PhotoCopy creates a photographic reproduction of a printed or graphic work made with a process in which a new image is formed by the action of proprietary image analysis, color, texture, and light. Light can be added to a scene where none existed before just as if you were adding light at the time of shooting.
ANALOG EFEX PRO PHOTOSHOP SKIN
The Alien Skin Exposure 5 rendition is very flattering, to say the least, the Color Efex Pro rendition is (again) a pantomime version that’s just plain wrong, while the DxO FilmPack 4.5 version is probably closest to the results I got from the real thing.DFT (aka Digital Film Tools) is the definitive digital toolbox meant to simulate optical camera filters, specialized lenses, film stocks and grain, lens flares, optical lab processes, color correction, keying, and compositing as well as natural light and photographic effects.ĮZ Mask is an easy to use interactive image masking tool capable of extracting almost any object in an image-even if you are dealing with fine hair detail, smoke, or reflections.įilm Stocks is a unique filter that simulates 288 different color and black-and-white still photographic film stocks, motion picture films stocks, and historical photographic processes. I’ll admit I used Kodachrome 20o only twice, and found it grainy, contrasty and with such a strong magenta cast I vowed never to use it again…
The generic DxO FilmPack 4.5 version is OK but, again, looks just like the original with some tiny tweaks, but the non-generic DxO version (why are there two?) is flat, magenta and, to my eyes, just plain wrong. Of the rest, the Color Efex Pro version is just a pantomime effect –too much contrast, too much saturation. Of all of these, I think the Alien Skin Exposure 5 version is best, though to me it just looks like the original digital version with a tad more saturation. My Kodachrome 64 transparencies have neutral, subtle tones and a particular ‘steely-grey’ rendition in skies that I really like.īut this is where you get the biggest variations in the digital versions.
Some say its colours are super-saturated and unreal (I think this is an unjustified Kodachrome reputation in general), others say K64 images have a magenta cast. This was my favourite colour film, and I can’t really understand the (bad) reputation this film seems to have. I’ve scanned plenty of Kodachrome 25 transparencies, so I know what to expect, and if I’d shot this scene on K25, I’d expect a much richer, more saturated outcome than either of these. I’m not particularly convinced by either, to be honest. The Alien Skin rendition looks the best to me, while the DxO version doesn’t have the saturation I would expect. Only two of these plug-ins offers a Kodachrome 25 simulation – Alien Skin Exposure 5 and DxO FilmPack 4.5 Slow as heck, true, but I thought it had really nice colour rendition, good saturation and not too much contrast. I’ll start with the colour films, then move on to the black and white… 01 Kodachrome 25 There are plenty more, but I’ve chosen the ones I know best from my own film photography days. On their own, each of these plug-ins makes a good case, but it’s when you put them up against each other that you realise they can’t all be right… I don’t have test results for all of them with every film because they don’t all support the same range of emulsions – but the results are interesting nonetheless. So I’ve taken the same shot (above) and processed it using Alien Skin Exposure 5, Color Efex Pro, DxO FilmPack 4.5 and Silver Efex Pro, all of which promise to replicate the look of traditional film. One problem is that they don’t always look like the films I used to use another is that they don’t even agree with each other. But I’m also a bit sceptical, because many of the film simulations I see from plug-ins look quite suspect to me.
ANALOG EFEX PRO PHOTOSHOP SOFTWARE
So I’m especially interested in any film simulation software which promises to replicate the look and feel of traditional silver-based films. I love its richness, depth, unpredictability and character. It’s what I grew up with, and it’s what I made most of my photographic discoveries – and mistakes – with.
0 kommentar(er)
