Adding Grain to Jpegs

Yes it's arrived. And yes, it's gorgeous!

Ok, slight context.... I've recently purchased a Fujifilm X100 (original) as my lightweight 'travel' camera (see last two posts) instead of carrying around my full-frame S5 with numerous lenses. And it arrived yesterday. And it IS gorgeous. 😁

In my previous post, I also discussed how I would use the X100 to challenge my photography in 2026. To use it:

Okarito Schoolhouse. Fuji X-E2. Grain added

• as a one camera, one lens set up
• with a fixed 35mm focal length lens
• shooting in jpeg only

Call it a New Years resolution if you will. And, like all New Years resolutions, we'll see how long it lasts?

I haven't used the X100 for any serious photography yet (it only arrived yesterday), but I have set the camera up for how I like to shoot, and I'm sure I will tweak this once I get a few excursions under my belt.

Initially I have it in aperture priority (choosing the aperture on the lens), single shot, central AF point, beep turned off, fine jpeg and auto ISO. I will play around with the optical vs electronic viewfinder, but initial thoughts are that I quite like the optical viewfinder with the information overlay. No, you don't get to see the changes you make to the image in real-time, but you do still get to see a histogram so you can nail exposure and can see what your current settings are. As with all range-finder setups with the viewfinder off to the left, the camera lens does protrude a bit into the bottom right corner, but not excessively. And it will be even less apparent without the lens hood attached.

With all that out of the way, my thoughts turned to how I was going to 'process' the images from the X100. Yes, I realise that if I am going to commit to shooting jpegs all year, then the camera does all the work for me. I should just be able to use the images SOOC (straight out of camera). After all, isn't that the point?

Donovan's Store, Okarito. Fujifilm X-E2 with gain added in Nik Color Efex Pro 4 (before & after)

Well, yes, I suppose it is. Shooting jpeg - especially when applying a film recipe - means that you are getting the 'look' you are after without having to go through the RAW editing process later. And the 'look' that I am after, is a 'representation' of film. 

I added italics to my last statement because I know that shooting digital is not, and never will be, the same as actually shooting film. But I'm happy with that - because I don't actually want to shoot film. But I do want to use the X100 to photograph in a similar way to shooting film, and achieve a similar look. And with the Fuji film recipes, I'm 90% there. What's the other 10% that's missing? Grain.

Lake Mapourika, South Westland. Fujifilm X-E2 with grain added in Nik Color Efex Pro 4

I recently ended my subscription to Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, and since then I've been using Affinity Photo (which I paid full price for a few months before they made it free for everyone! Don't get me started...). While I don't for-see a lot of post-processing required to the jpegs from the X100, I do want to add some grain to the final images. In later camera models (the X-E3, X100V etc) grain can be added in-camera as part of the film recipe. Unfortunately not so in the X100.

I looked around at possible software solutions (of which there are many), and as amazing as some of them looked, they all needed an ongoing subscription to use them. Not happening.

Then I realised that I still had the Nik software suite from when Google owned it and they offered it for free. Nik's Analog Efex Pro 2 seemed just the ticket, so I fired it up and played around with making my own 'camera' grain settings. After playing around for a while, I couldn't seem to achieve the look I was after. The software really tries to overplay the old camera effect - it doesn't do subtle. All I really wanted was just some simple grain added. In the end I gave up on Analog Efex and opened Color Efex Pro 4 instead. And bingo - there it was. A simple 'grain effect' filter.

I have created my own custom effect that I can apply to all the images I want to add some grain to from the X100. Yes, it adds another step, and yes, it counts as post-processing on a workflow that is supposed to be SOOC - but I won't do it to every image - just the ones I want to post/share on the blog. The effect can be seen on the images above - all shot with the Fujifilm X-E2. The middle image of Donavan's Store shows some of the 'before and after', where prior to the red line in the image is the 'before'.

I like the look of the grain in the image (and yes, I know it's not grain as such, but simple added texture /noise) which completes the illusion of creating a film-look from a digital camera. And that's good enough for me. It's the closest thing to shooting film, without actually shooting film.

I'm looking forward to taking the X100 out for it's first official shoot. I've already programmed three film recipes into the camera, and will try them out with the film grain added in Color Efex Pro 4 and post these next time. Then it's bring on 2026!

One camera, one lens, in 2026.

In my last post I discussed my recent purchase; the Fujifilm X100. I had hoped it would have turned up in time for my birthday, but alas that was not meant to be. It’s actually due to arrive on December 23rd (this Tuesday at the time of writing this). To say that I’m looking forward to it arriving would be something of an understatement. I’m pumped.

For those of you who may have been following along at home (and if you have been then ‘thank you’), you will know that this is not my first foray into the Fujifilm ecosystem. In 2019 I invested heavily in the XE1 and XE2, taking a deep dive down the film recipe rabbit hole. I enjoyed every minute of it back then, and I have a feeling that I’m going to be doing the same soon. I’ve already started re-reading some of my old posts to familiarise myself with some of the film recipes that I created for the XE1, and I think that these will port over to the X100 quite nicely.

I’m also hoping that the X100 will help rekindle my love affair with photography. I had been recently mulling over what I might be able to do in 2026 to get me back into photography again, and the X100 might just be the answer. In a few ways.

Firstly, the move back to a rangefinder-like shooting experience is something that I am really looking forward to. I loved the handling of the XE cameras I owned, which from someone who was brought up on SLR bodies was very surprising. In a good way. I’m also looking forward to experiencing the hybrid viewfinder on the X100. I have become used to using evf’s (electronic view finders) and the myriad benefits that they bring. I don’t even mind a lower resolution evf like those on the XE1 or Olympus EM5. But an optical viewfinder, with an electronic overlay that gives some shooting information,may be the perfect blend between digital convenience and optical clarity? Using the optical viewfinder option also helps with battery life, which on the original X100 isn’t all that impressive (apparently).

Secondly, 2026 may see me embrace the ‘one camera, one lens’ philosophy with the Fujifilm X100. It will be fascinating to see what using just the X100, with its fixed 35mm focal length lens, will do for my photography. Especially since I’m a self-confessed zoom guy. In preparation I’ve been watching a few youtube videos extolling the virtues of the fixed 35mm focal length. Some even refer to it as the ‘goldilocks’ focal length. It had better be if I’m going to shoot it exclusively for my images in 2026. We have a North Island holiday planned for the start of 2026, and we also may go to Australia towards the end of 2026 - so I had better fall in love with the 35mm focal length and the images it produces, or the one camera, one lens philosophy may be somewhat short lived? But I’m certainly keen to give it a go…

Speaking of giving it a go, the third and final decision with using the X100 is around file types. Given that I really loved Fuji’s film recipes last time I used the system, and given that I’m already thinking of what recipes I can programme into the X100, I’m also thinking that in 2026 I will concentrate on shooting jpegs only!? If there is any system that warrants shooting only jpegs, it’s Fujifilm. With its retro styling, film-like handling, and basic (2010) technology, the camera is as close as it gets to a film-shooting experience in a digital camera body. Right up my alley.

If I go through with all of the above (one camera, with one fixed 35mm lens, shooting jpegs only), then 2026 could be a very interesting year for me - photographically and artistically speaking. Bring it on…..

Happy Birthday to me!

Shhhhhh - don’t tell anyone, but I’m turning 58 in five days time!

I can’t quite believe it really, and it seems quite surreal. My Dad only made it to 36 before he passed away (as the result of a bad accident at his place of work). And while I didn’t therefore assume that I would also go young, 58 (only 2yrs away from the big 60) has kinda snuck up on me. 

I’ve also been struggling a bit health-wise this year as well. I have a family history of high blood pressure, of which I take daily medication to keep it under control. But this year I’ve also been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, as well as having had surgery for ankle issues. I am taking action to deal with the diabetes and am hoping to get this under control through diet and exercise in the new year.

But this isn’t a health and fitness blog (you’ll be pleased to know), so what has this all got to do with photography? Excellent question. I’m glad you asked.

My wife and I travel quite a lot back and forth to Christchurch, to spend time with family. And on these trips, it’s a good opportunity to take some family photos. The grandkids are growing up fast (as grandkids are wont to do), and we like to document this. Or at least we like to ‘occasionally’. More often than not, I find myself leaving my full-frame Lumix S5 behind and not bringing a camera at all. I end up taking photos on my phone instead. And as a ‘serious’ photographer, this simply will not do.

This, of course, got me thinking. Maybe I need a more compact travel camera? Something that I don’t mind lugging around for those photo opportunities with family and on the road. Something like a Fujifilm X100 maybe?

To be fair, I didn’t have a specific camera in mind when I started looking on TradeMe (NZ’s answer to ebay). I actually bid on a few cameras (including a Canon M10 and Lumix GX85), before putting in a rather cheeky bid on a Fujifilm X100 (original). I made an offer of $400.00 on the camera with an asking price of $500.00 - and was surprised when the seller accepted my offer! But I ain’t complaining.

For those of you who may have read some of my previous posts, you will be aware that I have taken a deep dive into the Fujifilm rangefinder-esque style of camera in the past. I owned both the XE1 and XE2, and loved the aesthetics, handling and functionality of the Fuji system. Especially the film simulations. And I have used an X100 in the deep dark past (briefly) when they first came out in 2011. Ironically, I can recall not being overly enamoured with it. But this was also when I was deeply embedded in the digital SLR system.

With the original X100, I’m getting 15 year old technology, with a fixed 35mm equivalent lens and 12 megapixels. It’s slow focusing, inaccurate, has slow write speeds and has very limited film simulations. On paper it’s a bit of a dog to be honest. So what's the appeal?

Well, for a start, just look at it! It’s flippin’ gorgeous. And yes, as vain as it may seem, looks do matter (to me at least). If I’m looking for a ‘fun’ travel camera that makes me want to pick it up and take pictures with it, then look no further than the X100.

And I also don’t need (or want) another camera crammed with technology and all the modern bells and whistles. I’ve already got one of those. With the X100 I’ll look forward to slowing down and experience the process of taking a photo. And yes, the experience is very much like shooting film. Which I love. But with digital, which I also love.

So while the Fujifilm X100 might be old, and slow, and lack most of the newer film simulations, I think it will more than make up for this with the experience of picture taking. Will I miss some shots occasionally? Undoubtedly. Will I find the fixed 35mm equivalent field of view limiting from time to time? Most certainly. But will I enjoy using the X100 and taking photos with it? Absolutely!

It should arrive on my birthday (happy birthday to me), and I can’t think of a better present to give myself for my 58th birthday.

Shooting with the 65:24 custom ratio - XPan images on the Lumix S5

I can't afford a Hasselblad XPan  - who can nowadays? Here in New Zealand they can go for as much as $7000.00! But hey - that's with a lens buster! If, that is, you can find one. Rare as hen's teeth they are. People just don't want to part with them. And that's because they are:

1. A Hasselblad
2. An XPan - a camera that managed to be something not many other cameras are - truly unique.

I'm fairly sure I'll never own one, and for a long time I wasn't sure I wanted to (but oh, I do!). Because the XPan's image ratio is what sets this camera apart from most others (certainly in the 35mm film space). Its 65:24 'panorama' view could almost be seen as a gimmick. Or just plain weird. And that's what I thought when they were first introduced in the 1990's - the love-child of Hasselblad Sweden and Fujifilm Japan. The camera you didn't know you needed, until you saw one.

How many photos do you want to shoot at an extreme 65:24 aspect ratio? Isn't a bit of a novelty isn't it? A bit like a fisheye lens point of view. Get's old real fast. Am I right?

Nelson Waterfront. Lumix S5 in 65:24 aspect ratio with S 20-60mm . f/8 @ 125th, ISO 100

Nope. Turns out I'm wrong! Dead wrong. It looks like those clever Swedish/Japanese engineers knew what the hell they were doing when they designed the XPan. Shooting in the 65:24 aspect ratio is not only a whole heap of fun, but amazingly helpful when composing an image. And fortunately for me - even though I don't have an XPan, I do have a Panasonic Lumix S5, which just so happens to shoot in the 65:24 aspect ratio (amongst others).

In a recent trip to Nelson, my wife and I took a stroll along the waterfront in the early evening, hoping to get some half-decent photos of the boats and wharf. It was a lovely evening, with some very nice light. BUT, there wasn't much in the way of cloud action in the sky, or foreground action either. I shot for a while in the usual 3:2 aspect ratio, and wasn't digging the results. But then I thought to myself - 'self, what would it look like if I got rid of the foreground and bland sky, and shot XPan style'.

Boatshed Cafe, Nelson. Lumix S5 in 65:24 ratio with S 20-60mm . f/8 @ 1/50th, ISO 100

Boom! Instantly better photos! Well at least I think so. The Panoramic-style format has not only allowed me to get rid of the bland sky and foreground, but it also suits the horizontal composition of the building jutting out into the water. It 'accentuates' to horizontality (is that a word) of the subject - and I love it. And far from being the 'only' composition I could use it with, the opposite seemed to be true. Everywhere I looked there were images crying out to be 'XPanned'!

Fishing off the Wharf, Nelson. Lumix S5 in 65:24 ratio with S 20-60mm. f/8 @ 100th, ISO 100

Now I know what you're thinking. These aren't really 'XPan' images. They're just full frame 3:2 images 'cropped' in camera to produce the look of the 65:24 ratio. And of course, you'd be 100% keerect. But when you look through the viewfinder of the S5 in 65:24 ratio, that's what you see. And you can compose accordingly. A bit like when you switch the camera to shoot mono and you get to 'see' in mono through the viewfinder. It elevates the user experience in a way that 'pre-visualising' can't.

And just like shooting in monochrome, as long as you are also capturing a RAW image, then you are still retaining a colour 3:2 full-frame image. Actually - that's just given me an idea.... How about using the 65:24 aspect ratio and setting the camera to monochrome, for that truly old-school film shooting feel. I hadn't thought of that! (Note to self...)

Boat at Dusk, Nelson Harbour. Lumix S5 in 65:24 ratio with S 20-60mm lens. f/8 @1/25th, ISO 100

Sure, it means that you are 'throwing away' about half the megapixels in the image - but with a full frame camera and 24MPs they still end up being a decent size and have plenty of detail to work with in post.

And speaking of 'post' - I've made a huge change recently to my post-processing. I've dumped my Adobe Photography subscription and moved to something else for all my RAW processing and photo editing. What did I go with? I'll let you know in the next blogpost.... 😉

Serenity. Panasonic Lumix S5 in 65:24 ratio with S 20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/60th, ISO 800

I loved photographing Nelson Waterfront in the 'Hasselblad XPan' 65:24 aspect ratio. I had an absolute blast. And it proved to me that the 65:24 aspect ratio isn't just a gimmick. It's a bona fide choice for really strong compositions - with the right subject.

Is it enough to make me want a Hasselblad XPan? Yeah - it kinda is. It's certainly shown me that it wouldn't just sit on the shelf gathering dust. Will I ever use one 'for real'? Nah. Probably not. It's a bit like the Leica conundrum. Yes, I'm sure they are nice. But for that price, I'd rather have a couple more lenses for my Panasonic and change left over! Dreams, however, are free.....

A Tale of Two Cameras (and Fuji Superia 200)

In recent posts (here) and (here), I've talked about starting to shoot film again - with a Minolta Dynax 7 and a Canon EOS 300V. I've been able to put a roll of Fuji Superia 200 through each camera in the last month, and recently had the film developed during a trip to Christchurch. Let's have a look at the results....

Cobden Lagoon. Minolta Dynax 7 with 35-70mm f/4 (@ 35mm). Fuji Superia 200.

First things first - both cameras work! Yay!! Of the two rolls I shot, under varying lighting conditions, the exposures were bang-on. So that's the first hurdle out of the way. Two fully functioning camera bodies.

Second, how do the images actually look? And again - no problems there. All the photos are sharp (or at least sharp enough for 35mm film scanned on a flatbed scanner) and have good colour rendition. In terms of the colour, I did find that all the photos tended towards a blue tint with the Fujicolor Superia. With almost all of the scans I removed some of the blue from the midtones and shadows to get the colour a bit more 'neutral'.

Lagoon Reeds. Minolta Dynax 7 with 70-210mm f4.5-5.6 (@100mm). Fuji Superia 200.

Since having decided to shoot some film this year, I have been thinking about how to digitize the negatives. As mentioned above, the photos here have been scanned on a flatbed scanner (Epson Photo V700). I just happened to have one, and so that's what I have used to digitize almost all of my 35mm negatives. But there is a lot of buzz on the interwebs about using your digital camera and a macro lens to 'scan' your negatives. This is, they say (whoever 'they' are), the better - and quicker - way to go.

I just happen to have a full frame 24MP digital camera, and a Sigma 105mm macro lens. So this is definitely something that I will be giving a go in the near future. I may even do a 'comparison' with the flatbed scan and the digital camera scan.

Brunner Mine Bridge. Canon 300V with 28-80mm f4.5-5.6mm (@50mm). Fuji Superia 200.

If I'm honest, I'm not quite sure of what I think about scanning 35mm film with a digital camera? You might argue that if you are going to do that, why not just shoot with a digital camera in the first place? And you might have a point.

But (playing devils advocate), if you want to show your photos on a digital platform, then you are going to have to digitize your negatives at some stage. So why not use the best re-productive system available to you? And if that happens to be your digital camera, then so be it. Having used a film scanner over the years, I have to say that they are a bit of a faff to use, and don't always produce the sharpest results - especially with 35mm.

Cobden Pigeons. Canon 300V with Canon 28-80mm (@80mm). Fujicolor Superia 200

Speaking for myself, the 'fun' of shooting film is in the actual process - and in the cameras I get to use. I enjoyed using both the Minolta Dynax 7 and the Canon 300V. Both very modern cameras - and yet both very different shooting experiences. The Minolta has a more 'pro' feeling about it - with a rugged magnesium-alloy body and lots of dials, whereas the Canon 300V is certainly a more consumer-grade shooting experience.

I didn't really 'prefer' one over the other - although if I'm honest I liked more of the photos I shot with the 300V. But that probably has more to do with the places I went to photograph rather than the camera's themselves.

Taylorville Bus. Canon 300V with Fujicolor Superia 200.

Thoughts of scanning aside, my first rolls of film through my two film cameras was definitely a success. I got images that I really liked from both cameras - enough to want to repeat the experience. I have a trip away to Nelson for a holiday coming up, and I'm deciding whether to shoot it all on film or not. The only thing that really gives me pause is the film stock situation. I have a lot of black and white film, but no more colour. I'm not sure I really want to shoot everything on black and white, so I may end up just taking the digital and leaving the film cameras at home until I can find some more cheap colour film? Anybody know where I can get some cheap colour film from?

Creating custom Photo Styles on the Lumix S5

In my last post I said that I was going to have a play around with making my own Photo Styles for my Panasonic Lumix S5 - a bit like the Fujifilm 'recipes'. When I shot with the Fujifilm E1 and E2 (excellent cameras and I rather miss them), I spent a lot of time creating my own film 'recipes' and then shooting them in either RAW + Jpeg, or sometimes even Jpeg only. I decided to try and replicate them in my S5, just to see how close I could get, and whether the results would be worth it or not.

For the colour styles, I wanted a classic film look (similar to the Classic Chrome film simulation of the Fuji's), as well as a more punchy 'Velvia' style. Above is my 'Classic Film' Style next to the Standard Panasonic picture profile, and my 'Velvia' next to the Vivid picture style that comes with the camera.

The 'Classic Film' style certainly has a slightly de-saturated film look compared to the Standard profile, since it's based on the L. Classic Neo photo style. My settings for the Classic Film look are:

Base: L Classic Neo

Contrast 0

Highlight 0

Shadow -4

Saturation +3

Hue +2

Grain Effect: Low

Colour Noise: On

Sharpness 0

Noise Reduction 0

For my Velvia photo style, I started with the Vivid base, and then ramped it up a bit more:
Base: Vivid
Contrast +2.5
Highlight 0
Shadows -1
Saturation +4
Hue -2
Sharpness +2
Noise Reduction -2

For the monochrome styles I wanted two contrasting styles - and these I've called Acros and Tri-X.

Acros is based on the standard Monochrome Picture style and is not a huge change, although it does add grain and a yellow filter. For my Acros style I used:

Base: Monochrome

Contrast 0

Highlight -1

Shadow +1

Tone 0

Filter: Yellow

Grain: Low

Sharpness +1

Noise Reduction +2.5

And for my grittier Tri-X style I used:

Base L. Monochrome D

Contrast +3

Highlights +1

Shadows -3

Tone 0

Filter: Red

Grin: High

Sharpness +1

Noise Reduction -2.5

Does the end justify the means? Is it worth all this fluffing about - especially when you can achieve all of these results with just the one RAW file in post?

If I'm honest, it's probably not really worth the hassle - and I basically came to the same conclusion when shooting Fujifilm. Unless you are a Jpeg shooter only, who wants their images to have a particular look and feel SOOC (straight out of camera). Then all this picture style stuff really does make sense.

The only picture style above that is markedly different from Panasonics own offerings is the gritty, contrasty Tri-X style. But even then, I discovered while playing around with picture styles that there are also 'Filters' that can be set as well (although not in conjunction with Picture Styles). Most are just gimmicky (sepia, fantasy, stars etc), but a couple of them might be worth using. Especially the Dynamic Monochrome which gives results like (you guessed it) Tri-X! 

I've got the above Picture Styles programmed in now, so I may as well keep them there. But will I shoot with them? Maybe. Just maybe....

Exploring the Panasonic Lumix S5 Photo Styles

In my previous post I talked about getting back into film photography. And on that note, the film I ordered from AliExpress, that was due to arrive in about two months from that slow boat to China, actually only took a couple of weeks. Excellent! If I like the look of the 400 ISO Lucky film, I may have to order some more....

But why, in this day and age, would anyone want to shoot film (I hear you say)? And that's a very good question - thanks for asking. Well, one of the main reasons to shoot film relates to what I just said about the Lucky film from China. It has to do with the 'look' of the film. Its rendition of colour (or monotones). Its grain structure. The way it handles contrast - mid tones, highlights etc. 

It's the reason film photographers have favourite film stocks. Some like the 'look' of Portra, while some prefer Velvia. Which of course, also speaks to the Fuji vs Kodak debate. Fuji tends more towards greens and blues, while Kodak tends more towards reds and warm colour tones.

Film shooters will argue that they get to change their camera's 'sensor' every time they change their film stock. Kodak for portraits, Fuji for landscapes, and TMax for moody black and whites. Whereas a digital sensor is just an electronic device capturing 1s and 0s in a predictable and repeatable manner - right?

Cobden Lagoon. Lumix S5 with S20-60mm. L Classic Neo Photo Style + Low Grain.

Well, actually, digital camera manufacturers have gone to great lengths to reproduce colours from digital sensors in very specific ways. It's why two manufacturers can use the same digital sensor, and yet the images that they produce will be very different in the way they render colour. Very much like film shooters preferring a particular film stock, you will now hear digital photographers talk about preferring a particular 'colour science' from one brand over the other.

Every digital camera you buy offers 'Picture Profiles' (some call them 'styles') with titles like Landscape, Portrait or Natural (to name just a few). These give you different 'looks' to your photos - if you shoot Jpegs. If, however, you only shoot RAW, then these picture profiles are basically redundant (although they will be what you see through the viewfinder and on the LCD screen when you review the image).

Perhaps the manufacturer who has taken these picture styles to the extreme is Fujifilm. With a rich history of 'film' (duh), they offer styles called Velvia, Acros and Eterna (among others) that get baked-in to the jpeg and simulate their film stocks. An entire community has been created around photographers coming up with new 'recipes' that simulate film stocks for Fujifilm cameras. But they aren't the only players in the game...

Photo Styles from the Panasonic Lumix S5.

Above is an overview of the 15 Photo Styles (plus one with grain added) available in the Lumix S5. It may be difficult to pick up some of the subtle (and not so subtle) nuances in each style, but they are certainly different from each other. Many of the styles are 'as advertised', in that Natural is quite 'natural' looking, Vivid is more 'vivid, and Monochrome is - you guessed it - 'monochrome'. Others, like 'Landscape' or 'Portrait' are also fairly self-explanatory.

But then there are also options like L Classic Neo, L Monochrome D and Cinelike V2 which are a bit more out of the ordinary. L Monochrome (Lumix Monochrome - or Leica?) has been added to Photo Styles with the S series of cameras, together with Monochrome D and monochrome S. D is a more punchy b&w - more suitable for architecture and landscapes, while S seems tailored towards portraiture? That's how I would use them.

L Classic Neo is Panasonic's attempt at simulating colour negative film. The colours are intended to have a more nostalgic and gentle colour film look. And to be fair, it does a pretty decent job of it (see the first photo in this blogpost).

Another example of Photo Styles.

The final row of Photo Styles are more geared towards video shooting, although you can produce still images using these profiles. The final, V-Log is a very flat profile, ideal for colour grading of video, and not really useful if you are purely a stills shooter. I did, however, quite like the colour rendition using the Like 709 style on the landscape image above, so there's no rule that says you can't use these video-centric style for your photography. But again, remember these are for Jpegs only, so the resulting style will be 'baked-in' to the final image.

Greymouth Wharf from Cobden Lagoon. L Monochrome D + Grain High.

Almost all of the above examples are of Picture Styles using the default settings. Each individual Photo Style can also be 'tweaked' to create your own style (or 'recipe' to steal the concept from Fujifilm). The S5 allows you to programme a further 4 custom styles of your own making for quick recall. 

Adjustments such as contrast, highlight, shadow, tone, hue and sharpness can be set by adding or subtracting values and will vary depending on the picture style (you can't set hue and saturation in the monochrome styles for example). For Monochrome (and Classic Neo), you can also add grain structure in 3 settings (low, standard or high), as well as adding yellow, orange, red or green filter effects. The options are almost endless! With a bit of trial and error, I'm sure you could dial in something resembling your favourite film stock.

Grain can be set at either Low, Standard or High for that extra film look.

And if this wasn't enough, the latest Lumix S cameras (not my S5 unfortunately) can also accept LUTs - colour profiles that are usually used at the post-processing stage by videographers to simulate different colour gradings or film stocks. Fujifilm eat your heart out!

Photo Styles (or film recipes - call them what you will) were something that I played around with a lot when I was shooting Fujifilm cameras. It seemed like a natural thing to do when you were starting out with styles called Provia. But there's really no reason why you couldn't do the same thing with Lumix cameras like the S5 using their Photo Styles as a base. 

If you enjoy shooting jpegs, and trying to get a particular 'look' to your images SOOC (straight out of camera), then have a play with Photo Styles. I'm going to have a play with some of my own, and I'll share what I've come up with. Can I get Kodak TMax 400 and Fuji Velvia out of a Panasonic Lumix S5? Why not....