ITALIAN RATIONALISM WITH THE X-TRANS SENSOR (X-T1 REVIEW CHAPTER 4)

Fujifilm X-T1 - Fujinon XF 56mm (80mm eq.) w/polarizer
1/170" f11 ISO 400
Converted into monochrome with Silver Efex Pro 2

The brightly lit buildings and empty spaces of the Foro Italico compound in Rome make one of the most celebrated masterworks of the Italian Rationalism, as well as the ideal subject to test the monochrome attitude of last generation's Fuji X-Trans sensor. As Fuji-related posts build up on this blog, I realize that my announced review of the X-T1 has already started, and will continue with further "chapters", each focused on a different aspect of the camera. PhotoGraphia readers could call it an "in-progress review". Of course, as far as the imaging pipeline is concerned, X-T1 and X100S are to be considered exactly the same.

For different reasons Fujifilm X cameras, like Leica and Sigma, play in a different league. They can be considered as "statement cameras", and in most cases their owners consider themselves as "aware" photographers -of course being good photographers is another kettle of fish-. No offence meant to other brands' buyers, we are speaking here of imaging tools that can not be bought by accident. At the most, people choose them out of snobbishness. So having in mind this kind of photographer, the effectiveness of the monochrome workflow is something worth focusing on.

Since black&white dedicated cameras like the Leica M Monochrom or the Phase One Achromatic make the ideal while unreachable (for most humans) tools in this respect, setting our camera's picture mode to monochrome, choosing perhaps a red filtering, is definitely a tempting option. All the more so if our camera is an X Fuji, thus capable of delivering mind blowing out-of-camera jpgs: set to b&w, filter in red, tweak low-light curve to dark, add a notch of contrast and you are done, right? Wrong.

Too good to be true. View your file 100% in your PC, and you will find that the marvellous blue sky you shot earlier in the day now shows the most irksome blotch artifacts, along with the inevitable white border randomly marking the edges of trees, roofs, antennas and lampposts. As I already described in a previous post, the X-Trans sensor doesn't perform the miracle, alas. Moreover, in out-of-camera monochrome jpg, the lowlight areas tend to be too blacked out, while the highlights show too steep a curve towards their maximum level. Of course such an ooc-mono-jpg could be good "enough" for the intended use sometimes, but people investing in gear like this are supposed to be a little picky, at least.

This is why I tried to fine-tune a reliable monochrome workflow for my X-T1 and X100S cameras. The aim of which is to obtain a tonally rich, low-contrast and flat file. Like we used to do during the film era, when a dumb and muddy black&white negative was considered as the ideal base for a good printing (editing) process. "Expose for the lowlights and develop for the highlights" was the rule of thumb at the days. Nothing much has changed. So here is my how-to list for the shooting part:

• Shoot raw+jpg (raw is a good parachute, just in case).
• Set Dynamic Range to "Auto". This involves going up to ISO 800 in daylight sometimes, but believe me, it's the only way to get smooth and less likely to be blown-out highlights. Plus, the X-Trans sensor gives you more than enough headroom as far as image noise is concerned, so don't worry.
• Set film simulation on "Negative Pro Standard", which ensures smoother color gradation (yes, you need good color to get good black&white). Forget all those crappy "Provia", "Velvia" and "Astia" presets. They are marketing's and not photographer's invention. A name reminescent of a great film doesn't necessarily make a good digital capture.
• Set white balance on "Auto": Fuji's is the best I have known in my entire digital photographer's life.
• Set color on "0".
• Set sharpness on "-1", in order to avoid or at least reduce the impact of the white border issue.
• Leave highlights and shadows on "0".
• Set noise reduction to "-1". Why give up the awesome X-Trans sensor's detail rendition when you can selectively take care of noise in post-processing, if needed? Have you ever tried to apply Noise Ninja or D-Fine to the smooth areas of a landscape (the sky, for instance), while leaving the crispness of the detailed areas (rocks, building, the sea surface) intact?
• Enjoy yourself.

As for editing, either you are an X-T1/X100S user or not, follow the steps listed below (which are a copy/paste from a previous post on the same matter):

• At home, open your file in your photo-editing application and tweak levels in order to get a full-range histogram, from far left to far right (a brightness-calibrated monitor is de rigueur).
• Launch Nik Silver Efex Pro plug-in and select the red or yellow color filter to begin with. You can also tweak filter's hue and/or intensity according to your needs.
• Second step: generously push the luminosity/midtones slider to the left. This will exceedingly darken your image: it's all right.
• Now try and recover highlights by alternatively pushing the dynamic-brightness or the white-enhancer cursor to the right (the former could cause halos around objects surrounded by a plain dark sky, while the latter could give too much contrast). This is when your photograph almost takes its final looks.
• Never use "structure" sliders on the whole image: this will spoil your job with fake-sharpness borders and artifacts. At most, sharpen your image locally (see next step).
• Use Nik's control-point technology to brighten/darken/contrast/uncontrast/sharpen/soften limited areas of your image: you can activate as many of them as you wish, and -believe me- the whole job is a breeze.
• If your composition needs a little visual help, maybe you would add some vignetting to it. You better postpone this enhancement and use your photo-editing application: Silver Efex does a lousy vignetting job.
• And now the final step. Go to the toning options and select a hue value of 30° with a 20% of "silver tone". This is the way I always warm up my black&white tone a little bit, in order to be sure that the CMYK printing conversion will remain on the warm side (I hate random blueish tones in my printed photographs). Of course cold-tone lovers can pick their tone values accordingly.
• Back to the photo-editing application, check the histogram: sometimes the highlight slider needs a little adjustment.
• The final touch, if needed, is a smooth curve tweaking, in order to get exactly the brightness and density your photograph deserves.
• Proudly post/print your photograph and be happy.

My in-progress Fuji X-T1 review will continue in the next few days, so stay tuned.

Chapter 1 of my X-T1 in-progress review can be found here.
Chapter 2 can be found here.

Fujifilm X100S - Fixed Fujinon 23mm (35mm eq.) prime
1/750" f8 ISO 200
Converted into monochrome with Silver Efex Pro 2

Fujifilm X100S - Fixed Fujinon 23mm (35mm eq.) prime
1/1200" f8 ISO 400
Converted into monochrome with Silver Efex pro 2

Comments

[Fabio Urbinati]

Gentilissimo e bravissimo Gianni, sono un appassionato fotografo di bianco e nero che ammira da sempre il suo lavoro e la sua competenza. Mi chiamo Fabio Urbinati di lavoro faccio l'Oculista e non a caso ho dedicato da sempre il mio interesse e la mia passione a tutto ciò che ha a che " vedere " con all'immagine in generale e con fotografia in particolare.
Sin dai tardi anni 70 ho passato ore in camera oscura stampando bianco e nero con qualche soddisfazione, e ora passato con entusiasmo e pochi tormenti da più di un decennio al digitale, cerco invano di ricreare la magia della stampa analogica coi nuovi procedimenti.
Ho finalmente capito che sebbene il mezzo sia rimasto sostanzialmente lo stesso, i substrati e i materiali attuali non possono trasmettere la stessa sensazione materica di quello che l'analogico rendeva , sebbene con molti limiti anch'esso, come un continuum di tonalità che passavano senza soluzione e senza strappi dal bianco brillante al nero profondo.
Il digitale ha varcato le colonne d'Ercole della resa materica sostituendo per lo più la stampa con la visione su schermo, e in questo ha perduto un po' della magia della pellicola, acquistando però altre capacità e spalancando modalità di sperimentazione e ricerca virtualmente infinite. Ma la stampa rimane per me come per tutti quelli che fanno fotografia, il vertice dell'espressione di questo mezzo. Per cui dopo aver letto con attenzione i suoi articoli vorrei porle alcune quesiti su questo aspetto del flusso di lavoro.
Tutta questa lunga premessa per dirle che anch'io alla fine di una transizione lunga e non indolore ho abbracciato definitivamente la nuova tecnologia di stampa e dopo numerosi tentativi ed errori ho forse avuto la mia illuminazione sulla strada di Damasco quando quasi per caso ho avuto modo di provare le fotocamere della Fuji che mi hanno ridonato il piacere della fotografia ragionata e non compulsiva. Adoro la resa di queste fotocamere e di loro obiettivi.
Per cui l'articolo che ho letto mi ha molto interessato.
Vorrei perciò chiederle perché secondo lei l'impostazione del tipo di pellicola dovrebbe essere così importante nella resa finale dei file RAW, visto che a quanto ne so questa resa dovrebbe riguardare solo i JPEG ? qualcosa mi sfugge ? Uso anch'io Silver Efex PRO 2 che adoro, ma questo dovrebbe agire sui dati grezzi della conversione RAW fatta da ACR di Photoshop. o no? Quale influenza possono avere su di essi le impostazioni della resa dei JPEG ?
La prego, mi chiarisca questo punto.
P.S. mi scuso per averle scritto in italiano su un blog interamente in inglese, ma pur leggendo correntemente tale lingua ho grosse difficoltà a scriverci.
Se ritiene di potermi rispondere anche privatamente sarò lieto di ascoltare il suo parere, altrimenti prenda queste osservazioni come un piccolo contributo alla discussione.
Ringraziandola comunque per la qualità del suo blog e delle sue immagini la saluto amichevolmente.
Fabio Urbinati Ancona

[Jim]

Absolutely stunning images and a great write up. I look forward to the next discussion. If you feel it appropriate, I would appreciate some discussion/comparison with your Olympus OMD E1.

[Gianni Galassi]

Jim,
thank you very much.
Regarding the X-T1 vs. E-M1 discussion/comparison, I'd feel it more than appropriate. Except that a direct comparison between two cameras would require methods I don't know and equipments I don't have. But you will easily find "scientific" side-to-side tests on the Internet.
As I said before though, both cameras deliver awesome image quality. Their difference is mainly a matter of ergonomics, so your hands will judge better than your eye.

[Gianni Galassi]

Thank you Fabio.

I try to summarize in English your comment.

- You are/have been a nostalgic of the black&white film era, as both the visual rendition and tactile pleasure of the digital imaging/output don't meet your taste.
Let me disagree on this: obtaining a tonally rich monochrome file is not more difficult than obtaining a well-printable black&white negative. It's only a matter of deeply knowing your gear and software, having a well calibrated monitor and "translating" your valuable darkroom experience into the digital workflow through a slow, meditated and painstaking trial-and-error process.
On the other hand if you miss the inherent technical limits of the photo-chemical imaging system, I have no objection. Nothing beats the appeal of a vinyl LP if you are more interested in old turntables and vacuum-tube amplifiers than in music. Or the fascination of a sailboat if your goal is enjoying the wind instead of getting to a destination. One's pleasure is never objectionable.
As for printing, have you ever tried to order a pro laboratory a Lambda or Lightjet baryta print? Give it a try, and you will never miss an enlarger anymore, believe me. I tried White Wall, a Germany-based online service: simply fabulous.

- You ask me why I recommend camera settings which will have no influence on the raw file. Thank you for asking, as my writing wasn't clear enough in this regard.
You are right, raw files contain raw data which are unbiased by your personal camera settings. Though, if you shoot raw only, you can still apply my suggested in-camera settings to your raw-developer application. This will widen your monochrome potential in Silver Efex.
Nonetheless I like the idea of obtaining a good workflow based on jpg instead of raw. Why make it more complicated if there is a chance to have it simpler? As in many aspects of life, less is more: the lesser the process, the better your imaging. In other words, why bother with vinyl if you simply want to listen to music?

[Robert Jones]

I don't often write on web sites, but I must make an exception here. I originally came to your site looking for examples of the Sigma DPM2 and DPM3, which I use, and then found you also use the X-T1. I was intrigued by your B&W work and started going through your web site.

I am so impressed by the excellence of your photography, the quality of your writing (most native English speakers can scarcely construct a lucid sentence yet alone a paragraph), and the usefulness of the content.

A few days ago, I bought and downloaded one of your photography books (Sushi Notes) because I wished to help support your site, and, quite selfishly, because I enjoy your B&W abstractions. As I'm writing this, it struck me that I've not bought an on-line photo book before (in fact, the last photo books I purchased were printed well over a decade ago). I also date from B&W film days (and analog audio too), and so appreciate your approach to creating B&W images.

Truly, hats off to you and your work.

[Gianni Galassi]

Robert,
you definitely made my day.
Such a rewarding comment is the best cure for the laziness that sometimes refrains me from posting texts after my long day-job hours.
As for cameras, I wouldn't call myself a gear-geek: I'd rather say that we are living the very early years of the digital photography era, where imaging technology evolves by the hour and aesthetics and style evolve accordingly (as it was in the second half of the 19th century). Thus trying new cameras often leads photographers towards new ways of expression -by the way, I just purchased an used Leica Monochrom, which turns out to be a mindblowing photographic tool-.
Regarding books, thanks for your support. I'm planning a new black&white title in the next few months, so stay tuned.

[Barry Seiler]

You say to set film simulation to Negative Pro Standard, but why should that make a difference if you are post processing the raw file?

[Gianni Galassi]

Barry,
I usually wouldn't.
Fuji cameras deliver the best jpgs I have ever seen in my life, and I couldn't manage to do better via the raw-ACR pipeline. Therefore if your exposure is correct you can rely on jpg without qualms, provided that it's set on "Negative pro Standard".