Is it possible to get the Fuji 400H pastel look with an all analog process?

[trin_yuthasastrakosol]

<p>For better or for worse, in the past few years wedding shooters all over have adopted (or imitated) the look that Jose Villa made popular - you know, the overexposed Fuji Pro 400H look. I posit that this look is as much a digital artifact as it is an analog artifact. It's a very difficult look to get without a properly set Noritsu or Frontier scanner - someone with a home scanner might be able to pull it off but only after tons of fiddling in photoshop.<br>

So...am I wrong? Is it possible to get that look with an optical printing process? Would be interested to hear if anyone was able to do this. </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>An example might be a good start.</p>

[trin_yuthasastrakosol]

<p>Heh, apologies, I assumed everyone was familiar with it :-). Here are a couple. Many more can be found on his blog - http://josevillablog.com/</p>

<p> http://www.100layercakelet.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/jose-villa-family-shoot-4.jpg </p>

<p> http://www.oncewed.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/jose-villa-photography.jpg </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Are you asking how to get the look from digital or film?</p>

 

[peterbcarter]

<p>Playing in lightroom, increasing exposure and lowering contrast get's you close.</p>

 

[wblynch]

<p>Probably easier to get it with all optical workflow than electronic. With an enlarger and dodging/burning techniques you can get just about any look you like.</p>

<p>Over-exposed negatives like the backlit little girl are harder to scan because scanners have fixed light strength and timing across the sensor. So the only "exposure" changes you can make are in post processing which are all fake.</p>

<p>In an enlarger, if you have thick, overexposed negatives you can adjust the lens opening or give more time to 'print through' the negative.</p>

[trin_yuthasastrakosol]

<p>Peter - looking to see if that look can be obtained in an all analog workflow. The only digital would be to scan the completed print if a photographer wanted to share it on the internet. It really isn't just playing with contrast and exposure, there's significant color work as well. Johnny Patience has done a nice writeup on it, breaking it down for a digital workflow. http://www.johnnypatience.com/jose-villa-colors/<br>

But, perhaps the question is unfair. It is difficult to answer without comparables - as in, sending the negatives to Richard Photo Lab for scan using Jose's colors, and then optical printing them on my own. Then, scanning those in and complaining about how crappy my optical prints look compared to the RPL scans :-). OK, I'll do just that. Might take a while to burn through my roll of Fuji though...</p>

 

[trin_yuthasastrakosol]

<p>Bill - thanks, hard to say how the lab scans were handled with the backlit shots. You could very well be right!</p>

[art_thomas1]

<p>From past Photonet contributor A. T. Burke...If you are using the word "analog" to mean film through glass printing, yes. First flash the film using a bright white (lots of titanium dioxide pigment in the white mix) reflector board in noon day sun. Then in the enlarger filter pack, over filter both opposite colors which will balance each other and reduce coloration. It takes a little trial and error to get the look you want.</p>

[r_david]

<p>If I may put my $0.02 in ... that guy is a master with lighting and composition and exposure. His stuff doesn't look overexposed to me, either.</p>

<p>Looking at his stuff, it's more about lighting and color balance in this shots than anything he's doing with any sort of processing - analog or digital. Those lavender flowers has the pastel look because they take up the whole composition and their reflected light is bouncing off of the white background.</p>

<p>I mean, it looks like he's just doing old school color and comp to me. I think he could do what he does with a Holga.</p>

<p> </p>

[andrew_brown7]

<p>Is that her name? Holga?</p>