Provia 100 and Velvia 100 gurus. Bestow upon me your knowledge.

[albireo]

Small quantities of Provia 100 and Velvia 100 are reaching some European distributors.

I'm not much of a colour photographer anymore, but nostalgia overtook me. That, and reading/participating to a couple of threads on slide film on here did the rest.

The result is that I have 2 rolls of Provia and 3 of Velvia in 35mm coming to me. I am very excited.

I used to shoot loads of Sensia a couple of decades ago but I've forgotten everything about it.

I vaguely remember hating how the results looked when I overexposed even a tiny bit - the highlights became 'translucent'. I might have used a permanent exposure compensation on my cameras of -1/3 or -2/3 EV. Is this wise?

In 35mm, I will be using a Nikon F90X and its AF-D prime lenses, most likely. Should I

• just set the camera to Matrix metering and shoot away
• switch to spot and 'expose for the highlights' and let the shadows fall where they want
• something else

I have dug into my box of memories and found a 'Hoya Skylight 1B HMC' and a Nikon A2. The A2 is visibly darker. I would welcome input on how to use (or if to use) them both with Provia and Velvia 100. Any other filters worth having? @DREW WILEY - let it rip!

I will probably be waiting for some Spring colour to test the film. Undergrowth in the forest, but also city scenes a la Eggleston would be my planned usage. I hope to go out and use the film either soon after dawn or before sunset as I like those glowing colours.

A final thought: the slides will be projected AND scanned, so it would be nice to nail the colour balance right on the slide.

Any thoughts or experiences appreciated. Exciting!

 

[albireo]

Also - I won't be doing my own development. If someone could recommend a rock-solid, dependable pro lab offering E6 development in western Europe (France - The Netherlands - Germany - Belgium etc) that would be great.

 

[koraks]

I vaguely remember hating how the results looked when I overexposed even a tiny bit - the highlights became 'translucent'. I might have used a permanent exposure compensation on my cameras of 1/3 or 2/3 EV. Is this wise?

Yes. You'll find the same with any slide film. Overexposed highlights break down.

Should I just set the camera to Matrix metering and shoot away?

I'd suggest using spot metering and base metering on the brightest part of the scene where you want to preserve tone. Don't go beyond +2-2/3 for these parts. Let all the rest fall wherever it may.

Can't help you on the filters; 99.9% of the time when I shot color slides, I shot them without a filter and was happy with how they came out. Look for pleasing light, capture it.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Here's what I do with my OM-1n center-weighted average metering TTL: meter my scene paying attention to highlights and if dominated by them - just open up to 1/2 of a stop or come back at different time when the light is more even. Otherwise highlights will be made "neutral gray" - so a tad more exposure helps to place the metered hightlights where they should belong - highlights.

So - yes. Meter the scene by highlights you want to keep and let shadows go to hell.

 

[loccdor]

Modern 90s-2000s cameras with matrix/evaluative metering rarely overexpose slide film on +0 compensation. Usually only can happen if I have a ton of black in the image. It's much more common that it slightly underexposes them. And that's great, at least for films like Sensia and Ektachrome you can get usable pictures even 2 stops underexposed. Provia and Velvia have a bit less latitude.

On the other hand if you have an older camera where the speeds run a little slow, it's easier to overexpose slide.

Does your camera have autobracketing? You can use that on 1/3 stops but it burns more film. You could also use a handheld incident meter and meter for the highlights. But most of the newest advanced film cameras preserve the highlights of slide film well. Even my Olympus XAs with their basic metering err on the side of underexposure.

 

[Film-Niko]

Small quantities of Provia 100 and Velvia 100 are reaching some European distributors.

That has been a quite constant situation now for about 1.5 years. It has been possible for me to buy my needed amount of Fujichrome films at my usual sources. They inform me when new supply is coming in.

I'm not much of a colour photographer anymore, but nostalgia overtook me. That, and reading/participating to a couple of threads on slide film on here did the rest.

You won't regret it. The detail rendition, color brillance and three-dimensional impression of color reversal film is absolutally unique and unsurpassed. You can't get that with any other photographic medium.

The result is that I have 2 rolls of Provia and 3 of Velvia in 35mm coming to me. I am very excited.

And you can really be, for very good reasons: Provia 100F, Velvia 100 and Velvia 50 are the benchmarks for color positive film. Best materials available.

I used to shoot loads of Sensia a couple of decades ago but I've forgotten everything about it.

Sensia I and II were the amateur versions of RD 100 Prof. and later Provia (without F). But Sensia III was the amateur version of Astia 100F.

I vaguely remember hating how the results looked when I overexposed even a tiny bit - the highlights became 'translucent'. I might have used a permanent exposure compensation on my cameras of -1/3 or -2/3 EV. Is this wise?

Not when your exposure meter is working correctly. Then you usually don't need a permanent correction.

In 35mm, I will be using a Nikon F90X and its AF-D prime lenses, most likely. Should I

• just set the camera to Matrix metering and shoot away
• switch to spot and 'expose for the highlights' and let the shadows fall where they want
• something else

I have shot hundreds of transparency films with my Nikon F90X using its Matrix metering. Results were perfect to 98-99%.
An even higher keeper rate I have only with my F6 and Matrix metering.

Therefore my recommendation is to make your life easy and just use Matrix metering. Only in very extreme high-contrast situations a double-check with the in-built spot meter is useful.

Provia 100F has quite a lot of latitude for a color reversal film (only Astia 100F / Sensia III were a little bit better in that regard).
Velvia 100 has a steeper characteristic curve, and more contrast. It has about 1 stop less latitude (Velvia 50 is in between Provia and Velvia 100).

I have dug into my box of memories and found a 'Hoya Skylight 1B HMC' and a Nikon A2. The A2 is visibly darker. I would welcome input on how to use (or if to use) them both with Provia and Velvia 100. Any other filters worth having? @DREW WILEY - let it rip!

I extremely rarely use color filters with Fujichrome films. Simply because it is not needed.
Provia 100F offers very natural, neutral "true to life" colours. Perfect all-round film.
Velvia 100 offers higher color saturation, and the color rendition is warmer compared to Provia.

I am using both films for different applications and situations, and by that get perfect results. Horses for courses.

Lab recommendations:
- https://jankopp.de/
- https://www.prolab.de/produkte/fotoproduktionen/filmentwicklung/

I am developing my E6 films by myself for years. But friends of mine have used the above mentioned and have been very satiesfied.

 

[1957ExaktaVarexIIa]

If someone could recommend a rock-solid, dependable pro lab offering E6 development in western Europe (France - The Netherlands - Germany - Belgium etc) that would be great.

How about Foto Görner in Dresden, Germany?

 

[miha]

@albiero Don't overthink it, it's not rocket science, just use common sense. About 18 years ago, my wife (then my girlfriend) and I spent 3 weeks in Spain and Portugal in the summer. I took 10 rolls of Velvia 100 with me, and my camera, a Nikon FM2 with a primitive meter, allowed me to capture some of the most beautiful slides I brought home from the vacation. All the slides were perfectly exposed, and I still enjoy looking at them.

 

[JParker]

@albiero Don't overthink it, it's not rocket science, just use common sense. About 18 years ago, my wife (then my girlfriend) and I spent 3 weeks in Spain and Portugal in the summer. I took 10 rolls of Velvia 100 with me, and my camera, a Nikon FM2 with a primitive meter, allowed me to capture some of the most beautiful slides I brought home from the vacation. All the slides were perfectly exposed, and I still enjoy looking at them.

+1.

For decades photographers have used reversal film successfully in much simpler, less sophisticated cameras than your excellent F90X. And they produced amazing results.

As an long-term F90X user myself I can also to 100% agree what Niko has written above. I've made the same experiences.
F90X + Fujichrome: Just go for it and enjoy .

 

[albireo]

Ah fantastic thank you all very much for the input, I can't wait!

Question: does anyone still offer Cibachrome/Ilfochrome printing in the world?

 

[brbo]

Question: does anyone still offer Cibachrome/Ilfochrome printing in the world?

http://lab-ciba.com ?

 

[albireo]

http://lab-ciba.com ?

Ops.. A bit far.

 

[axestrata]

Here's what I do with my OM-1n center-weighted average metering TTL: meter my scene paying attention to highlights and if dominated by them - just open up to 1/2 of a stop or come back at different time when the light is more even. Otherwise highlights will be made "neutral gray" - so a tad more exposure helps to place the metered hightlights where they should belong - highlights.

So - yes. Meter the scene by highlights you want to keep and let shadows go to hell.

Yes, the misplacement of highlights as neutral gray is an issue I’ve definitely come across with average metering!

 

[Samu]

Unless you know the lab knows what they are doing, I strongly suggest buying chemistry like Bellini, and processing the film yourself. The problem is that the demand for E6 is quite small, and it is often not possible to run a replenished, minilab type system commercially. This means many labs use Jobo or similar solutions for this. The risk is overusing chemistry, old chemistry and bad quality chemistry (3 bath kits), or all of these problems. That said, there are labs who know what they are doing, but this can´t be taken for granted any more.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Or they'll collect enough orders for a single run

 

[albireo]

You make an excellent point, @Samu. I was just pondering this today. I have stumbled a few times in exactly the problem you describe with C41. I have a sous vide stick and and have in the past done my C41 processing, but over the past few months I haven't had the time for this. So I've sent out my C41 rolls. I have moved to another city, too, and cannot rely anymore on the local trustworthy lab I was using.

The result is that I'm playing Russian roulette with the the C41 labs that are now available locally to me. The first one has been a disaster: 2 rolls which are basically lost: terrible colour dominants etc. Just today I've gotten two more rolls of Kodak Gold 200 back from another lab and these are looking much better.

But the often used mantra that 'you don't need to do your own C41 development as it's "a rigorously standardised process and unlike B&W you can't do better than a lab" is utter BS in 2025 where I live. Variability for the reasons you mention is too high.

So I've been wondering whether I should just go back to doing my own C41 and call it a day. The old Tetenal 1L I used to use doesn't exist anymore. I've seen both Adox and Bellini make a kit now, and the Bellini seems to have the blix split in its two components? What's the advantage of doing that? I might open another thread.

As for E6, I see that, again, Bellini and Adox both have a product. Any comments on this? It does seem to be more daunting to me.. I might use the pro lab recommended by Niko above first, and hope for the best..

 

[koraks]

Bellini seems to have the blix split in its two components?

The Bellini kits use separate bleach & fix as intended for a C41 process. The use of a blix has always been aimed solely at amateur, small-scale users for reasons of convenience. It works OK in practice, but purists will point out that there are technical as well as practical reasons why separate bleach & fix are preferable.
The Bellini kit has been used by many and I'm not aware of any recent complaints about it. The @ADOX Fotoimpex chemistry has been on the market for a little briefer and AFAIK is also an excellent product. I'd pick whichever suits you best.

 

[albireo]

The Bellini kits use separate bleach & fix as intended for a C41 process. The use of a blix has always been aimed solely at amateur, small-scale users for reasons of convenience. It works OK in practice, but purists will point out that there are technical as well as practical reasons why separate bleach & fix are preferable.
The Bellini kit has been used by many and I'm not aware of any recent complaints about it. The @ADOX Fotoimpex chemistry has been on the market for a little briefer and AFAIK is also an excellent product. I'd pick whichever suits you best.

Ok thanks interesting. I think the Tetenal C41 I used to use before had the amateur 'combined' blix solution, and to be honest I was always pleased with the results. But I'd be interested in understanding if the separate solutions can result in some visible improvements. Can you point me to some resources about this?

 

[ChrisGalway]

I can certainly vouch for the Bellini kit, it's 7 baths in all but there are only 2 intermediate washes, so it's not as tedious as it sounds and you can open the tank quite early in the process (I find that convenient using the Paterson tank). I've not tried the Adox 4-bath kit yet, but used the Tetenal kit many times and I understand that the Adox kit is identical (or very similar) to the Tetenal one.

Doing the processing yourself, in a disciplined way, means you can be consistent. "Same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie? Same procedure as every year, James" for Dinner for One aficionados.

By the way, I find in both the Bellini and Tetenal kits that you need to give a 1st Dev time of 7:00min, or even 7:30min in fresh solutions. That's for my usual exposure of 1/60 @ f/16 for Provia 100f, in full sun. (I do medium format stereo, need to use f/16 or f/22 to get required depth of field.).

 

[Samu]

You make an excellent point, @Samu. I was just pondering about this today. I have stumbled a few times in exactly the problem you describe with C41. I have a sous vide stick and and have in the past done my C41 processing, but over the past few months I haven't had the time for this. So I've sent out my C41 rolls. I have moved to another city, too, and cannot rely anymore on the local trustworthy lab I was using.

The result is that I'm playing Russian roulette with the the C41 labs that are now available locally to me. The first one has been a distaster: 2 rolls which are basically lost: terrible colour dominants etc. Just today I've gotten back two more rolls of Kodak Gold 200 from another lab and these are looking much better.

But the often used mantra that 'you don't need to do your own C41 development as it's "a rigorously standardised process and unlike B&W you can't do better than a lab" is utter BS in 2025 where I live. Variability for the reasons you mention is too high.

So I've been wondering whether I should just go back to doing my own C41 and call it a day. The old Tetenal 1L I used to use doesn't exist anymore. I've seen both Adox and Bellini make a kit now, and the Bellini seems to have the blix split in its two components? What's the advantage of doing that? I might open another thread.

As for E6, I see that, again, Bellini and Adox both have a product. Any comments on this? It does seem to be more daunting to me.. I might use the pro lab recommended by Niko above first, and hope for the best..

In C41 it is not a problem in most cases, as labs have still enough customers for running their minilabs, or other kind of equipment using a replenished process. For this kind of system to work properly, enough film must go through the process. But with E6. the demand has declined to the point that many labs can't maintain this kind of process.

 

[Samu]

I can certainly vouch for the Bellini kit, it's 7 baths in all but there are only 2 intermediate washes, so it's not as tedious as it sounds and you can open the tank quite early in the process (I find that convenient using the Paterson tank). I've not tried the Adox 4-bath kit yet, but used the Tetenal kit many times and I understand that the Adox kit is identical (or very similar) to the Tetenal one.

Doing the processing yourself, in a disciplined way, means you can be consistent. "Same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie? Same procedure as every year, James" for Dinner for One aficionados.

By the way, I find in both the Bellini and Tetenal kits that you need to give a 1st Dev time of 7:00min, or even 7:30min in fresh solutions. That's for my usual exposure of 1/60 @ f/16 for Provia 100f, in full sun. (I do medium format stereo, need to use f/16 or f/22 to get required depth of field.).

There is really no such thing as exact industry standard time for E6 FD. The nominal time is 6:00. but the documentation also states you must find which time fits your conditions. Kodak suggested +0:30 for Fuji films, while Fuji does not. But the times are in range of 6:00 to 8:00. I use 6:30 for first use, and 7:00 for second use if developing in tanks with a standard developer (Bellini, Fuji Hunt, Jobo). for Kodak films. For Provia, the times are the same, but with Velvia I extend all times by 30 seconds.

 

[albireo]

Those of you who routinely do both C41 and E6 in small tank (Paterson, AP etc) could you list the differences? Do you find E6 dev as complex or more complex than C41?

I have a sous vide stick that works reasonably well with c41, and also have three dark brown glass chemist bottles. Would I need four more for the Bellini E6 kit?

What kind of app/timer are you using for E6 development?

 

[Samu]

Those of you who routinely do both C41 and E6 in small tank (Paterson, AP etc) could you list the differences? Do you find E6 dev as complex or more complex than C41?

I have a sous vide stick that works reasonably well with c41, and also have three dark brown glass chemist bottles. Would I need four more for the Bellini E6 kit?

What kind of app/timer are you using for E6 development?

E6 has more steps, but calling it harder is not what I would like to say. E6 chemistry does not keep as well as C-41 does. When looking at the capacities, 8 films does not mean you can reuse it for 8 times, if you want good results. For good results, E6 chemistry can be used twice in tanks, not more. One shot with rotary processing, such as Jobo. Other things, such as accurate temperature, are needed for both processes.

If your sous vide stick works with C-41, it will also work with E6. The temperature for this process is 38.0°C

For the Bellini kit, you will need at least 7 bottles of 1L capacity. I use even more, because I use this kit in batches of 500 mL. To use this kit to the maximum capacity (or any standard E6 in tanks for that matter), you would need a Jobo tank or similar, which will need 500 mL: per 2 films (unless it is 120 film, when this is not an issue in Paterson). This way you can develop 8 films with the kit using it only twice. For other chemicals than developers, this is not an issue. If you use it more than twice, you will get slides, but the quality will be visibly worse - the highlights will go remarkably darker. You can compare the exposed leaders of the film to see the difference.

I use Lab Timer app for Android, with my own times for most processes I do regularly. This is C-41, E6 (both with variations for fresh and used developer) RA-4 and for the most common black & white film and developer combinations I use.

 

[albireo]

Excellent, thank you Samu.

In terms of quality that can be expected from DIY E6 development vs a professional lab operating to specs - can 'pro' level quality be achieved at home if everything is done correctly?

 

[Samu]

Excellent, thank you Samu.

In terms of quality that can be expected from DIY E6 development vs a professional lab operating to specs - can 'pro' level quality be achieved at home if everything is done correctly?

Hard to say, because I don't have the possibility to control the process with test strips and a densitometer. But the slides will be of good quality, if you don't mess up. I would say the risk of getting badly developed slides from labs is quite real these days. In theory, well maintained machine doea always the best work - it is impossible to have such a constancy in temperatures, agitation or times when developing by hand.