Classic Chrome vs Kodachrome | Mike Miriello
Since Fuji’s X-T1 update in December 2014, we’ve all been given a new film process version called ‚Classic Chrome‘. From everything I’ve read, it’s goal is to simulate Kodak’s Kodachrome film, and it looks beautiful. I really like Classic Chrome. So knowing that its goal was to simulate Kodachrome, my curiosity was piqued as to how good a job Fuji did on matching it. Before we begin, we have to iron-out a couple things:
- Kodachrome is a film type, and with all film, it has to be developed in a darkroom before any prints can be created from its negative. The developing process allows a photographer to make many changes to the final image such as exposure, contrast, dodging, burning, etc. that will change the default and neutral look of the original exposure.
- Fuji requires the photographer to shoot in RAW in order to adjust the camera process version in post-production. This is a good thing, especially for this test, because it ensures we are adjusting the foundation of the image vs a lossy/compressed version of the image.
- Really Nice Images (link) has gone through the painstaking process of creating iconic film simulation presets for Lightroom. Keep in mind that these film simulations are not the same as a camera process. Camera processes adjust the starting point of an image, a preset adjusts the actual sliders and adjustment settings. They are both trying to achieve the same thing, but a camera process is far superior as it doesn’t actually adjust the variables of the image aside from the digital foundation its built upon………..
Source: www.thedowntowncreative.com
Fuji X100T
Do you love my work and want to support me? If you’re planning on buying camera gear, you can check out above-noted links. Prices remain the same for you, but a small percentage of your purchase value is valued back to me. Thank you!
Previous articleThe fast compact normal conundrum | Ming TheinNext article Fuji WCL-X100 and Ricoh GR | Calogero Randazzo