Change, it is somewhat of a constant in life, as contradictory as that may sound. Since LifeInDigitalFilm’s inception about a year and a half ago, the blog has made many little changes, shifts if you will, but never strayed too far from the original purpose. That purpose was to distribute my film emulation presets. However, as with all things in life, its time for a change.

Over the past year and a half, the mere task of emulating film has led me back into the warm embrace of the darkroom arts. I actually shot multiple rolls of each film I emulated to get an accurate feel for each film, both objective and subjective. For a while I was shooting just for the purpose of emulation, but the old Minolta Maxxum 7000 felt wonderful in my hands, and when the test rolls came out of the rinse I started to feel that old magic reignite.

Since the inception of LIDF, I have went from shooting 100% digital to shooting 20% digital and 80% traditional (I truly loathe the moniker ”Analog” for film photography). I still shoot digital for my paying jobs mostly, but almost all my personal work originated in silver salts embedded in gelatin. Keeping a digital focus on LIDF became work, both because I was enamored with the old ways and a guest spot on X-Equals led to becoming a regular contributor to the site. With the gwoing interest in film and a constant workload at X-Equals, LIDF began to suffer.

So recently, while working with Brandon of X-Equals on some upcoming projects, we discussed the future of LIDF. As it is, I am a major part of X-Equals, both in writing and product production, but I didn’t want LIDF to fade gently into the night. We can up with a plan together, which I am going to lay out to you now.

• LIDF has a new direction, one I have been slowly shifting toward over the course of the past year. LIDF is now going to focus on the needs and issues of the Hybrid Photographer. Those who choose to meld the strengths of film with the abilities afforded us by the digital darkroom. Using traditional and modern tools hand in hand to take the art of photography to the next level.
• To further this direction, LIDF will no longer have any digital content. From articles on digital photography to presets, including my film emulation presets. My articles relating to digital will now find a home on X-Equals, as they have been for over a year now.
• The film emulation presets will continue again in the future, they will be found at X-Equals from now on. Make sure to sign up for the X-Equals+Digest to be the first to get your hands on future Cold Storage film emulations. Also, sales of Cold Storage are no longer being done through LifeInDigitalFilm, X-Equals is the sole provider of my preset endeavors. The “Presets for Sale” link at the top of LIDF still works, but all sales are routed through X-Equals infrastructure. Or you can go to the X-Equals Store, instead.
• As X-Equals and LifeInDigitalFilm come more instep with one another, one focusing upon digital whilst the other upon film, there will be changes to LIDF. A new theme is in the works, replacing the excellent Mono theme I have been using. Also a change in hosting is very likely as well. I’ll keep you updated on any expected down time as those events move closer.

So now you know what is changing, here is some of what you can expect.

• Fresh articles on the arcane art of scanning. I started a series a while back on scanning, but other issues prevented me from getting it moving along, however they are well on their way to completion and posting.
• More in depth coverage of the two preeminent pieces of scanning software on the market. SilverFast and VueScan. I have touched upon these before, but both will be recieveing 30-Day Reviews, where I review the software after an intensive month with the software, in the coming weeks. Beyond the reviews, look forward to in-depth scanning workflows for both of these fine pieces of software.
• I’ll keep you up to date on new scanner releases as soon as I find out about them. Plus I will have reviews for the hardware I frequently use and share my thoughts and techniques with you.
• I love Lightrooom, and I find it just as powerful for the Hybrid Photographer as the Digital Photographer. We will look at the non-destructive workflow Lightroom offers, as we use the tools made for RAW files upon our scans.
• Plus, I will completely outline my personal scanning settings, which in the end become my fDNG files. 48-bit TIFFs wrapped up in a warm DNG blanket to provide additional security for your images as well as a litany of metadata to help you utilize your scans in Lightroom.
• We will experiment with some alternative photography methods, from printing in the darkroom from digital “negatives”, “scanning” slides using a DSLR enabling the use of RAW and HDR, to some traditional techniques that you may have never encountered.
• Dig deep into the world of development, from B&W to Color. We’ll even take a look at compounding our own chemisty to take our control of development to the next level.
• And more that I haven’t thought of. There is over 100 years of traditional technique and everyday there is more technology we can apply to the old ways.

So hang around and see what you think.

So let’s see whats coming up in the next moth, as I copy from the draft panel in Wordpress.

• The Hybrid Photographer’s Toolkit: A series of posts in which I share what equipment I use and recommend to fully setup both your traditional and digital darkrooms. The stuff I have to have every day for support my hybrid workflow.
• 30-Days Reviews: I got both SilverFast and VueScan on deck and I will share my thoughts and observations made over a full month spent with each of these killer pieces of software.
• Film Photographer Profiles: As I recently introduced, I will continue to choose some of the most talented film photographers and share their work with you. To see what I mean, look back at my profile on the talented Nick Shere.

So keep dropping by and find out for yourself what I have in store for everyone. And don’t forget to add X-Equals to your required reading as well, especially if you were here for my presets and views on the digital world. Its been a great ride so far, I can’t wait to see where we go next.

Forgot to mention, LIDF now has a Flickr Group. Join up at the LifeInDigitalFilm – The Home of the Hybrid Photographer group and lets talk! If you want to hang out and wax poetice over the digital realm of photography catch me at the X-Equals flickr group, X-Equals on flickr – share, interact, inspire.

Michael W. Gray

Tweet This Post

[Image scanned by ScanCafe from old, cheap 3M film shot on Minolta Maxxum 7000 ]

I really don’t know what triggered this, but it seems the great film vs digital debate has risen from the depths of Flickr groups and message boards and surfaced in the photo blogging community. In the past few weeks I have read pieces from all over focusing on film, and casting it in either a positive of negative light in comparison to digital. Frequently the comments below these posts have exploded into heated discussions from both sides of the aisle.

Film vs Digital seems to be the great argument in the photo community, and has been for a while. Much like the Windows vs Mac debate in the computer world and the right-wing vs left-wing squabbles in politics, film vs digital seems to never die out and occasionally rises to prominence. It seems to be a prominent discussion at the moment.

As a self-described hybrid photographer, using both digital and film in my work and even blending the two together, I fail to understand the need for this discussion. Both have advantages and disadvantages, and a reasonable person can see this. There are cost, creative and stylistic issues for both.

As you can plainly see from my work on LifeInDigitalFilm, from my film emulation presets, to discussion film and scanning, I love film. From my articles on X-Equals, it is plain to see I am just as devoted to digital. I feel as such, I can give a fairly balanced overview of the argument and show, in the basest terms, there really is not debate at all.

I could discuss this on a point by point basis, but that is asinine and could make this article drag on forever. So I am going to make this quick and do a quick pros and cons list for both digital and film photography. This is by no means a thorough listing, but the points that come to mind most frequently when I find myself in this discussion.

Digital Photography

Pros

• Lower cost per shot. You pay for the camera up front and take virtually unlimited shots with no encumbrance of development and scanning costs.
• Highly flexible. Digital allows you liberties with your images that film simply cannot offer. Shoot in Raw and the world is your oyster, you can do most anything your heart desires with Raw processing programs and graphics editors (Lightroom and Photoshop in particular).
• Consistency. Once you understand your camera’s operation, you can consistently get great results, controlling almost all variables. Be it ISO, noise or even color … digital gives you consistent results from frame to frame and shot to shot. You normally know what you will get before you even push the shutter.
• Virtually unlimited shots. With just a few memory cards, you can go out and shoot all day. Each card allows literally hundreds of shots with little to no down time while shooting. Aside from full buffers and the occasional change of card, you can shoot all day without interruption. No need to change film. Plus you get multiple renditions of any particular scene, allowing you the freedom to choose exactly the one you want.
• Shoot now, process later. Digital does not force you to commit to a style beforehand. You can shoot away, in Raw format, and worry about stylistic decisions later. Make a black and white image, boost saturation, re frame shots via cropping. You are not locked in at all, the Raw format free you to make those decisions later.

Cons

• Overabundant options. Nothing can stifle creativity more than unlimited processing options. Upon reviewing each photo, you have to consider your processing options. This process can be more time consuming than actually carrying out the process. This creates the photographer’s version of writer’s block, you don’t know what you want to create because there is little to constrain you. Constraints are challenges, and challenges encourage creativity to overcome them.
• Virtually unlimited shots. Many of use frequently fall back to a “run and gun” mentality when shooting digital. When take countless photos of the same subject, at differing angles or exposures. A simple afternoon outing can translate into thousands of photos quickly. From this glut of images, you have to take time to find the images you really want. If you do not have self control, you can quickly overwhelm yourself when it comes to processing time.
• No surprises. Consistency is a pro, but also a con. Frame after frame, upon import the images tend to have a similar feel, even from shoot to shoot. Your Raw files will have their own feel, unchanging until you start your processing workflow. Before, different films would give you different feels, and that would impact your shooting and change things up. Again, it is easy to fall into a rut without even realizing it.
• Upfront costs. Now this is a bigger issue for some than others. Digital systems can get expensive, as good DSLRs get quickly up into the multi-thousand dollar range. Obviously you don’t have to stay on the cutting edge, but to maximize returns on digital photography, you still want to stay close to the blade. New models drop frequently, each with new desirable features, better noise handling, higher ISO and larger resolutions. And lets not forget the cost of the top-end lenses required to get the most out of these bodies, check the price on good Canon L glass lately? If the prices on those lenses don’t make your checkbook cringe, then this is not remotely an issue. However, for the average photographer it is an issue. And don’t forget flash units and other must-have accessories. I won’t even touch on Digital Medium Format
• Development cycles. Tying into the cost scenario, the rapid development of DSLR technologies keeps bringing out better tech each year. Obviously no one is holding a gun to your head trying to make you let go of your D40, but you have to admit it is getting rather long in the tooth by today’s entry level technology. In the film era, the only real upgrade you had to worry about was new. better film. You rarely had to upgrade bodies, instead you simply changed film. To stay up on image quality in the digital era, you have to be ready to sacrifice some cash to the camera gods, as a DSLR is essentially one huge roll of film that only runs out when you replace your gear or it dies. You can just push your DSLR film speed further and easier than you could with film.

Film Photography

Pros

• Incredible variety. In direct opposition to digital, where your sensor defines how the image you are shooting is rendered and cannot be changed, film photography allows you to change your film at your whim. This leads you to entirely different interpretations of the scene, each unique to the particular film emulsion and format you choose to shoot. Even today, in what many consider the waning days of film, there is still a wide variety of film stocks each providing their own unique rendition of the world on the other side of the lens.
• Wider variety of equipment. As it appears we are in the waning days of film, it is surprising the bargains that can be had on great gear. From 35mm to Large Format, great deals can be found on great cameras and excellent lenses due to the rapid migration of many to strictly digital. I, for example, shoot Canon for digital and Minolta manual focus for film. I have a small selection of lenses for my Canon gear, primarily due to the cost of the equipment … I have just the lenses I need for weddings and portraits, and they ain’t “L” glass either. Now, for less than the price of a Canon Rebel, I have an extensive Minolta collection, anchored by an SRT and an X-700 with a wide variety of Rokkor lenses. These old lenses are every bit as good as most lenses on the market today, and some can put “L” lenses to shame with the right film behind them.
• Simple limitations. As mentioned earlier, limitations can enhance creativity. Shooting film automatically limits you to the film you chose, and the film’s speed. If you are shooting black and white, you will never have a color image from those shots. If you shoot color negative, you will never get the same vivid colors slide film can provide. High-speed film produces some wicked grain, and virtually grain-free film are painfully slow (try shooting at ISO 6 – EI 6 for film purists). You know these limitations going into your shoot and create your images accordingly, sometimes having to get creative to express what you desire to be conveyed to the eventual viewer.
• Forced deliberation. Film had no preview and rarely allows a second chance. To nail a shot you have to expose carefully and still you bracket your shots. The known limit of shots forces you to slow down and work more deliberately. Sure you can do this with digital, but temptation to chimp and delete bad images is overwhelming. Shooting film, you won’t know if you got it right until you develop your film or develop a large degree of faith in your photographic skills.
• Freedom from post. If you sent your film out for development, scanning and prints; your post processing ends at dropping the film off at the lab. What you get is what you get. Now this benefit does not apply to me, as I develop, scan and print my own images from film. This is why I shoot digital for weddings, I would hate to have to develop and scan 25 rolls myself. If you are not going to do any of the developing or scanning yourself you are done. This can be liberating and the excitement of seeing your images for the first time is beyond description.

Cons

• Backside costs. You can easily put yourself in the poor house buying film and paying for development, scans and prints. This cost can be mitigated by going develop only and scanning for yourself or even go all out and start souping your own negatives. However the money saved is offset by time lost. If you shoot a lot and are not restrained in your snapping, you will quickly abandon the thought of film photography and seek sensible refuge in the low cost per shot world of digital.
• Film lock in. Unless you want to get into the rather advanced techniques (although quite simple really) allowing you to change out film mid-roll, you are locked into one ISO and one color rendition for anywhere between 12 and 36 shots. You lose a lot of flexibility by going the film route.
• Technique. Film photography really requires a lot more technical skill to get consistent quality results. Quite a few older cameras have no light meter, so you have to use a handheld meter, use the “Sunny 16″ rule or get good as guessing exposure. Then you have to account for your film’s reciprocity and it’s inherent reciprocity failure, exposure based color shifting and compensating for light temperature by using filters and flash gels. None of this is remotely a concern in the digital world, and these rules and techniques can slow a shooting pace to a crawl until you warp you brain around them. Although understanding these quirks can improve your digital skills, not knowing them will not hamper your abilities as a spectacular digital photographer. And I didn’t even mention the cocepts of pushing and pulling film.
• Filters, filters everywhere. And keep in mind, you will need a lot of different filters for film photography that are simply not needed for digital. In digital photography, all you really need are a few Neutral Density filters and a good Circular Polarizer. For film, you will want split ND’s, color correcting filters, ND’s, Polarizers, Circle Polarizers just to get started. Delve into black and white and you will want a variety of color filters, ranging from reds to blues. I guess you really don’t need these, as you can just shoot straight on, but for advanced techniques you will be wanting them. That said, once scanned you can simulate many of these effects in Photoshop, much like you would with digital, but the desired effect is rarely as good as if you shot with the filter or faked it with a digital image.
• Freedom from Post. Lets not kid ourselves, Photoshop and Lightroom are great tools and can really make an image sing. If you take the hands off approach to photography, you are precluding yourself from utilizing these tools to their fullest ability. Albeit it is freeing to drop off a roll and wait for the final results, you loose a lot of control over you images. Again, you can go the scanning or self-development routes. But again, those methods require an investment of time. While rewarding and giving a great feeling of accomplishment, the do it yourself methods are painfully slow compared to the all-digital methods.

So there, a fairly balanced list of pros and cons for each. There is no right answer for the question of film or digital, so I compromised and use both. For work shots I shoot about 80% digital and 20% film. For personal work its about 80% film and 20% digital, so more or less I am 50/50. When shooting film, I develop myself and then scan in myself, digitizing my film early in the process and working up the images as I would any shot from a DSLR. I still step in the darkroom once and a while and make some optical prints, but I have also been known to make a transparency print from an inverted digital shot and make contact prints on photo paper from my digital work. I blend both photography techniques together on a regular basis, working towards what I envision my final product to be, not limiting myself to a chemical or digital workflow at any time. I do what works best. There is no film vs digital debate in my book.

One other benefit of film I forgot to mention is resolution vs cost. I can much more affordably shoot medium format or large format film and scan in for a high resolution image than invest in a digital medium format system. a $300 dollar camera and a $6 roll of medium format film can easily be scanned into a 40+ megapixel image at home on a consumer grade photo scanner. To get comparable results in the digital world would require an prohibitively expensive setup. Sure, comparing 35mm film to digital is one thing, digital has won that war years ago. But comparing Medium Format and larger film to digital is another situation entirely. When I know I need to go large, I still shoot larger format film.

From my point of view, film and digital where equivalent in resolution around the 10 megapixel mark in DSLRs. Now this is a generalization, as maximum resolution in film really depends on the film used. I would still put 35mm Velvia up against any Pro level DSLR today. Velvia’s resolving power and resolution is still insane to this day, but the DSLR will still win out in the end, especially if you include color accuracy in your rating matrix. I shoot a lot of 35mm film still, but the argument really leans in digital’s favor in this film format. I still love the unique look of each film available, and I love using the inexpensive, high quality gear at my disposal, so I still shoot 35mm film. But as I just alluded to, digital will not be displacing my Mamiya gear any time soon.

So, those are my arguments both ways, take them for what they are. I love both methods and use each every day. I see no need to debate film vs digital, as in my consideration photography is both film and digital. With proper technique, even 35mm can compete with digital any day of the week, and like it or not there is a certain feel to film that digital does not have. Same as records vs CD’s, there is a certain warmth to film.

Now let me know your thoughts on the matter. Fire off your thoughts in the comments below. I would also love to run a series on why you use film still today, so if you would be interested in writing up a piece telling why you still love film, email me at michael@lifeindigitalfilm.com and let me know, I’ll get your opinion up for the world to see, along with some of your work if you would like.

That’s it for now.

Michael

Tweet This Post

First off, if you really want something, be sure to send your wish to Adobe via their feature request system. We can all blather on about what we want on message boards, Flickr, Twitter and the litany of blogs that dot the Internet but if you don’t tell Adobe, they will not know why you feel the feature is important. For some of these points, I have submitted feature requests, others, I see where the feature would help me, but in the long run hinder Lightroom’s scope and performance. To submit your feature requests, head over to the Adobe site or click right here.

That being said, here is my wishlist for the next iteration of Lightroom. Hopefully some of these are added and others are pure flights of my fantasy, but still doesn’t change the fact that these features would make Lightroom absolutely perfect for my needs. I write this from my perspectives of being a wedding/portrait photographer, film photographer and preset developer. First I will cover the few that I have sent in feature requests for, leaving my flights of fantasy for last.

Soft Proofing

This is probably one of the most requested features to be added into Lightroom’s realm of capabilities. Without a doubt this single feature would be of the utmost value to professionals world wide utilizing Lightroom for their post processing. To be able to render you image onscreen, preview what final output will look like via printer or lab would be an absolute timesaver for any serious photographer.

By utilizing ICC profiles to render the image on the screen, demonstrating a likely final print appearance, Lightroom would vastly improve any photographer’s work flow. If Lightroom had a hot-key that would apply your preselected ICC profile to your image to preview output quickly from within Lightroom, instead of having to open in Photoshop to soft proof would be great. Even a develop module selection box featuring all available ICC profiles would help.

What would really be killer though, would be the ability to further utilize the Develop Module while Soft Proofing. Instead of just temporarily displaying the proof, actually allowing you to tweak you image with the profile applied so you can perfect your image’s presentation before export. It seems that it would be simple enough with Lightroom’s design as a metadata editor, not an actual pixel editor. However implemented though, anything that eliminates and otherwise unneeded trip to Photoshop is a welcome addition.

Relative Presets

For the preset developer in me, this would be an absolute godsend. If when developing a preset I could set a slider to be adjusted from its current location a set number of units would allow a wider versatility in prets that are developed.

Here is an example. I am currently developing a set of Wratten filters as a preset toolkit. Currently I am running into issues with exposure compensations caused by use of these filters. Many correcting filters will drop exposure 1/3 to 1 full stop in the process of applying their effect. As it is, I have to hard code the Exposure slider to -25 or -50. It would be incredibly helpful to both the accuracy and eas of use of these presets if they could simply adjust the current setting on the image instead of completely rewriting the exposure value.

If you had perfectly processed you image and it required a +1.25 exposure value to get the image there, applying any filter would automatically reset the Exposure slider to the preset’s defined value. If that adjustment applied to -.25 to the current value, it would then it would simply back the exposure off to +1, altering the image in a manner closer to the actual effect of the real filter.

And this would not simply be useful to my emulation presets, but would be of value to any other preset designer that see a need to manipulate Exposure, Recovery, Black or even Contrast. Presets are designed relative to the image they are being developed on. If the presets were relative to the image settings and not simply a predefined script of settings, theoretically the preset would be consistent in its application to all images, making an equivalent alteration to any image from its starting point, completely unrelated to the image that the preset was originally designed for.

As to implementation, I feel it would be as simple as adding a check box and value box to the Save Preset dialog in Lightroom (and ACR for that matter to maintain compatibility). If a value needs to be relative, then simply check the box and set the relative value in therms on + or -. Lightroom could even pull the difference from 0 automatically and then allow the designer to override.

Either way, this would enhance the preset tools Lightroom provides and allow Lightroom users to create even more useful and versatile presets that extend beyond pure image enhancement to honest to goodness tools, ala Photoshop Actions.

Input Scanning Interface

This could be either applied as a part of Lightroom, or as an input plug-in. I don’t care if this is designed by Adobe, LaserSoft Imaging or Hamrick, creator of VueScan. I know that Lightroom is designed as a cataloging tool with RAW processing capabilities, but I shoot a lot of film and Lightroom handles the scans beautifully. 48-bit scans in Lightroom react almost as well as RAW files do, so let us add a utility that allows import from film, scan to 48-bit, output as DNG and automatically import the images into Lightroom.

As more film photographers and those who have switched to digital scan their film stock, many are finding Lightroom capable of handling much of the adjustments required to digitize the images. Lightroom also adds the benefit of the original scan never being manipulated, which is good if they scan once and wish to reinterpret scans.

It is easy enough to scan in VueScan to a set folder as 48-bit Tiff based DNG files, however to be able to do so in Lightroom and have Lightroom automatically import whilst you continue scanning would save me time and effort. As it is, I have to scan my entire folder contents, usually on rolls of film, taking hours. Then I have to import them into mu Lightroom catalog and generate my 1:1 previews. This can take time, if Lightroom automatically grabbed the newest scan, added it to the library and created the preview whilst I scanned the next frame, I would save the 5-15 minutes of import time at the back end. Not to mention that I can start processing images immediately, while scanning continues.

This would be good for me and the rest of the small, but growing, film community.

Relocate Derivative Files

This one is courtesy of my good friend Brandon Oelling from X-Equals. He points out that whenever you Edit in Photoshop…Lightroom generates the derivative PSD of TIFF in the same folder as your original. For many workflows, this can be an issue, as you want to have your processed images in a completely different location from your originals for the sake of clarity and organization. While Brandon provides a good workaround in his post +THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS on X-Equals, it is a time consuming workaround that Adobe could easily eliminate with one, simple change.

When in the Edit In Photoshop… dialog, simple at a File Location option beneath the output image settings. Simply input your folder of choice, and Lightroom creates a raster PSD or TIFF and places it in that folder, creating a new folder in your Lightroom catalog with said image automatically. This would help remove filmstrip crowding and accidentally reworking a process image when you really wanted to manipulate the original RAW image again. Simple fix that would help many photographers out there keep things organized.

As a side to this feature request, it would also be beneficial to stack images from disparate folders. This allows you to keep the original and derivative together, whilst at the same time, not destroying your organizational schema on your hard drive. This should be a separate request, but I mention it here because it seems easy to do and goes hand in hand with relocating derivative files.

For more insight as to why Brandon feels that these are important points for Adobe to address, check out his series on Digital Asset Management.

Now for the pipe dreams

Grain Addition

This is great for me, good for those who want a film look and completely worthless to the rest of the Lightroom community. I really wish Lightroom had a way to add grain to images. Three sliders that represent size, density and coarseness and proceed to clump pixels together to simulate grain. I would like this to generate the final image with grain ala Silver Efex Pro, not as an overlay as typical in Photoshop.

The way I see it functioning would be similar to the way the clone tool works, but creates areas of a solid color with a definite edge to them. By no means easy to implement, but it would allow me even better film emulations by factoring in grain into my presets. This is a very niche request, and the Lightroom team would be half insane to implement it, but I feel the ability to add grain to an image would be spectacular and make Lightroom an even more useful tool to a portion of the target audience.

Obviously, the Grain Simulation would have to be preview at 1:1 zoom. It would be a processor intensive procedure that would take forever to render if it is applied to the whole image during post processing. But you would only want to see the grain at 1:1 anyways, as grain shouldn’t really be so large as to see it in a normal image preview at all. Sure it would add time at export, but it would be well worth the price to avoid having to fake grain in Photoshop or run the image through Silver Efex Pro just to get grain applied after the image is rendered. Rendering grain at time of RAW export would create a more high quality presentation in my opinion.

But again, it is a pipe dream.

Limited Layer Support

This would be useful for many times when layer may be needed to process an image. If Lightroom could support layering of images, such as 4 Virtual Copies of a file, and provide basic Layer Masking support, I could eliminate my need for Photoshop about 50% of the time.

In application I see this as very limited support. Allow me to stack together up to 5 Virtual Copies into a new Virtual Copy. All adjustments to the layers should be done before the layering process, as I believe that in layer mode, Lightroom should not allow for further manipulation of the layers. If you want to manipulate a layer midstream, go back and re-edit the original Virtual Copy that was brought into the layer image.

Now simply allow only masking of layers in layer mode. This would allow multiple exposures to be blended, different presets to be applied to different parts of the image and even double exposures if the layers are from different images. When the file is exported, the Layer Copy would cull data from the Virtual Copies and use that data to generate a fresh Tiff or Jpeg from the combined data. Again, this avoids Photoshop and creates a pristine output file generated only from RAW data, never having to deal with raster images in the interim. A similar process can be carried out in Photoshop via Smart Objects, but it is a rather time consuming work flow, as I detailed on X-Equals recently.

Layering more complicated than this is beyond the scope of Lightroom, and many would argue my proposal is as well. However I see this as a natural extension of Lightroom, and with the limited functionality, should not create a lot of added overhead while providing a way to create images while in RAW without manipulating pixels.

Again, a pipe dream.

Lens Perspective Correction

PTLens is an awesome plug-in for Lightroom, but why can Lightroom not have some of the basic features on its own? I would think that basic keystoning could be done in Lightroom fairly easily. Since Lightroom is based solely on the editing and interpretation of metadata, would it be so difficult to institute basic image correction for lens distortion?

Case in point, doing a large group portrait with a wide angle or even fish-eye lens. As it is you could retouch the image in Lightroom and then have to rely on PTLens or Photoshop to correct distortion for you before you crop. If image distortion correction was provided in Lightroom, you could simple correct the distortion, crop the image and then export the image as you desire. Again this provides the benefit of you image being produced solely from RAW data and not requiring further manipulation of pixels on the final rendered, raster image.

Although this seems simple enough to me, there may be issues under the hood I am not considering. So for now, I am going to again chalk this up as a pipe dream.

So What Can You Do?

So we can sit here and whine about what we desire all we want, but if your desires are not made know directly to Adobe, then you are simply preaching to the choir. If you see something on this list you think is needed in future revision of Lightroom, or if you have an idea that would really take Lightroom up a notch, let the Lightroom team know through Adobe’s Feature Request/Bug Report Form on Adobe.com. Surely they are already working on some of these ideas, but it never hurts for them to know that you, their customer, desire these features.

There is no sense in cluttering up Lightroom with features that have little or no demand, which is why I keep my pipe dream requests to myself for the time being. What makes Lightroom special in comparison to Photoshop, is that it is a limited, scope precision tool, like a scalpel. Photoshop on the other hand, is a massive application that does almost everything and then some. A behemoth of a program to master, and is not as streamlined as Lightroom.

We need Lightroom to stay trim, if it grows too big it will slow more and become another piece of bloated-code. However, new features are needed to enhance an already great product. Lightroom has an edge on Aperture at the moment, and it has to continue to evolve to stay ahead, otherwise photographers will start to drift away to Aperture, much like many Aperture users are starting to currently drift to Lightroom.

The Lightroom team has to balance new features with performance, and can only devote so much time and money on developing new features. Your feedback helps them gauge what people are clamoring for and what people really need. This helps them stay focused and provide a better product on a timely basis.

Just food for thought …

Michael

Tweet This Post

I have shot 15 rolls of Kodachrome 64 in the past year, with 6 more in the freezer. If you have some, or decide to buy some, I recommend you get out and shoot it soon, as Dewayne’s, the only K-14 processor in the world, announced continued support only through 2010. Once they close up the K-14 line, it’s all over. If you have any left, your only option will be cross processing in B&W chemistry.

Kodachrome was and is the defacto standard when it comes to archival quality slides. Although they fade rather rapidly under the light of a projector, in dark storage, they colors stay true to the day they were shot. A quick search of the US National Archives will bring you scans of Kodachromes shot in the late 1930’s that look as crisp and colorful as if they were shot yesterday. That longevity will be missed.

What will furthermore be missed will be Kodachrome’s magical appearance. I can’t describe the nuance that is Kodachrome, it it too subtle to define in words. Only a projection from a Kodachrome slide will ever do it justice. Kodachrome is difficult to scan, expensive to process and now scarce to get. But it is a film worth the expense and hassle, and I am glad to have gotten back into film photography to enjoy Kodachromes waning days.

In Kodak’s press release, they recommend two excellent replacement films for the Kodachrome lover. The first is KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME E100G, which is a beautiful film in it’s own right. Not to disparage it, it lacks the subtlety of Kodachrome. However, I will concur it is the closest option you will get in an E-6 film (also try Fuji Astia if you shoot a lot of people, as I feel it renders better skin tones than E100G.) Kodak’s second recommendation is their new EKTAR 100 negative film. Which is a wonderful option, as it has it’s own special nuance that no other film comes close to (I will be posting an in-depth review of the film in the coming weeks). However EKTAR poses two problems. First, it is a negative film, not a slide film. As fine grained as it is, EKTAR still cannot capture the feel of a slide. Secondly, EKTAR is special in it’s own right, with a great feeling to the colors, giving me a feel of the seventies in 2009. However it does not convey the timeless Kodachrome does. In short, there is no replacement for Kodachrome.

What I hope Kodak does, is spend some R&D money and produce us a new E-6 film that will carry the Kodachrome name and emulate the feel. A lot of Kodachrome’s magic is in the K-14 process itself, but if Kodak can give us a film as nuanced as EKTAR or as beautiful as PORTRA VC they can bring us an E-6 film that can capture some of the true-to-life nature of Kodachrome. Ektachrome is great, but it doesn’t bring the bang like Kodachrome.

For now, go out and get some Kodachrome and shoot a roll or two. Kodak estimates current stock will last through Fall 2009, however I am going to guess it will get scarce in the next month or so. If you don’t shoot fil anymore, but want a feel of Kodachrome, try my two Lighroom/ACR Presets I have on the site. Try my current Kodachrome 64 and my Kodachrome 25. They will get you close, but they won’t get you there. I have two emulation test rolls shot awaiting development currently of Kodachrome 64. Once I get them back I will do a fresh emulation and a Camera Profile for the results. That will be a while however.

In the end, today feels a bit like the day the music died. My heart sunk a little when I saw the news on Twitter. But we move on. There are great films still available and will continue to be, and out digital cameras and Adobe’s magical tools will provide us with the means to bring us a little closer to the magic again. To me, today is a day i will remember for quite a while. It came as no surprise, the writing was on the wall and i was stocking up to complete a personal project. The finality of it still hits home.

Have a great day,

Michael W Gray

Tweet This Post

Okay, I still have not written an actual article, and I don’t want to release a preset tonight as I have released quite a few this week…I will have a new black and white preset up tomorrow however. I did want to take a few minutes though to say s few things that dropped into my mind today.

So, today I opened my freezer and saw rolls of film that I have shot over the past year, awaiting development. The picture above is one of the frames snapped on the rolls I had developed. I also had my roll of Fuji Press Film 800 I bought a while back developed finally, so an emulation is a week or so away, but I digress. As I dropped the film off at Wal-Mart, as I told them “develop only, no prints” I got a look of confusion from the clerk at the counter. Almost like, why are you even shooting film if you don’t want prints. I didn’t say anything, it just jump started my brain.

On the drive back over to my mother-in-laws house to pick up my wife, I was asking myself “Self, why did buying a fancy new DSLR lead your right back into the world of film photography?” Now I know the answer for the one roll of Press Film, I am going to emulate this film for LIDF so I can get a look similar to this film on any of my digital shots. That did not explain the other three rolls I just got processed. It had me wondering, and I came upon my answer, shooting film makes me a more disciplined photographer. Shooting film also keeps me firmly in touch with the past and makes me appreciate the advances in the field of photography. Plus, shooting film seems organic, like a natural determined act. That makes no sense, but its how I feel.

I think it is refreshing to get out with a film camera and a roll or two of film. I know I only have 24/36 photos to take, and that each one has a defined cash value. I think about my shots, I don’t take 20 frames of the same subject to find the right one later, I take time to find the correct shot and take it….then I move along. I am not saying there is anything wrong with taking a long series of photos to get the right shot, but it forces you to think more when those same 20 shots esentially end your shooting for the day.

I love the feeling of opening the envelope and seeing my photos for the first time. I still can’t develop C-41, so i can’t say pull the negative out of the spool, but it is the same feeling. This is the first time my eyes have seen these images. On my DSLR, I can see everyimage instantly, there is no wondering. When you have that perfect shot, you smile and move on, you are out shooting after all. With film, the second your mirror blocks out your viewfinder, that is the last time you will see anything approximating that image until you open the envelope. And when you are sitting in your car in the parking lot and see that you got the perfect shot, you rejoice…celebrate even. The time removed from the act of shooting allows you this luxury. You can enjoy the beauty of your shot for the first time and breath it in. Your LCD does not go black, reminding you to get shooting again. This is Zen.

Then when you look at the images, the color and tone, the feel of film is different. Which that is what LIDF is all about, bringing that feeling to digital. But it is only inspired by the original film. Making your perfect shot look like it was taken on Velvia is not the same as actually capturing it on Velvia. Both feelings are great, but there is just something about the old-fashioned way…Not saying that using my presets is not also great…but it is not the same. But it may soon be the only way to live that moment with your favorite film.

Please, take some time and shoot a roll of film if you have not done so lately. Get back in touch with the past. You don’t even have to have a great SLR, a good point and shoot film camera works great…hell, even a disposable will remind you what it felt like before. If you have never shot film, give it a chance. Take a film camera out for a day, maybe even learn to develop the film yourself. It is really fulfilling, but that is just me.

Well that ends my rant, on to some items I want to cover before I log off for the night.

First I would like to ask you to take a jump over to profiPhotos. Markus just posted a new video tutorial today on making HDR images using HDRSoft’s Photomatix Pro plugin with Lightroom. It is very informative, as is his entire site. If you love Lightroom, this is a definite must visit. Just make sure to give him a visit!

Speaking of both Markus and Photomatix, I want to remind you that there is only one week left in the Presetting Lightroom photocontest on Flickr. Markus and I both adminstrate the group, and have been trying to kick up the activity level there. We have a photocontest running currently with HDRSoft’s Photomatix Pro as the grand prize and three copies of my Cold Storage collection floating around for the top 3 finishers. There are not many entrants thusfar and the odds are pretty good to take home some type of prize. So please, come by and enter one of you preset processed photos…and by all means, feel free to enter a photo of your’s processed with a LifeInDigitalFilm preset, I have no supporters entered in the contest so far. Follow the link HERE TO ENTER!

So that is it for the evening, come back for a new preset tomorrow.

Until then,
Michael

Tweet This Post