Jump to content

Change film simulation in jpg (no RAW available)


Bella Font

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone;)

I shot a series of pictures in JPEG (no RAW available) with the WRONG film simulation: camera was set to VELVIA by mistake while shooting portraits, so they look too saturated!

Is there any way to "automagically" convert the jpeg from one film simulation style (VELVIA) to another one (e.g. Pro Neg Hi)??

Thank you very much for your help!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cpX, thanks for your response!

I am not familiar with FFMPEG nor LUTs, but I see that there seem to be LUTs for fuji's film simulations:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4463001

However, they seem to do this on the RAW file, which I don´t have available.

Are you suggesting that I reverse-apply the VELVIA LUT and then forward-apply the ProNegHi LUT?

PS I have learned my lesson and in the future, I will definitely save in RAW for important pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • The yellowing issue has always been easily fixed in my experience. It's a result of the presence of Thorium. it can be greatly or eliminated by exposure to UV light, so I've on occasion simply left a lens on the window sill for a few days. It also kills fungus, but fungus can create unrecoverable etchings in the glass if it is particularly aggressive. Note: this can be done on cloudy days. UV light penetrates the clouds. Next note: We're speaking a lens and possibly strong sunlight here. It could create a risk of fire the orientation of the lens and its configuration leads to it focusing on a spot. I use tinfoil at the camera end of the lens. It reflects the UV light back up the barrel, giving a double bath to the lenses. 
    • Cheers! I hope to enjoy it as much as I have enjoyed the Spottie I grew up with and which will remain in my bag for life not simply in my bag, but with a roll of film in it, and more to come. I'm coming at the XT5 from a very weird angle. It sort of goes back to unpreparedness. I found myself with my Spotmatic in "the Garden of Ireland" - Wicklow - beautiful county. I was spending a week exploring its beautiful valleys. When the batteries on my Spotmatic failed, I reached into my rucksack for a replacement set. There were none. So I shrugged and decided I had to use my eyes to meter. Things were cheaper then. When picking up processed films the photos came with a new film thrown in, so it was easier to take that decision. Within a few months I was getting nearly 100% keepers - at least in terms of focus and exposure. So circumstances forced me to be ever vigilant of light. I've had many other cameras since then, but the bare bones (it doesn't even have a self-timer) Spotmatic was an ever-present. Expense has forced my hand, though. That and some curiosity. I feel as if my first car is a Ferrari! In fact, when I explained at the shop that I was an experienced photographer looking for a digital which placed the emphasis on stills, they tried to force a €7k model on me. That would be a step too far. Thus my experience in approaching this camera is somewhat unusual. Thus far I have had great enjoyment with it. I was thrilled on opening to box to discover that I was getting utter rubbish from it. Yes!!! I had to learn how to use it! Praise the Lord! I also found a magic button which was the answer to my dreams - the diopter adjustment. That's how naive I was (and am) about the digital offerings - this was an enormous and hugely welcome surprise. I've been learning. The supplied kit lens is not ideal - a 16-80mm zoom. It's pretty sharp, but demanding in manual mode. My old glass reminds me of my father's Opel Senator, which was forgiving to the point that it would comfortably take off at the lights even if you'd mistakenly selected third. My old glass is much more forgiving. At the moment, I'm leaving everything to automatic ISO. I'll wean myself away from that quickly enough, though. in the past I'd retrofitted my son's lenses to my older kit, and found that you needed to be much more precise. I guess when you're designing something which will be adjusted by algorithms then you can make the continuum as tight as you want. My son laughs at me. "You have bracketing mode if you want, Dad.", he'll remind me. "Use burst mode.", he'll add. Some of my habits are deeply ingrained, though. Two other things people find odd about my photography: I never ever use post-processing - what comes out of the camera is the final product. Secondly, I have never once taken photos where the subject is a human being without first requiring a lot of persuasion. 
    • Seconding this! Would be nice to preview a desqueezed image in camera + output it via HDMI.
    • I found my answer. Actually you can assign the profile from a .dng conversion but not from a .tiff conversion. I hadn’t double checked the .dng option.
×
×
  • Create New...