Same photos. Different mood. Back to the RAW files from my previous post, but this time without stripping out the colours.

Colour changes everything. It brings more information. But without any pop – light was diffused by a massive cloud, as explained – I resorted to Fuji film simulations.

I picked CLASSIC NEG. The muted colours felt appropriate for the feeI I was looking for.

I read somewhere that it replicates SUPERIA color film: a popular bread & butter stock from the 90’s that, incidentally, I’m quite familiar with. Back in the days I used to develop my photos in a Fujifilm lab and they would bundle SUPERIA rolls as part of the service.

Nothing to brag about. It was the cheapest stock, consumer-grade, offered for free. It kept me going without stretching my wallet.

Now that I’m no longer a student, playing with expensive cameras I could only dream about back then, and I end up using this same SUPERIA’s digital version called CLASSIC NEG as an aesthetic choice.

It is ironic to some extent and I had to mention it.

CLASSIC NEG does offer a unique film look I cherish. It’s actually quite impressive how Fuji film simulations easily turn something dull into something else.

Yes, many other colour recipes out there do the same. Free apps with trendy filters are abundant in social media. I know. But – call me a fanboy now – Fuji doing it based on its legacy on film feels more legit to me.

Mixed feelings

Re-editing the same images with this different approach shows how much lives in post-processing nowadays.

I have mixed feelings about this.

It is cool to explore what the digital darkroom can offer. Creating with RAW files open so many possibilities.

Still, it feels a bit like cheating. Like the photos are not from my camera, but from Lightroom.

You may positively argue that what I’m doing with these files is no different from the film days: I’m just picking the adequate film stock for a given day’s conditions. Only that I’m doing it after the fact, capitalizing on a RAW file’s flexibility and what digital has to offer.

But it was different back then. It was slower and more deliberate. It felt more like a process.

White balance was set in the film, not something you could change in the camera or in post. Same for ISO. Each film type had its unique attributes chemically baked into the emulsion. Some preferred Fuji, others picked Kodak. There were oddball options like Agfa or Ilford – those were cheaper, whatever the reason.

Then there were the labs. They could develop film with new or obsolete equipment, run with good chemicals or well beyond their processing mileage. Photos had a distinctive look depending on the lab they came from. Which ones to like or dismiss, a matter of personal taste.

Money played a part as well. Expired film would be available from time to time with a big discount. Go to a cheaper lab, you may get unconventional results.

For years, I got used to this Fujifilm lab because it was near my place. Then, as an exchange student living in Italy, I had my film developed in a Kodak lab instead because it was cheaper and every student would go there. Photos there always had a warm, golden tint.

This was all part of the game.

Digital effortless

In this new realm called digital photography, everything is so fast and easy that it feels wrong.

In Lightroom, I open the colour profiles tab and have all Fuji film simulations available to play with. PROVIA, VELVIA, ACROS, CLASSIC NEG, you name it. Pick a RAW file, have the mouse cursor fly over the film stock and see the colours swap in real time. Then pull some sliders here and there and ok, good to go.

It’s effortless to the point I feel like I’m no longer part of the process.

Film forced me to think and work methodically before shooting. Pick the right film stock and load it to the camera correctly, or else you come out with nothing – it happened to me before.

Every press of the shutter must be intentional because film is limited and costly. Finish a roll, rewind it mechanically. Make sure it’s all in the canister before you open the back of the camera, or else you burn it and ruin everything. There is no undo button.

It was a tangible experience before taking it to the lab and waiting to see the results. A slower process with much more involvement from start to end.

We lost all this with digital. We lost the uniqueness of film, which was far from perfect because it had grain, noise, light leaks and sometimes even stains, dirt and hair from the lab.

No, it was not something I treasured back then. But now as a result we get clinical outputs that lack character. Every photo looks the same.

To some extent, it doesn’t matter what camera you are using now. Digital software will rectify your lens imperfections. Lightroom makes it look coming from whatever camera you want. This is the power of digital.

So here we are, in 2026. Same photos, different look: ACROS black & white or CLASSIC NEG colour. It’s so effortless that it’s wrong.

Where shall we draw the line?