How Would You Compare Velvia 50 to Ektachrome 100 ?

koraks said:

I think the last part isn't really true. I personally believe they stop manufacturing a product they see insufficient demand for. Or they schedule a production stop, at least. They then proceed to sell remaining stock or final production at increased prices before issuing a notice of discontinuation. I also privately suspect that the latter is imminent for all Fuji's remaining E6 films. I have no concrete information to that effect, though.

Click to expand...

In Poland, distributors were asked for slide estimates for the next 1.5 years.

Mr Parker : Velvia pulls quite poorly. In fact, no current chrome films pull well. Polarizers do not decrease contrast. Fill flash doesn't work all that well when the scene is across a canyon, and grad filters merely make things look cheesy and fake. How much Velvia have you actually printed? You named three half-baked tricks. I know far more. I've shot or used in the lab every Fujichrome sheet film from the inception : Fuji 50D, Tungsten 64, every generation of Provia, all the Velvia series, every generation of Astia and the related CDU duplicating films, as well as all the Kodak E6 counterparts. And I've used most of em in 8X10 format, where the price penalty for choosing the wrong film is rather painful. I've got all kinds of punch and register lab gear to handle contrast the precise way. But there is damn little wiggle room with Velvia regardless.

And incidentally, as far as those easier to load 120 reels, which are nice, that no longer applies to their second generation ACROS II b&w film, which is finished in England and not by Fuji themselves anymore, and uses ordinary Ilford spools. So I save my Fuji ones for at least the take-up end.

faberryman said:

it does look like the writing is on the wall for Velvia.

Click to expand...

That's the way I see it, too. Sadly, but I don't think the market can really sustain a Kodak with their relatively popular E100 and the Fuji lineup insofar as it still exists. E6 film is a slow seller in the retail channel.

DREW WILEY said:

Mr Parker : Velvia pulls quite poorly. In fact, no current chrome films pull well.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree here from my experience. Have got good results with pulled Velvia 50 (works better than Velvia 100), and very good results with Provia 100F. And I am not the only one, as photographer friends of mine have the same results.

DREW WILEY said:

Polarizers do not decrease contrast.

Click to expand...

Of course they can do: E.g. in a landscape secene by turning the pol-filter you get more intense (more blue) and darker sky in relation to the ground. Depending on the direction of the sun and your wanted result you can often decrease the contrast between the blue sky and the ground by 1-2 stops. I am doing that very often for years with excellent results. And here again, I am definitely not the only one .

DREW WILEY said:

Fill flash doesn't work all that well when the scene is across a canyon,

Click to expand...

That is right, but in lots of other scenes it works perfectly, e.g. people in shade in the foreground. That technique has been used for decades in professional fashion photography. And it is still used there, now with digital imaging, because it improves the results.

DREW WILEY said:

and grad filters merely make things look cheesy and fake.

Click to expand...

Sorry to say, but that sounds arrogant. Gradual filters are very successfully used for decades by countless professional landscape photographers, with film and digital. Used by excellent photographers who are doing their living by selling their pictures. And no, their results don't look cheesy and fake. They know how to use it (and I know, too ).

DREW WILEY said:

How much Velvia have you actually printed? You named three half-baked tricks. I know far more. I've shot or used in the lab every Fujichrome sheet film from the inception : Fuji 50D, Tungsten 64, every generation of Provia, all the Velvia series, every generation of Astia and the related CDU duplicating films, as well as all the Kodak E6 counterparts. And I've used most of em in 8X10 format, where the price penalty for choosing the wrong film is rather painful. I've got all kinds of punch and register lab gear to handle contrast the precise way. But there is damn little wiggle room with Velvia regardless.

Click to expand...

You are not the only one who has used many colour reversal films. I have, too, I am using them regularly, and probably using more p.a. than most of the users here. I know my stuff. My photographer friends as well.

DREW WILEY said:

And incidentally, as far as those easier to load 120 reels, which are nice, that no longer applies to their second generation ACROS II b&w film, which is finished in England and not by Fuji themselves anymore, and uses ordinary Ilford spools. So I save my Fuji ones for at least the take-up end.

Click to expand...

I know that of course. But the topic here was Fuji colour reversal film, and both Velvias and Provia have the excellent original Fuji converting as described by me above.

JParker said:

Are you kidding? You say Velvia is your favourite film, and you don't even know Fujifilm's superior 120 film converting?
- Easy Loading System: There is a hole in the start of the paper, which fits perfectly in the special hook in the second, taking spool
- Easy End Seal: Perfect self-adhesive end to close and finish the film very tightly and absolutely reliable
- Barcode System: Certain cameras can read it and get data like sensitivity from it.

Click to expand...

I've always slipped the 120 film leader into the groove into the take-up spool in my Mamiya RB67. Unfortunately, I currently have film in my holders so I can't check. Are there hooks there too? Is there a hole in the Velvia 50 film for it?

Parker - Why would any fashion photographer choose Velvia to begin with? It has poor neutrality and certainly doesn't flatter many complexions. That's the kind of studio application Astia was designed for, the opposite end of the selection scale from Velvia. It was far more neutral and more evenly hue balanced - the best ever, in fact. I even used it for making precision internegs from chromes; Velvia and even Portra would be worthless for that.

You just made an argument why polarizers increase contrast rather than decrease them. I have plenty of pola experience in art copy work, and know what it does. I gave up on them in the field half a century ago - didn't care for the look. I relish natural sparkle and reflections just as I see them.

Find me a name brand ND grad set, and I'll tell you every example that particular outdoor photo guru himself made that way looks ridiculous. I guess if you were somewhere with a perfectly even horizon like the ocean or prairie with no trees or mountains on the skyline, you might get away with it; but few do. It's far simpler to select a film better matched to the scene contrast range to begin with. I'm not being arrogant, just honest.

Do you have any experience with earlier E-6 films like generation I or 2 Provia (I think it's now 4th generation), or old Ektachrome 64? - those pulled way better, but if too much, more than half a stop, risked highlight crossover. The newer fine-grained "F" versions lost most of that ability (though gained certain other advantages). And a lot of pros did complain. That's been known for a long time cross-platform, between mfg, labs, and end users, but apparently not by those beginning in the past 20 yrs or so, unaware of the transition.

But you'd better adapt to current Ektachrome, at least in parallel. Fuji's commitment to color film is questionable at this point. Or hoard plenty of your favorite film in your freezer.

JParker said:

Are you kidding? You say Velvia is your favourite film, and you don't even know Fujifilm's superior 120 film converting?
- Easy Loading System: There is a hole in the start of the paper, which fits perfectly in the special hook in the second, taking spool
- Easy End Seal: Perfect self-adhesive end to close and finish the film very tightly and absolutely reliable
- Barcode System: Certain cameras can read it and get data like sensitivity from it.

Click to expand...

What are you referring to? Converting what?

Alan -Fuji spools are just slightly different, with mildly convex instead of flat ends, which does make them easier to load. My hardest camera to load camera is the Pentax 6X7, where the fit is somewhat tight, and Fuji spools are quicker to insert. But they're proprietary and patented. Too bad they don't sell them to their competitors too; but maybe they have a finite supply and won't make more. Dunno.

"Converting" simply refers to taking a big master roll of coated film and cutting it down and packaging it, in this case, onto spools and backing paper as 120 film. Fuji still does that for their color film, but now, as I already mentioned, sends their Acros II b&w film to Harman (Ilford) in England to complete. That might not be the complete story, but comes close enough.

DREW WILEY said:

Alan -Fuji spools are just slightly different, with mildly convex instead of flat ends, which does make them easier to load. My hardest camera to load camera is the Pentax 6X7, where the fit is somewhat tight, and Fuji spools are quicker to insert. But they're proprietary and patented. Too bad they don't sell them to their competitors too; but maybe they have a finite supply and won't make more. Dunno.

Click to expand...

Is there a hook in the spool and a hole in the Velvia film as Parker says? I can't check right now.

DREW WILEY said:

"Converting" simply refers to taking a big master roll of coated film and cutting it down and packaging it, in this case, onto spools and backing paper as 120 film.

Click to expand...

It also includes edge printing and, where applicable, adding sprocket holes.

Yeah, Matt, but 120 film is generally coated on a different base substrate than 35mm, so the finishing would be distinct too. Edge imprinting? - don't try this at home, folks. Gosh, the equipment they must have!

Alan Edward Klein said:

Velvia 50 is my most popular. Unfortunately, they're ending it in 4x5 so I'll have to continue to shoot it in medium format 6x7. Ektachrome is OK but rather pedestrian.

Velvia 50 in different formats https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=velvia&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

Comparison of Ektachrome 100 vs Provia 100 Ektacrhome has redder red and greener greens. Provia's reds are orangey. Unfortunately, I don't have a Velvia sample of this subject.

Click to expand...

Here;s is the comparison of the actual film shot with my cellphone Galaxy S7. The first pair was the original scan. The second set is the cellphone picture shot of the original films on a Kaiser light table. Colors on second set were adjusted afterwards to match as closely as possible to the original film.

DREW WILEY said:

Yeah, Matt, but 120 film is generally coated on a different base substrate than 35mm, so the finishing would be distinct too. Edge imprinting? - don't try this at home, folks. Gosh, the equipment they must have!

Click to expand...

Yet Photo Engineer (now departed) reported on this forum https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/thickness-of-film-support.26050/
that the base of 135 and 120 both measured 5 mils, while large format measured 7 mils,
and an antihalation layer of microns in thickness is what differentiated 120 film from 135 film.

Depends on the product, Wilt. 120 film is generally coated on thin acetate, 35mm often on stronger PET, and thicker sheet film on both triacetate as well as PET, depending on the specific type (now Kodak's sheet film selection seems to be entirely PET, but for awhile their color films were mostly triacetate. Fuji also used both triacetate and PET for color sheet film base, depending on the specific product). So overall, all kinds of coating distinctions were going on, not to mention specialty graphics, industrial, and movie films.

And you cited Ron (PE) incorrectly. 35mm base is a little thicker than 120 base, at least among the major manufacturers.
But nowadays Kodak seems to logically be trying to do a much as they can with PET base of various thicknesses, which they manufacture themselves, rather than acetate, which they purchase from others.

JParker said:

The major differences between Velvia 50 and Ektachrome are:
- Velvia 50 has higher colour saturation
- Velvia has a warmer colour rendition
- Ektachrome has a neutral to slightly cool colour balance
- sometimes shadows with Ektachrome can get a bit green colour cast
- Velvia is much sharper
- Velvia has higher resolution, especially at lower detail contrast
- Velvia works fine at box speed, Ektachrome looks best at EI 80
- in 120 Velvia has the much better film converting with Fujifilms Easy Loading System, Easy End Seal and Barcode System.

Click to expand...

and one thing else: Velvia needs a tripod - Ektachrome more times not....

JParker said:

No, completely different films in concept, design and characteristics.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'll give Provia a few good tries before the Summer is over.

faberryman said:

Well, however the discontinuation process plays out, it does look like the writing is on the wall for Velvia. If it were my favorite film, I might think about stocking up, if I could find a source that still has it in stock.

Click to expand...

You're giving me anxiety - do you mean Velvia stands a chance of going kaput?

wiltw said:

an antihalation layer of microns in thickness is what differentiated 120 film from 135 film.

Click to expand...

120 tends to have an anti-curl layer on the backside that 135 doesn't have. This is basically a gelatin coating. Since it's there anyway, it's often used to embed the antihalation dye into as well (in sheet film, too). The primary purpose of that layer is to prevent the film from buckling into itself as the image-bearing gelatin layer dries.

Anti-halation is generally present as a dye and as such doesn't add thickness.

DF said:

You're giving me anxiety - do you mean Velvia stands a chance of going kaput?

Click to expand...

Velvia 100 has gone kaput in the USA because it was using a banned chemical. I don't know if it's still being produced for sale elsewhere.

Velvia 50 has different chemicals. However, it is no longer being made in 4x5 and larger. I've got two boxes of 4x5 in my freezer either to shoot later on or as an investment to sell as the price continues to escalate.

koraks said:

I think the last part isn't really true. I personally believe they stop manufacturing a product they see insufficient demand for. Or they schedule a production stop, at least. They then proceed to sell remaining stock or final production at increased prices before issuing a notice of discontinuation. I also privately suspect that the latter is imminent for all Fuji's remaining E6 films. I have no concrete information to that effect, though.

Click to expand...

The production stop already happened due to Covid plus then the March 2023 backlog. IIRC he notice included the reversal films.
But overall, what the heck is Fujifilm making film wise nowadays? I think if optimistic they will make again the consumer films in house, but 120 and sheet availability is nil. The hypothetical situation of stocked film lingering around channels prior to discontinuation makes sense.
I purchased some of the last 400H available locally in my country, and still has a 2024 expiraton date. In the EU some of the film has been available on distribution for a while.

DREW WILEY said:

Parker - Why would any fashion photographer choose Velvia to begin with? It has poor neutrality and certainly doesn't flatter many complexions. That's the kind of studio application Astia was designed for, the opposite end of the selection scale from Velvia. It was far more neutral and more evenly hue balanced - the best ever, in fact. I even used it for making precision internegs from chromes; Velvia and even Portra would be worthless for that.

But you'd better adapt to current Ektachrome, at least in parallel. Fuji's commitment to color film is questionable at this point. Or hoard plenty of your favorite film in your freezer.

Click to expand...

Yeah unfortunately (myself included now) color film = color negative film in most of the pop and social media use. Cool scans with rebates, one sees reversal much less than the Portras and Ektar.
I have frozen Provia and a stray roll of new Ektachrome. With an end of summer trip to

Alas, I didn't grab any Velvia earlier on and now crave to shoot a bit. Let's see what happens.

Prest_400 said:

The production stop already happened due to Covid plus then the March 2023 backlog.

Click to expand...

Yes; I have suspicions that E6 film hasn't been manufactured by Fuji since that manufacturing stop. Mind you, they're just suspicions. No facts.

koraks said:

Yes; I have suspicions that E6 film hasn't been manufactured by Fuji since that manufacturing stop. Mind you, they're just suspicions. No facts.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Plus perhaps they still have some stock around to convert and send.
The last price increase of ~15-88% has been commented around social media and naysayers. It could very well be Fuji following Kodak's increases and consolidating with a chance to seeing money. But the range is a mess and does not allow to see where is this happening.
They could have a chance (re)formulating one 100-200, 400 CN film and then somehow keep Provia and Velvia 50. Coating film they must, as Instax very well needs color neg "substrate".
But merely releasing a color neg film is not simple, as PE (RIP) well explained many times then and Smarter than everywhere's documentary goes to mention the ~1200 components of a film.

But well, the only precedents for films coming back are Pro 400 limited batch in 2016 and Acros II.

koraks said:

120 tends to have an anti-curl layer on the backside that 135 doesn't have. This is basically a gelatin coating. Since it's there anyway, it's often used to embed the antihalation dye into as well (in sheet film, too). The primary purpose of that layer is to prevent the film from buckling into itself as the image-bearing gelatin layer dries.

Anti-halation is generally present as a dye and as such doesn't add thickness.

Click to expand...

re-reading Photo Engineer's post, I find that I mistakenly attributed 'a tad' to antihalation. I now quote is post for clarity:

A few mils of thickness difference determines whether a plastic bag is flimsy kitchen bag or a heavy construction and landscaping bag.

DREW WILEY said:

A few mils of thickness difference determines whether a plastic bag is flimsy kitchen bag or a heavy construction and landscaping bag.

Click to expand...

Really? Who'd have guessed? If you would like to know more about plastic bags, here is some information from Plastic Bag Partners:


And now back to your regularly scheduled program.