slides to digital

[photosal]

I don't know if this where I should post this question. If not I am sorry.
I have shot Fuji Sensea 100 for the past 18+ years. I have now changed to digital. I am using
maxxum 7d cameras .

The problem is this, I can not seem to match or come close to color or detail of the slides. When I got the cameras I was told to set the ISO to 200 because of the digital camera. I primaraly photograph out of doors wildlife etc. I use a Sigma 50/500 5.6 lens primarily.
I shoot large, fine and jpg. My color setting is set at natural. I also always shoot on a tripod and use a remote release.
Any advise ?
Thanks in advance
Photosal

[Traumuh]

Have you tried shooting in RAW and the AdobeRGB color space?

[photosal]

Hi traumuh
To answer your question, no I have been shooting in jpeg. When I first got the digital that is one of the things I was advised to do.

Having just talked to one of my accomplished photographer friends last night, he advised to shoot raw. I have since started to search out the pros & cons of raw, jpeg and raw +jpeg. Not knowing much about any of it. I find that is is overwhelming at this point. The one thing I have found out it will come down to a matter of choice and how much work I intend to do in photoshop.

At the present time I am trying to edit some 3000 images I shot in Yellowstone and the Tetons. The
one quick lesson I have learned is you shoot a hell of a lot more images with digital than slides.

Thanks for your response
photosal

[Traumuh]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml

Have a look at that link and decide which works best for your needs. I'm interested in obtaining more vibrant colors too, so lets wait on a more qualified opinion.

[gldiana]

I have been shooting in jpeg. When I first got the digital that is one of the things I was advised to do.

Whoever advised to you drop RAW in favor of JPEG didn't have the slightest idea about photography. Yes, RAW requires work, you must "develop" the photo, jpeg is the equivalent of sending the film to a lab and have them print ir for you; that's something that no professional photographer has ever done, afaik. So the "con" of RAW would be that it doesn't end with pressing the shutter, that's just the beginning. The "pro" is that YOU have total control over the image. The "pro" of jpeg is that it's a small file. The "con"... oh God where do I start... you have a very limited amount of control over the image, some engineer made that decision for you and applied it the same way to every image independently of the type of photo. The quality is lower because the bit-plane is smaller and the amount of data is much smaller. When you take the photo in jpeg the camera's processor discards everything that it thinks the image doesn't need and there is no way to get it back. And so much more...

[photosal]

I have been shooting in jpeg. When I first got the digital that is one of the things I was advised to do.

Whoever advised to you drop RAW in favor of JPEG didn't have the slightest idea about photography. Yes, RAW requires work, you must "develop" the photo, jpeg is the equivalent of sending the film to a lab and have them print ir for you; that's something that no professional photographer has ever done, afaik. So the "con" of RAW would be that it doesn't end with pressing the shutter, that's just the beginning. The "pro" is that YOU have total control over the image. The "pro" of jpeg is that it's a small file. The "con"... oh God where do I start... you have a very limited amount of control over the image, some engineer made that decision for you and applied it the same way to every image independently of the type of photo. The quality is lower because the bit-plane is smaller and the amount of data is much smaller. When you take the photo in jpeg the camera's processor discards everything that it thinks the image doesn't need and there is no way to get it back. And so much more...

Luca,
Thank you for taking the time give me this advise. I am now doing some extensive research on shooting raw.
thank you for prodding me on .
photosal

[Bonish Photo]

Photosal, one thing I have found with moving from film to digital is to be as liberal as possible with the delete button

Unless I see the image, and say something along the lines of "Wow" or "Oh, I really like that one" I usually hit the delete button.

For us, think two photographers shooting sie by side, so the editing takes twice as long, it has become very easy to delete more images than most probably take in a months time.

That is the beauty of digital. We shoot RAW+small Jpeg, so we can browse through the images very fast on the cpu and dont have to worry about slowing the editing process down with opening up each RAW image to review it.

I'd second what Luca said, and if you're taking your photography seriously, something I know you do, then move up to RAW and you'll find more what you're looking for when comparing to film.

There is also a program advertised in a few of the Photo Magazines, I think the ad I saw it in was actually in Outdoor Photographer, about a program that will allow you to shoot the image in RAW, then you import it into this program and can choose from dozens of different film types to have it mimic. I've never used it, but if you're trying to match Fuji Sensea, Velvia, T-Max or any of the other formats, it might be something you want to check out.

Good luck, and do your research wisely.

Another thing I've learned is the camera themselves has a lot to do with the image you're creating. We have shot with a Canon 1D, a Canon 30D and the Canon 5D. The 5D is the most saturated of all 3 and produces the best, most realistic colors. The 1D was known for being very neutral and you had to manipulate almost every image to boost saturation and color.

The 30D can be set to boost the colors in-camera, but I dont like the camera figuring out how I want my colors to look, so I have it set to Neutral, same as the 5D. But the 5D straight out of the camera produces some outstanding images. I've heard amazing things from the 1D Mark III and the newer 5D Mark II, although I've never used them.

You'll have to ask Luca about that. He has the 5D Mark II. Bring a empty Compact Flash card to a local camera shop and try it in various camera bodies, then bring the card home and look at each image to see which one gives you the look you're trying acheive. It might be your camera body