW was my default and I spent a lot of time with editing on my Mac. Since switching to Fujifilm, I mainly shoot in JPG, with RAW only as a backup on my second SD card. Just in case… X-Raw Studio is indeed very handy for applying different settings. So my workflow basically matches your description. I’m sure you’re going to like this way of working.. Good luck!!
Thanks Leon! Good to read I'm not doing something utterly weird hehehe ;-) X-Raw Studio is also handy to backup/restore film recipes. Still early days though, the photos in this post are the first ones done this way.
Tip: don't forget to backup the film recipes you made in X-Raw Studio outside the app.
Good point!
Well first off, thanks for the recommendation! That’s so nice of you to share my post! Seems like we were on a similar wave length with our most recent posts as I was also talking about Fuji simulations. I think these photos turned out great, When experimenting with recipes I’ve found I prefer some of the more unique or specific ones, like the Wes Anderson one, yield more interesting results when used out of “context”.
Thank you for your nice comment about the photos. The more I look at them, the more I appreciate them, I think. Interesting thought about using 'looks out of context' 🤔👍Oh and you're welcome, your article was very well worth the read!
I'm torn about this too. I tend to shoot in Velvia or Acros + Red, but also keep the Raw files. I don't have the discipline, tenaciousness, or whatever it is that it takes to open RAW files in X-RAW Studio with the camera tethered to the computer and selecting a preset after the fact. I do import both RAW and JPEGs and tend to evaluate images in Bridge using the jpegs first because they load faster and show me how intended to shoot them, but I often look at the RAWs when I want to see what the image looks like flat. Quite often if I am not sold on the jpeg, I will start from the RAW, but there are also times when Velvia or Acros film sims give me a better starting point. I don't find raws works better or worse than the jpegs coming out of my XT3 or XT50. I also like the Reala Ace I think it's called, available on the XT50 and XT5. I don't go in for custom filters like you mention that mimic someone else's idea of what film stock should look like. I'd prefer to start with something more basic and I'm pretty happy with the basic Fuji options as a starting point. Camera Raw can now open jpegs like raws directly, and that's where I do most of my post processing regardless of RAW or JPEG. Beyond that, I often use Topaz Studio 2 and some preset filters in there if I want to give it a custom look that is mine alone. The only thing you can't do in Camera Raw with jpegs is AI noise reduction, which is a big benefit of working with RAW files. Camera Raw is such a great program and I think the settings are very similar to Lightroom which I have never used because I learned Photoshop before it came around and I couldn't see the point of switching from something I was already happy with. I'd like to choose between RAW or JPEG, but when it comes down to it, I want both and I save both for any image that I keep from a given shoot. I also keep PSD files of my full size post processed images. Maybe I'm not torn, but my relationship with these file formats is definitely complicated. Your six legged horse is a curiosity.
Thank you for your elaborate insights John. I had to sit down for this :-)
The X Raw Studio process is still a bit of work, and not necessarily faster then editing manually, but at least much easier than fiddling through the menu on the camera to change parameters for different outputs (because that is possible too; not sure how crazy you must be to go that way, but alas).
I think camera raw and lightroom share a lot of the same functionality (the raw processing engine etc). No need to change if that works for you (and for sure don't listen to the software companies and camera manufactures telling you otherwise ;-). For my Fuji files I typically use Capture One (an already older version but at least it supports the X-T5) or DxO PhotoLab occasionally. Hmm yes for noise reduction, raw data helps of course, but more and more I tend to embrace the noise. I do like the Fuji JPEG renderings really, the grain / noise is okay actually. That said, I rarely go above ISO 800, unless I photograph at night :)
I agree, the 'default' Fuji film simulations are already quite nice. I do like Astia, Classic Chrome, Nostalgic Negative and Classic Negative. When editing in Capture One these are typically my starting point. The others I haven't really tried so far, maybe I need to give that a go as well.
Cheers and thanks again!
A fast way to change film simms on an XT5 is to assign a button for it. On my XT3, I have assigned the left arrow button (left of Menu/OK) for this function and I find that even more convenient than the much maligned dedicated film simm dial on the XT50 which is a better place for the ISO dial any day of the week.
To set any button, click and hold the Disp/Back button until the screen changes. Scroll through the button locations until you find the one you want to assign a function to it.
Film Simulations is on the first screen, at least on my XT3. Once set, you can quickly change film simms on the fly without having to dig into the menus which is overwhelming.
Yes, using a button for that makes it easy. I use the Custom settings (C1 to C7) for this and swap between them using the Q-button (Quick menu).
I have this Quick Menu setup such that the Custom settings is set to the default selected 'slot' on the quick menu (top-left), making switching quite fast as well. Reason for using the Custom settings is that you can set other parameters as well (aspect ratio or white balance shift for example). Other slots in the Quick menu are to quickly override certain parameters set in the C1-C7 sets. I'm still working on getting this to my liking, but I'm already quite used to this.
JPGs are so versatile these days, too. I remember editing JPG back when Olympus first brought out their mirrorless line and being a bit offput by it. When I originally switched to Fuji in 2019, I was impressed by how much latitude there was then, especially if you are working with curves adjustments rather than aggressively spot editing. The kicker for fuji for me was that their jpg engine seemed to do nicer things with noise than the editing software did with raws. When using fuji, I leaned into it. Importing directly onto the phone, slight edits and then go. It certainly cut down time in editing.
One day, Ronald, you'll get to the last decade of editing!! Those comments certainly gave me a laugh. I try so hard to keep the pile from growing too large, but with fashion shoot after fashion shoot, it feels like it has begun to run away from me. Cheers!
Ha, I don't even do commercial work, it's all a hobby - still every time I go out a new batch of images emerge ;-) Thanks for your insights, Hanz.
Yes, I think noise (grain?) in the Fuji JPEG's is quite okay. Definitely not something I want to "correct", at least.
I remember too, when I started with (digital) photography I also struggled to appreciate the files at that time. I'm not afraid to admit that I was already a pixel-peeper back then (I don't think the term existed), but when I look at them now I think I can appreciate them better. Like you said, you need to embrace it. Sometimes if they don't look "good" (at 100%) I add more grain - this helps mask the digital artifacts you often got with these files. Now and then I quite like very grainy images :-)
Cheers!
My thoughts?! You’ll never catch up… the thing is workflow efficiency and implementing your vision are two different things. One is about marginal improvements when you know what you want. The other is about creating what you want. My recommendation is never consider yourself behind—ie never feel the need to catch up. Work on your craft… and sure improve workflows marginally better.
Actually, that's a good point. I shouldn't be bothered with 'being behind', it just distracts and makes editing photos feel like a tedious chore. But, easier said than done I guess ;-) Thanks Tom, appreciate your comments!
Just to add more to this… It’s all about outcomes—images you like, experiences you have, etc. What that means is if you aren’t under the gun to produce on a timeline, what’s the point of feeling like you’re behind? What should happen when you do more edits and hone your craft, is you get better at doing your craft. Your flow becomes part of the outcome. For example, I spent a week processing a complicated astrophotography image—about 30 hours of work on a single image. The frustrating thing was I was stymied by my lack of success of applying tools and techniques to get to the image I wanted in my mind’s-eye. I am not at the level I wish to be—honestly, that’s always my problem. Still, through practice, effort, and sometimes guidance, we all get better.
Yeah for me it's all self-imposed 'pressure' to get through the photos. But it's not easy to let that feeling go and just think each image I take, edit and finish is simply about getting better at what I like doing :-) Thanks for pointing it out ;-)
I'm a fujifilm shooter as well and I love using film simulations. I still edit my raws in Lightroom, but the sooc jpgs are great for sharing quickly with friends and family
Yes indeed!