I have the same shot (just slightly different focal length) taken with a Canon EOS R and a Zeiss Ikonta (medium format) on Gold 200 (scanned with the R). I thought it would be fun to try to compare the two since people here are working on film simulation.
Digital :
0V2A7101.CR3 (30.6 MB)
Film :
0V2A7304.CR3 (30.2 MB)
This file is licensed Creative Commons, By-Attribution, Share-Alike.
neg:
0V2A7304.CR3.xmp (15.1 KB)
dig:
0V2A7101.CR3.xmp (20.2 KB)
dt 5
I did the negative, then tried to match it with the digital version. Not so easy. I wouldn’t have got close to that look without the reference image, but learnt a few things along the way - particularly about blur. Thanks!
EDIT: The exported jpeg of the negative has quite a bit less contrast then the raw inside DT. The digital image looks closer to the negative there.
…her comes my film version. I wasn’t able to achieve similiar colours like on the digital version. All in all I think it’s still a pleasant look.
Here is my comparison, using agx-emulsion.
In order to make a relatively comparable pipeline I used negadoctor (at the moment there is not an easy way to input a negative scan, and use the virtual printing)
(left) negadoctor conversion of the negative scan 0V2A7304.CR3.xmp (9.0 KB)
(right) negadoctor conversion of the virtual negative scan created with agx-emulsion using Kodak Gold 200, from a conversion of the digital with darktable 0V2A7101.CR3.xmp (8.5 KB)
The settings of negadoctor are exactly the same except for D min and scan bias exposure.
This is the virtual negative:
I had to lift a bit the blacks on the real analog conversion, and compress a bit the highlights of the virtual negative conversion. Also a very small hue shift of the greens.
This instead is a virtual print using data from Kodak Endura Premier (with 0.7 print gamma factor, -4Y0M enlarger filters)
Nice, the digital looks a bit brighter (in the shadows at least) but the colors are very similar. I think being able to load the negative and to invert it by virtual printing would be cool, as doing it in DT/RT requires a lot of rather random tweaking of the knobs.
It was interesting to export the simulated negative from agx and compare with your photographed negative.
