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

[Taylor Nankervis]

In terms of obtaining the very best results possible, 35mm Velvia 100 would not be the best choice, especially given its high cost, cramped contrast, and the consummate ease of errors many new/returning users make in exposing it. RVP 100 is hyper-saturated and requires a lot of experience to expose well — even done to its well-known edict, it can look quite gaudy compared to RVP50 — the proverbial (and very real!) Disneychrome look! It was commonly exposed to perfection in the era (now long gone) of Ilfochrome Classic printing. Much of my work before switching up to medium and large format was produced from Velvia 50 and 100 to Ilfochrome Classic, and the results of intensive experience (and huge cost) in the prints speak for themselves.

If you do go the 35mm way, restrict your photography when starting out to diffuse light where there are no deep shadows or bright areas; diffuse light penetrates shadows and subdues highlights and spectrals. Multispot metering, such as that afforded by handheld multispot/incident meters, provide the amount of control to critically analyse and balance the illumination across a scene — even extend the narrow dynamic range of RVP in ideal conditions. Exposing Velvia 50 or 100 in bright daylight is naff and wasteful; for that type of use, hook onto Provia 100. As you would be aware, RVP excels in early morning and evening light, gently accentuating colours, but how much it does so depends on how well you expose it! My use of RVP in forestry scenes almost always uses a polariser to modulate the effect — very easy in diffuse light, but a literal dog's breakfast in the harsh light of day. That's the sort of balls up mistake I made playing with Sensia 100 more than three decades-plus ago.

The Olympus OM4 is one of very few 35mm cameras I would recommended for Velvia, even so, the results you dream of probably will not come magically overnight, but with intensive practice: expose, take notes, develop, analyse on a (neutral/colour corrected-) lightbox and repeat. The OM4's hat trick is highlight and shadow balance — when used competently, it will easily ace even today's matrix/evaluative metering.

Note taking of exposure and scene is critical to evaluating and stepping your progress and planning improvements. None of the films are cheap, so keep in mind the cost of a single exposure every time you go out and plan to photograph, and make it count.

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?

If they did, I would have put myself in the queue a long time ago!
That ship has well and truly sailed.

• Photo: Evening at the Taoist Tree, Lake Bonney, Barmera, South Australia. RVP50, Pentax 67, 90mm, multispot metered.

 

[benveniste]

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

For a high contrast scene, I'd switch to spot and meter highlights for either emulsion. Otherwise, I tend to use center-weighted for slide film.

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 wouldn't use either of these filters. Velvia does have some UV sensitivity. So if you are shooting at altitude or on water, you might want to use a UV filter. During "golden hour," some people like to use an 80B or 80C filter. Others prefer the natural warm look of that time of day.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

I second the CPL filter usability - not only to control ugly reflections that tend to blow out, but to darken the skies on sunny days, "compressing" the scene quite nicely.

CPL is useful for IR work too.

 

[koraks]

Can you point me to some resources about this?

I'd start here: https://www.google.com/search?q=sitehotrio.com+separate+bleach+fix+"c41"&oq=sitehotrio.com+separate+bleach+fix+"c41"
Which yields e.g. https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/blix-vs-separate-bleach-and-fixer.128544/
And this https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/just-how-bad-is-blix-vs-bleach-fixer.53336/
and much, much more.
Since this is all about C41, it'd be best if we continued that tangent in a different thread and leave this one here to go back to E6.

If you do go the 35mm way, restrict your photography when starting out to diffuse light where there are no deep shadows or bright areas; diffuse light penetrates shadows and subdues highlights and spectrals.

Isn't this a bit of a case of putting the horse behind the cart, though? I'd expect that a photographer would choose subject matter and concept first, and then the material to suit. This seems like an example of the other way around, which strikes me as a little odd.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

That's often not an option for slide shooters though. I shoot slides exclusively and for projection - that's what I love to do and I appreciate the challenge.
Either come back with your E-6 film when light is complimenting or use CPL to see if it helps. Or - learn BW reversal and then yes - choose the material to suit: ortho, NIR, wider latitude, other characteristics...

With E6 you can shoot bright scenes no problems. With E6 you can shoot shadowy scenes - no problems. But there are some problems when both are present in the same scene. Overcast can help to balance it out. And Velvia loves a rainy day, brings nice colors to that gray.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

[...]


Isn't this a bit of a case of putting the horse behind the cart, though? I'd expect that a photographer would choose subject matter and concept first, and then the material to suit. This seems like an example of the other way around, which strikes me as a little odd.

No, not at all.
At least not in my and among the small (by global standards) number of E6 users here in Australia.
I know my subject matter very well enough — to conceptualise and visualise the end result — to confidently commit the majority of scenes to Velvia and/or in some rare cases, Provia 100F (when I absolutely must shoot in bright sun and deep shadow) or RVP100 (for pinholing, which characteristically dulls the palette of films like RVP50). From experience, there are very few alternative films available (Sensia, and this would be a good ring-in ) that provide the effect I and clients find visually appealing. That's half the story...

...the much bigger, continually niggly problem for so much of us (and I'm sure we're not alone down here tugging at the forelocks of a long-gone era...) is not so much film (the which material, when and why), but the meaty business of printing: The loss of Ilfochrome Classic back in 2010 sounded the death knell of at least 54 photographers here in Australia whose 'big ticket' printing did more, much more, than put bread and butter on the table (two I know personally now work in retailing). Even reflecting on the massive, turbulent, expensive and frustrating times prior to 2010 of faulty, inconsistent or just plain crap-finish products coming from overseas. I just feel, very strongly that alternative print methods just are not up there with the punch and pizazz of IC.

At present and going forward, I am drum scanning and gicléee printing to art media (Hahnemühle Photo Rag 308gsm) and museum-grade conservation framing; the results are attractive, and very different, but still cause me pause to grumble; I am surrounded at home and in the studio by the continuing sparkle and flash of framed IC on the many walls. RA4...? There are a vanishingly few Lambda/Pegausus RA4 printers now; they are considered by labs as quaint relicts of antiquity.

But I smell a rat.

Now, I must get din-dins under way!

 

[Samu]

No, not at all.
At least not in my and among the small (by global standards) number of E6 users here in Australia.
I know my subject matter very well enough — to conceptualise and visualise the end result — to confidently commit the majority of scenes to Velvia and/or in some rare cases, Provia 100F (when I absolutely must shoot in bright sun and deep shadow) or RVP100 (for pinholing, which characteristically dulls the palette of films like RVP50). From experience, there are very few alternative films available (Sensia, and this would be a good ring-in ) that provide the effect I and clients find visually appealing. That's half the story...

...the much bigger, continually niggly problem for so much of us (and I'm sure we're not alone down here tugging at the forelocks of a long-gone era...) is not so much film (the which material, when and why), but the meaty business of printing: The loss of Ilfochrome Classic back in 2010 sounded the death knell of at least 54 photographers here in Australia whose 'big ticket' printing did more, much more, than put bread and butter on the table (two I know personally now work in retailing). Even reflecting on the massive, turbulent, expensive and frustrating times prior to 2010 of faulty, inconsistent or just plain crap-finish products coming from overseas. I just feel, very strongly that alternative print methods just are not up there with the punch and pizazz of IC.

At present and going forward, I am drum scanning and gicléee printing to art media (Hahnemühle Photo Rag 308gsm) and museum-grade conservation framing; the results are attractive, and very different, but still cause me pause to grumble; I am surrounded at home and in the studio by the continuing sparkle and flash of framed IC on the many walls. RA4...? There are a vanishingly few Lambda/Pegausus RA4 printers now; they are considered by labs as quaint relicts of antiquity.

But I smell a rat.

Now, I must get din-dins under way!

I have personally a soft point for Cibachrome (later called Ilfochrome in some markets), because it was the first material I have used for color printing. I was probably 13 years old then. I moved quite quickly to EP-2 from negatives, as Cibachrome was prohibiyibely ecpensive for a schoolboy's budget. But I did like the look of that material very much,

 

[koraks]

I know my subject matter very well enough — to conceptualise and visualise the end result — to confidently commit the majority of scenes to Velvia and/or in some rare cases, Provia 100F

OK, fair enough, but that doesn't really answer the question. I understand that if your subject matter and the lighting conditions happen to be a good match for slide film, and slide film also happens to be the material that helps you to get to the end product that you envision, then it's a logical choice. It just seems backwards to me to start with the assumption "I want to shoot slide film" and then try and create or wait for the shooting conditions to justify that choice.

Mind you, I think it's totally fine if someone decides they want to experiment with a certain process or material and use that as a starting point. But I do feel we could set that choice clearly apart from a workflow that starts with a choice of a particular image to create and then choose the materials and processes that will enable this end result. It seems that in this discussion (and some others on photography forums), there's an inherent confusion of means and ends going on. I wanted to highlight that aspect.

But I smell a rat.

That's not a very constructive remark and I don't appreciate it.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

It just seems backwards to me to start with the assumption "I want to shoot slide film" and then try and create or wait for the shooting conditions to justify that choice.

That's just a fact of life and specifics of shooting slides. To each his own.
Given the current market situation - I'd encourage to buy and waste as much slide film as you can possibly afford.

And waiting for best shooting conditions is what landscape and street photography is all about. No film choice will improve harsh lighting or lack thereof. Ever. Given this fact, it seems backwards to me to fight poor lighting with a choice of film. Not goona work.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I am using Provia with Matrix meetering in a Nikon F55. For normal, front lit scenes I like it very much. I sometimes push +1 when shooting skateboarding. I never use a filter for Provia but do use an A2 with Ektachome. I think Velvia needs more care. There's an interesting look if you underexpose 1/3 and meter on the bright part of a scene. That can be very striking.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

There's an interesting look if you underexpose 1/3 and meter on the bright part of a scene. That can be very striking.

Yup - can be very dramatic with dramatic sunsets - the richness of tones is something else whereas digital and phones tend to approximate nearest pure tone, loosing all the nuance.

 

[albireo]

I don't know about others, but for me selecting film with different characteristics (B&W vs Colour; C41 vs Slide; grainy vs smooth; orthochromatic vs panchromatic; red-extended vs standard panchromatic..etc) is very much part of the fun.

This means that I will sometimes willingly select a 'film feature' and challenge myself to 'wait' and only look for scenes, textures, colours, shapes that I suspect might fit that film.

As I don't print, and have standardised my development, scanning and post-processing technique along a number of lines, I can then reproducibly attribute to the film (and not to some source of uncertainty in my process) the reason for what I'm seeing, and whether what I'm seeing is pleasing or not.

But if you think about it, this is the same we do with lenses. Many 35mm format shooters will select only one lens for a project or a holiday and then go around seeking, or waiting for, scenes that might fit the selected lens. I find it perfectly normal.

 

[albireo]

In terms of obtaining the very best results possible, 35mm Velvia 100 would not be the best choice, especially given its high cost, cramped contrast, and the consummate ease of errors many new/returning users make in exposing it. RVP 100 is hyper-saturated and requires a lot of experience to expose well — even done to its well-known edict, it can look quite gaudy compared to RVP50 — the proverbial (and very real!) Disneychrome look! It was commonly exposed to perfection in the era (now long gone) of Ilfochrome Classic printing. Much of my work before switching up to medium and large format was produced from Velvia 50 and 100 to Ilfochrome Classic, and the results of intensive experience (and huge cost) in the prints speak for themselves.

If you do go the 35mm way, restrict your photography when starting out to diffuse light where there are no deep shadows or bright areas; diffuse light penetrates shadows and subdues highlights and spectrals.

Thank you for this Taylor. By diffuse light, do you mean for instance the light available outdoors during a very overcast day? Or are you talking about, for instance, artificial light obtained through a flash aimed at the ceiling or diffused via an adapter. Perhaps both?

 

[ChrisGalway]

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?

Yes.

E6 is not difficult. I've processed >100 rolls of 120 and about 15-20 35mm in the past five years, you just get into a routine. It's really important to be consistent, especially in the temperature and time of the first developer. I haven't messed up a film ... yet ... but there's always the chance of screwing up if I'm tired or careless. I process in batches, 4-6 films done individually, 2 per day for 2-3 days in 500ml of (reused) solution. I'm sure Samu's correct that there is a fall-off in quality as you process more in the same solution, but honestly I cannot detect it (I do not run test strips!) and it's far more important to get the exposure, lighting and composition right, and choose the right subject.

And here's my timer, stock photo attached but looks like mine, they don't make them like that any more, I love it!

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

[...]



That's not a very constructive remark and I don't appreciate it.

The comment is not about you!
I was making a veiled reference to the curious behaviour of labs that has not gone unnoticed.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Thank you for this Taylor. By diffuse light, do you mean for instance the light available outdoors during a very overcast day? Or are you talking about, for instance, artificial light obtained through a flash aimed at the ceiling or diffused via an adapter. Perhaps both?

Yes, that's diffuse light. It fills shadows and tones town bright spectrals; it also allows much longer Tv speeds for whatever particular reason one wants.

I was up at 3 this morning to travel 80km, then wait for pre-dawn light (similar to what you see on the Taoist Tree pic I posted earlier). This light was very, very soft.

Diffuse light can also be organised with a flash of course with/by any number of designs of diffuser.

 

[koraks]

The comment is not about you!
I was making a veiled reference to the curious behaviour of labs that has not gone unnoticed.

I'm sorry! I misunderstood; thanks for setting the record straight, my apologies!

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

I am using Provia with Matrix meetering in a Nikon F55. For normal, front lit scenes I like it very much. I sometimes push +1 when shooting skateboarding. I never use a filter for Provia but do use an A2 with Ektachome. I think Velvia needs more care. There's an interesting look if you underexpose 1/3 and meter on the bright part of a scene. That can be very striking.

The F90X (outside USA/N. American markets) is one of a small number of cameras I can recommend for nailing exposures with Velvia (or any slide film). Among others but as a standout, this was a very popular camera among rockclimbers and adventurers here in Australia through the 1990s; some are still in use, albeit battered scratched and begging retirement! Other cameras that made podium mentions were the Canon T90, Olympus OM4, Canon EOS 1N, and Nikon F4.

 

[rhmimac]

Considering, after reading this thread, shooting E6 again after my stock depleted last year (those prices scared the hell out of me). I have 4 ex. Nikon F90x on the shelf, one Nikon F90 too, so I'm covered with my matrix metering. I've got my Nikon F100 too, considering it's topnotch matrixmeter, could it be added to your capable E6 camera list @taylor-nankervis?

 

[ChrisGalway]

Considering, after reading this thread, shooting E6 again after my stock depleted last year (those prices scared the hell out of me). I have 4 ex. Nikon F90x on the shelf, one Nikon F90 too, so I'm covered with my matrix metering. I've got my Nikon F100 too, considering it's topnotch matrixmeter, could it be added to your capable E6 camera list @taylor-nankervis?

That sounds a great idea! First you have to find film: I put myself on the "alert" list at several (5 or 6) EU suppliers and just wait (and wait, and wait) but eventually it comes into stock you can build up a reserve in the freezer again. I personally prefer Provia 100f (purple-ish, warmer to Ektachrome (blue-ish, colder).

Honestly I think the difficulty of nailing the correct exposure is GREATLY exaggerated. Colours look so much better in the sun, so the "sunny 16" is a good a good starting point. After your first roll, you'll see that your intuition is a pretty good guide. Just take care not to over-expose the highlights.

Good luck!

 

[loccdor]

One other thing worth mentioning is that a contrasty film like Velvia or Provia can work very well with a low contrast lens, something uncoated or lightly coated, or a lens that perhaps has some haze or fine scratches. Opposite extremes helping to cancel each other out.

 

[albireo]

Nice insights, thanks everyone for the tips so far.

Something I had in mind the other day. What's the durability of exposed, but not developed, slide film? Will the image noticeably decay if one waits a little before development?

I'm asking this because I'm seriously considering doing my own processing with those new Adox E6 kits, and one option would of course be to expose the recommended 10-12 rolls first and then crack open the chemistry, develop in batches of 2-3 over a few days, and then dump the spent chemicals.

I would imagine that 10-12 rolls of slide film could take me a while to shoot, as my main medium is black and white film. Let's say..5 months? Would this lag result in decay of the exposed images?

 

[ChrisGalway]

Nice insights, thanks everyone for the tips so far.

Something I had in mind the other day. What's the durability of exposed, but not developed, slide film? Will the image noticeably decay if one waits a little before development?

I'm asking this because I'm seriously considering doing my own processing with those new Adox E6 kits, and one option would of course be to expose the recommended 10-12 rolls first and then crack open the chemistry, develop in batches of 2-3 over a few days, and then dump the spent chemicals.

I would imagine that 10-12 rolls of slide film could take me a while to shoot, as my main medium is black and white film. Let's say..5 months? Would this lag result in decay of the exposed images?

I typically only keep my exposed rolls for 1-2 weeks before home processing. And then I only do 8 (occasionally 9) per litre, not the 12 that Adox/Bellini say is possible. Perhaps if you have a Jobo processor and can process several films at a time, you might get way with 12 films per litre.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Nice insights, thanks everyone for the tips so far.

Something I had in mind the other day. What's the durability of exposed, but not developed, slide film? Will the image noticeably decay if one waits a little before development?

I'm asking this because I'm seriously considering doing my own processing with those new Adox E6 kits, and one option would of course be to expose the recommended 10-12 rolls first and then crack open the chemistry, develop in batches of 2-3 over a few days, and then dump the spent chemicals.

I would imagine that 10-12 rolls of slide film could take me a while to shoot, as my main medium is black and white film. Let's say..5 months? Would this lag result in decay of the exposed images?

Exposed, unprocessed slide film does not decay as readily as some other films, notably Ilford's PanF-Plus!
Certainly, exposed film can be wrapped in tin foil and refrigerated (not in a 'wet' fridge with high humidity), but not deep-frozen. I have three rolls in the fridge queued for processing at a later date.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I would imagine that 10-12 rolls of slide film could take me a while to shoot, as my main medium is black and white film. Let's say..5 months? Would this lag result in decay of the exposed images?

I send all my slide film to a lab in one go at the end of my shooting season in October. I start shooting in April so some of the film would sit for 7 months. I store it all in a fridge, never had an issue.