Time to Play

Recently, I'm using my camera in "Raw+JPEG" mode with a film simulation despite the fact that, exposure-wise, the result on the camera display might be misleading when chimping. I chose the "F1a" film simulation of my Fuji S5pro because it has good dynamic range and a nice color rendition. However - about 98% of the time, I don't keep the JPEG. I just want it as a comparison ("what would my camera do?"), and as an inspiration ("how could one possible interpretation of the raw data look like?").

How comes? After working with the LR presets by Brandon Oelling (and if you followed my recent output you surely recognized one or the other in my photos) I realized that there's more to photography than reproducing a most accurate rendition of a scene a) as we remember it or b) as it was recorded by the camera, and that is c) the creative rendition of "traditional/legacy" camera gear and film (which includes hue shifts, vignetting, overexposure, etc. etc.).

So what I am doing at the moment is a) look at the camera JPEG and see if I like it, if it fits my memory of what I saw, ie. what made me release the shutter first place, attracted my eye, and then b) optimize that with the raw file to get the most impact out of it (until I say "yes, that's it!") and then it's c) time to play - I create a virtual copy of my edit from the raw data and then I start playing... sometimes with presets, sometimes just going crazy all by myself (I also try monochrome versions in that stage often).

Time for some examples. I made the photo of this scene on my Saturday morning walk with Toni in a nearby forest (well, Burghausen is drowning in the "traditional" layer of November fog at the moment, I try to make the best out of it). This forest has many many beech trees and their turning leaves color everything in a nice and glowing orange/brown/red. Here's the in-camera JPEG with the F1a film simulation:


Foggy Forest (F1a JPEG) (FinePix S5Pro, 1/35s @ ISO 800; f/8, 62 mm DX)

Well, that's nice, but it's a bit dull and doesn't transport that ethereal quality of the fog that was hanging low amidst the trees good enough. For the most part, it's an exposure problem though: I should have overexposed this by one stop, sacrificing the few highlights that would burn out for a brighter appearance of the scene in general (which was not an option because I had no tripod with me, hence the ISO800).

I tried to correct that mistake with my own raw development in Lightroom, which looks like this:


Foggy Forest (own edit of raw data) (FinePix S5Pro, 1/35s @ ISO 800; f/8, 62 mm DX)

Yes, that's much more like it, it's definitely a keeper now!

The important part for me is to start "playing" only when I have something that already is worth keeping and a nice photo (in my very humble opinion, of course). I think it is the wrong approach to try to find something worth keeping by playing with presets and whatnot in a photo that would not be a keeper otherwise.


Foggy Forest (based on the "x=infra+ready" preset) (FinePix S5Pro, 1/35s @ ISO 800; f/8, 62 mm DX)