First rolls of Velvia. What was I waiting for?

[PtJudeRI]

Well, I just developed my first two rolls of chrome, ever. I'm completely blown away. To the point where I am rethinking what I want to do with my photography going forward. I've never shot chromes before. Just c41 sparingly, and B&W. my B&W isn't going away, but I see no future for c41 with me. I'm just sorry I jumped on this so late in E6's life.

Wow. This is a quick scan of one, shot with an F5 and developed in the arista kit. Thoughts?

 

[hdeyong]

Beautiful. Great colours, and all the detail is still in the white shirt.

 

[polyglot]

Completely agree that slides are lovely, with a couple of significant caveats:
- projectors for any format larger than 6x6 are horrifically expensive, and
- you can't print them except via scanning.

Of course once you scan & print, you lose the huge dynamic range because no reflective media exists with a Dmax to match what a chrome can achieve. If you're like me and shoot 6x7, there is no way to view a chrome (except directly on a light table) that doesn't lose all the advantages of a chrome over C41.

For that reason, I'm moving in the opposite direction. I'm winding down the last of my E6 film stock this month and have moved to C41 for all colour. I can make a pin-sharp large wet print from C41 with perfect colour and the opportunity to dodge+burn, and I can make as good a hybrid print from C41 as from a chrome, often better (again with the additional latitude and hue flexibility).

 

[dorff]

Not bad for a first developing attempt, and you did well in challenging lighting. That guy looks mighty pleased (as well he should be!).

I mostly agree with polyglot, though there is something to be said for a medium/large format chrome that is perfectly exposed and scanned with an excellent scanner. If you ever saw an Ilfochrome print, you would also want to shoot slides. My main gripe is with the shadows that tend to block fairly soon. The only remedy is to scan multiple times (as in 8 to 16), and to overlay, in order to reduce the sampling noise in the darker parts when one lifts the curve a bit. This takes loads of time, and is not worth the effort in 35 mm, but starts to become worthwhile for 6x7. Of course your take on it might be different, and I wouldn't discourage you from shooting 35 mm chromes per se, but I would advise choosing your subject matter accordingly. Also, while colour negative as well as black and white have clear strengths in terms of dynamic range, artistic expression etc, I struggle to rationalise the use of slides for any purpose other than the use of legacy medium/large format equipment to obtain high resolution scans. I don't want to drag the scanning issue into an analogue forum, but for me it is sort of part of the package of shooting slides. With the other media, analogue printing is an option, and for black and white one that I exercise. Ironically, I have resorted to digital negatives for contact printing some of my slides.

 

[Helinophoto]

Which Velvia is this? (great shot!)

I shoot a myriad of things, be it digital and film, but a properly exposed 6*7 landscape-shot with Velvia 50..........well, in my book, nothing can touch that. (except from even larger formats i suppose)
It's not just about the resolution, it's how Velvia renders the scene which is important. It's not just an increase in saturation with the 50, it's also slight hue-shifts which makes it so beautiful to my eyes.

Buy a few more rolls and keep shooting it until E6 is dead, I would believe that you can freeze Velvia 50 for pretty long, and there are still at least two seperate E6-kits available for home-development, so I would think that you still have a few years left to enjoy it, before it goes into the "Kodachrome path".

 

[Lowly]

I totally agree OP. Chromes on a light table is the closest thing to being there for me. Shooting chromes and b&w make me want to go out and photograph. C-41 not so much.

 

[jstout]

Well, I just developed my first two rolls of chrome, ever. I'm completely blown away. To the point where I am rethinking what I want to do with my photography going forward. I've never shot chromes before. Just c41 sparingly, and B&W. my B&W isn't going away, but I see no future for c41 with me. I'm just sorry I jumped on this so late in E6's life.

Wow. This is a quick scan of one, shot with an F5 and developed in the arista kit. Thoughts?

Very nice portrait. I like the balance of background lighting with the subject, and nice composition. Slides are so amazing to either view directly or project. When I look at my old slides from years ago (in the time before computers, when cars had fins) memories are brought to life, and there's a sense of being there, while looking at a print seems to take focused imagination to visualize the scene. That's what I like about slides. They may be specialized in how they can be used, but nothing else has this kind of impact for me.

 

[PtJudeRI]

Thanks guys. It really is like a come to Jesus moment for me. This was Velvia 50 35mm on my Nikon F5.

Conversely, I also developed a roll of ProviaF 100 in 120, and I wasn't in love, but still found them quite good.

I have been thinking about this now for two days, and I feel that for what I do (shoot, dev, scan, print lightly) e6 will be a great medium for me. I dont have a wet darkroom to use on a regular basis, and never C Printed, so Im ok with not having legit prints.

Now the question.. I really have been shooting a mix of formats (35, 120, and 4x5) and with everything that I do, I think that 120 is becoming the odd man out (except for the occasional holga shots). So thinking out loud, I may sell my RB67 kit and focus on some new lenses for my 35 and 4x5...

 

[henbo]

A nice photo with a beautiful couple.

Shooting E6 can be quite rewarding imo. The colours, the fine grain etc. is quite different from C-41. In 135 I shoot slides primarily, but I don't think it can replace C-41 completely. The exposure latitude of C-41 can be very convenient at times. E.g. I don't think that slides are the best for high key portraits. If you already have both 135, 120 and 4x5 format equipment, I would suggest that you simply buy some rolls (and sheets) of slide to test in the different formats, as the cost of that is primarily the film itself. Maybe also test some different type of E6 (the few that are left ).

As it seems that you are primarily scanning your film, I would say that scanning slides is a bit different from both scanning C-41 and b/w. Not that it's more difficult than C-41 or B/W, but it took me a while to master scanning each of the different types.

Go ahead and enjoy the world of E6.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Great shot! E6 is wonderful.

Jeff

 

[Vonder]

Choices abound! Slides, color print, B&W are each wonderful in their own way. For me, slides are the preferred way to capture a major event. Like family vacation, or a 471 mile bike ride through Iowa in the middle of Summer. My slides also document daily life; I keep a 35mm camera (with date imprint on) in my living room to record the more mundane moments that amuse and pile up over the years, which, were it not for the recording, would be someday lost from memory. The heart and soul of slide film is the ability to see it with the naked eye. No print need be made, no projection (although that is fun too) and no computer. I suspect that when I die, my slides will be the only thing that the kids will even want. The reams of C-41 negatives, the B&W prints, the photo albums will all likely end up in the dust bin.

Our existence is ephemeral. So are our photographs. Enjoying both is a pretty good ride, don't you agree?

 

[RattyMouse]

Completely agree that slides are lovely, with a couple of significant caveats:
- projectors for any format larger than 6x6 are horrifically expensive, and
- you can't print them except via scanning.

Of course once you scan & print, you lose the huge dynamic range because no reflective media exists with a Dmax to match what a chrome can achieve. If you're like me and shoot 6x7, there is no way to view a chrome (except directly on a light table) that doesn't lose all the advantages of a chrome over C41.

For that reason, I'm moving in the opposite direction. I'm winding down the last of my E6 film stock this month and have moved to C41 for all colour. I can make a pin-sharp large wet print from C41 with perfect colour and the opportunity to dodge+burn, and I can make as good a hybrid print from C41 as from a chrome, often better (again with the additional latitude and hue flexibility).

Shoot 6 x 4.5 and project inexpensively!!

 

[Tom Taylor]

"...Completely agree that slides are lovely, with a couple of significant caveats:
- projectors for any format larger than 6x6 are horrifically expensive..."

Occasionally A Mamiya ProCabin Z 6x7 projector shows up on ebay. I bought mine new from B&H at the tail end of their production during "Mamiya Day" at B&H for a 20% discount. Sure glad that I did because nothing matches the quality of a 6x7 slideshow.

Thomas

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

A nice shot. Velvia is the gold standard in imaging, though using it for people portraiture is a little off-beat.

6x7 projectors are still made by a designer overseas, not particularly costing an arm and a leg; a recent conversation with another APUG member here working overseas revealed this tidbit.

 

[dorff]

Thanks guys. It really is like a come to Jesus moment for me. This was Velvia 50 35mm on my Nikon F5.

Conversely, I also developed a roll of ProviaF 100 in 120, and I wasn't in love, but still found them quite good.

I have been thinking about this now for two days, and I feel that for what I do (shoot, dev, scan, print lightly) e6 will be a great medium for me. I dont have a wet darkroom to use on a regular basis, and never C Printed, so Im ok with not having legit prints.

Now the question.. I really have been shooting a mix of formats (35, 120, and 4x5) and with everything that I do, I think that 120 is becoming the odd man out (except for the occasional holga shots). So thinking out loud, I may sell my RB67 kit and focus on some new lenses for my 35 and 4x5...

I wouldn't do that too hastily if I were you. If the Velvia 50 in 6x7 doesn't come alive for you, then maybe do. But 120 has a very firm place in my film shooting, and I can't think of a lens worth having over a proper 645 or 6x7 kit that would cost the same. For example, I bought a Pentax 67 II with three lenses and accessories for much less than the cost of a Nikon 24-120/4 VR. And a Mamiya 645 Pro TL with an 80/1.9, 150/4, 300/5.6 and 500/5.6 plus accessories for less than the cost of a single Nikon 50/1.4 G. The amount of detail that can be obtained with a 6x7 kit and slides film rivals that of the best 35mm digital cameras and lenses, for 1/6 of the cost maybe. By all means use 35 mm if the focus speed and ergonomics are more what you need, but don't underestimate the quality of 6x7 systems and the best film. And printing from 6x4.5 is sweet!

 

[damonff]

I use Velvia for people all the time. It's great. Especially when I use my Zeiss lenses on my G2. The Arista kit is great and the Tetenal one is also very good. I get perfectly fine results from both kits. I use the original Velvia, expired. I store it in the freezer.

 

[dngrhm]

Just started shooting slides and am trying to figure out what to do with them after processing. The scan looks great and would be an acceptable quality for digital use for me. What scanner did you use and was there anything you did different in the scan process?

 

[PtJudeRI]

Not really. These, and a few others you can see on my Flickr Page, were scanned on an epson v600. I used the preset scan profile for positive film, set the unsharp mask to low, and used the Digital Ice feature. From there, I just tweaked the brightness and contrast, and did a bit of retouching to remove some spots in the sky. Very basic. What you see is all the film.

Regarding the Velvia and portrait use, it worked here in the sunset light, as it was very rich and warm; so I think that it works in this instance as a good reminder of the day.

 

[GarageBoy]

PtJudeRI - I know this is a DPUG question, but did you use auto exposure or did you manually set the levels during the scan?

I'm still trying to figure out what flavor of Velvia would be best for me
NYC doesn't have anything green to photograph!

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

LOL! Velvia loves greens, oh yes! I'm sure you have Central Park? That's green! Aren't you going into autumn ("fall") at this time, so there'd be colour.

Velvia scans very well but colourimetrics and profiling is the stumbling block for many people preparing scans for printing; typically printing loses 0.3 to 0.6 stops (sometimes more, depending on the type of media) and can flatten the palette. Auto exposure immediately on preview should be enough, though the Epsons can be fooled, so have your wits about you. My scans are sometimes prepapred on an Epson V700, or were, until I broke the 120 film holder!

Digital Ice smudges edges ("gauche effect"), especially noticeable in B&W; it is best avoided by thoroughly cleaning slides and despecking post-scan.

 

[PtJudeRI]

PtJudeRI - I know this is a DPUG question, but did you use auto exposure or did you manually set the levels during the scan?

I'm still trying to figure out what flavor of Velvia would be best for me
NYC doesn't have anything green to photograph!

For my in-scanner adjustments, I only adjusted the black and white points, and went with the auto exposure. After that, I did some additional tweaking (contrast, spotting, temp correction) in aperture, but really, this was very, very minor, and what you see here is very close to what I see on the light table. That was my goal, because I loved the look of the slide itself.

 

[Tony-S]

Holy bazinga! I just saw the price of a roll of 135x36 Velvia 50. Man, it's gotten expensive.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Holy bazinga! I just saw the price of a roll of 135x36 Velvia 50. Man, it's gotten expensive.

I don't consider Velvia 50 to be expensive. It's the cheapest of the lot.
To redefine the definition of expensive, try Provia 400X. Today a roll was offered to me at $40.95. Yes, for a single roll.
Provia 100F not far behind at $29.00. These are Australian Dollar prices; a bit less for USA.

 

[PKM-25]

Holy bazinga! I just saw the price of a roll of 135x36 Velvia 50. Man, it's gotten expensive.

Yeah, $12 a roll is not messing around prices. I used to shoot a ton of it for stock in 35mm for years, some in 120, never tried it in LF. I have two pro packs of 120 and just ordered 100 sheets of it in 4x5 before that totally disappears, talk about expensive, $10 a sheet when I factor in the soup cost...:-O

I'll take my time using it up that's for sure...

 

[PtJudeRI]

Yep, I paid $52 for a 5 pack of 35mm, and the 120 5 packs were a bit less, but still up there. Its averaging $10-11 for 35mm and $8-10 for 120. Its only going to get pricier, so I am thinking of investing now, while I can.