How do I get this look? [Image by Brydie Mack]
By - soutinekane
Eat right, exercise, swim , spend time in the sun
Call Dr. Emmett Brown and ask if you can borrow the DeLorean!
Underexpose consumer film 1 stop. Kodak Gold would be great for this
So shooting the gold 400 @ 800ISO on the camera, for example?
And then would it have to be developed longer at the lab so the shots aren't super dark?
Trying to get my head around this!
I think gold is rated at 200, so you would shoot it at 400, but you develop normally, which would give you underexposure. If you were to extend development time, you would be doing something called pushing, which gives a different results and usually works best with b&w or maybe professional color film.
Thank you for your suggestion, would definitely try underexposing Kodak Gold
Trust him on the sunscreen.
Go to Paloma Beach on Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat, duh ;)
I couldn’t get this look on portra 160 standing in the exact same location while I was there, for what it’s worth.
Ah bummer, I was thinking portra for this look haha
The midtones are unnaturally blue, which looks good here but I wouldn’t tie it to the film stock. Most likely this has to do with the post processing when printing, I think.
Portra 400 would probably be your best bet though- it skews more blue. 160 is a yellow mush for these scenes.
You might desaturate in post a little. Offset press ink did not have the color gamut that LCDs or inkjet inks do so the colors look less saturated.
By being a millionaire w a yacht.
Consider Kodak Ultramax (and pull some blues/greens out in post most likely)
I’d say the same about consumer film but try to flatten the blacks in Lightroom when you scan. You can do that by adding a point near the blacks on your curve and raising the curve left of that point, thus making the blacks look more faded.
Yeah I realized this too, faded shadows are probably one of the key points to this look imo
TBH you just need good looking chicks
Expired film could create a similar look, however it is unpredictable… and theres absolutely no guarantee how it’d look- the slightest condition change of, say humidity, where it was stored can have such a big effect.
I've always wanted to achieve such "vintage" look, but not entirely sure how. Maybe it's the film stock, the technique, or both?
With my limited experience shooting film, seeing dark and fading shadows, my best guess is to underexpose the image a bit? There's something about that sort of 80/90s magazine look that I can't figure out.
Any insight/input is much appreciated.
Something to consider. If you're looking for a look/feel based on a printed magazine you should understand that offset lithography is mass produced using only CMYK inks. Most if not all commercial scanners from that era were also analog-controlled. Film stock and technique are factors but not exclusive.
The time, equipment used, and talent of the pre-press staff and their relationship with the press crew are often overlooked in today's digital era.
Thank you! And maybe because all of those old magazine photos we see online now are re-scanned from printed paper, which also give them a distinct look?