Just got around to looking at some shots testing my first roll of Ektar 100 from a while back - yes yes I am slow and loose track of things easily. Thought I would leave you with this for the weekend. Just happened to be shooting my D7000 as a "known quantity" while seeing what stupid things I can do with Ektar 100 in 35mm. Like most of you I have this strange sort of anxiety about shooting "important" things with something you never used before. Like usual I just shot some stupid stuff about 3 feet from my front door. Hey at least I gathered the energy to go outside.
So here is the Ektar 100 with NOTHING done to it. I scanned it myself at a stupidly high resolution and can assure you that this is a neutral scan. Heck I didn't even sharpen it. Nothing. Well I did set the black point in the scanner software to something reasonable. Shot with a Nikon FE and 60's vintage Nikkor 50mm f1.4.
Ta….Daaaaaa. Here is the D7000 version with a similar contrast curve and black point (you should see it before that).
What the hell happened to my color - why the heck did I point my camera over here in the first place. Maybe If I use NX2 and set the WB to daylight and the picture control to vivid it might help things a bit. Why not.
No dice. Maybe if I use ACR6 and jack up the contrast and vibrance like everyone does on every single image. And also use a vivid camera profile. Maybe it will get better. Here we go, hold on to your hats - this will make it look good.
Hmmmm. Maybe film does look good - sometimes. I know there are a few of you that somehow are think that this is some sort of trick or that I have somehow not done what I "should" have to the D7000 image. Addressing the first - No tricks, no there was no filter on the film camera - NONE, not even a UV or 1A - Nothin'. I wish I were patient enough to actually shoot these on different days with the EXACT same light and water/wind conditions with the EXACT same boats. If I were I would put that patience to far far more nefarious purposes that hoodwinking a couple of people that film actually looks great. Or maybe I am not telling the truth about what I did in Photoshop to the film image - hmmmmm - I cross my heart - no tricky-ness. If I were going to resort to that - I would be a whole lot more tricky.
As to not treating the D7000 image properly - Yea I could make it look better. Screw it why bother. I could play around in Color EFEX Pro 8 different ways. Heck I could spend a year figuring out how to render it better. Why bother. There was pink in the sky - now it's gone in the D7000 images - see the color of the sunlight in the film - still golden but the clouds and sky had a pinkish purplish hue against a very set of cool shadows. Why did the D7000 not see this? I have no idea but this is not just "bad scanning" or "bad film". I notice this type of thing with the way digital renders scenes with wildly varying color temps of light in the same frame constantly. If I were a landscape guy this would drive me nuts trying to figure out how to get the whole warm/cool contrast and color back into images. Personally I am more concerned with how much more work digital capture is in making skin look great (color and texture).