Alright you win. The tree was a bit more yellow than the velvia version as I said previously, but much closer than the digital version over here. I was looking at overall balance of the skies colors, the greens, and the tree's colors, and how they matched up with the Velvia shot. Personally, I think the Velvia looks pretty unreal and overly orange, but that's the way it is. With 30 seconds of tweaking. If you really wanted to remove some of the yellow, I'm sure you could, it might take a bit longer. Adjust it on your super fancy monitor. I threw up a quick curve on my laptop to get it in the neighborhood, if it doesn't work, maybe try some of your own adjustments

You guys just love to nitpick. My original statement was:
"Of course, you can tweak digital pictures colors pretty quickly to get in the neighborhood of the Velvia shots. "

IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Not an exact simulation. Later.

kidtexas wrote:
Alright you win. The tree was a bit more yellow than the velvia version as I said previously, but much closer than the digital version over here. I was looking at overall balance of the skies colors, the greens, and the tree's colors, and how they matched up with the Velvia shot. Personally, I think the Velvia looks pretty unreal and overly orange, but that's the way it is. With 30 seconds of tweaking. If you really wanted to remove some of the yellow, I'm sure you could, it might take a bit longer. Adjust it on your super fancy monitor. I threw up a quick curve on my laptop to get it in the neighborhood, if it doesn't work, maybe try some of your own adjustments

You guys just love to nitpick. My original statement was:
"Of course, you can tweak digital pictures colors pretty quickly to get in the neighborhood of the Velvia shots. "

IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Not an exact simulation. Later.

I guess we have different criteria for what "In the Neighborhood" means. Yes, yours are ON THE SAME PLANET! The issue between the two trees goes beyond just the yellow color. If you look at the texture of the bark, you will notice there is more detail/microcontrast in the Velvia example. Anyway, color accuracy is my business so "on the same planet" might be fine for some but...

Nitpicking or, as some would refer to it, the subtleties of photography, is what this forum is all about.

kidtexas wrote:
I threw up a quick curve on my laptop to get it in the neighborhood...

...and, there it is!

I'm sure if I was on my other monitor the results migt be more acceptible. As far as microcontrast and the such goes, I'm sure you read the part of my original post where I said I also applied some sharpening in the L channel, specifically while watching the tree. The velvia shot also had a warming filter if I recall.

More importantly, who cares? In the abscence of a direct velvia comparison, the digital shot as put up looks boring. I think most people would have adjusted the color and saturation on that shot until they liked the results. If it doesn't match the color 100% of xxx film or reality, so? Which gets back to the original point I made in passing: choice in film, sensor, lighting, filters, and post processing CANmake much more of a difference in color than lens choice. And most photographers I'm aware of tweak the color in post processing nowadays one way or another.

kidtexas wrote:

More importantly, who cares? In the abscence of a direct velvia comparison, the digital shot as put up looks boring. I think most people would have adjusted the color and saturation on that shot until they liked the results. If it doesn't match the color 100% of xxx film or reality, so?

Well, you cared enough to make the glib statements and claims below which are simply not true and which you are now backpedaling on:

"I'm not sure I could do it if I didn't have the Velvia shot in front of me to work from, but with a comparison shot, it took about 1 min in LAB to match; it was pretty easy."

"Heck, you can get REALLY close with no work at all. Just use the Match Color command."

"It's funny how you all think it's either impossible or at least very hard to do."

Hey like I said you win.

Sorry for getting the thread off track.

kidtexas wrote:
Hey like I said you win.

Sorry for getting the thread off track.

No worries. Sorry if I came off harsh.

Spyro P. wrote:
kidtexas wrote:
Of course, you can tweak digital pictures colors pretty quickly to get in the neighborhood of the Velvia shots.

I honestly doubt it. Kodak and Fuji's colour pallettes are the product of decades of experience and they are very delicately balanced. I have seen very few people who are talented enough in colour management to just move a few sliders and get something equally vibrant from a digital file without completely destroying it.


All it takes is one person:
http://www.lifeindigitalfilm.com/

But seriously, it is difficult and the same settings won't massage any file from one camera to look like some particular kind of film. I do find that guy's presets useful at times though... It's probably better to not even try to go for a film look with a digital camera. It's much easier to achieve that by shooting film.

---

Also, have you guys tried playing with the Canon picture-stlye presets in LR/ACR? They give you a pretty big variety of styles. I haven't had any problems with the 5DII's colors.