Running out of Astia, is Provia an alternative?

Astia was unique in a number of respects. I'm not cursing yet, because I still have a bunch of it, as well as E100G, in the freezer. For printing
per se I've defected to Ektar. But yeah, on a slide projector the 400 speed stuff should still look wonderful. I'm still fussing with modernizing
internegs from chrome film so they can be printed on RA4 papers, but that's an ongoing project when I don't have other priorities. Otherwise,
I have little incentive to shoot chromes anymore. I still carry around a bit of 8x10 chrome just in case I see something worthy of a dye transfer print, but otherwise have no interest in going the digital route - it just don't look the same, even printed on the same RA paper.

Hello Drew,

DREW WILEY said:

I'm assuming you're referring only to modest levels of enlargement, Henning.

Click to expand...

as I have very clearly written in my posting, I am referring to a 40x enlargement = 1 meter x 1,5 meter from 35mm film in projection on a projection screen. At that enlargement you don't see any grain from normal viewing distances in structured details. Grain is visible in even zones like the sky, but it is still very fine and not disturbing at all.
Grain is finer compared to Pro 400H, Portra 400, Ultramax, Superia 400 X-Tra prints of the same size.
As Nathan has written both Ektachrome E100VS and Provia 400X have a RMS value of 11, and indeed in projection they have a very similar grain appearance.
The projection of these films is something I am doing almost on a daily basis.
I love my pictures big, impressive, high-resolved and sharp. And with best colour brillance. Slide projection with excellent projection lenses is the best way to achieve this, it is unsurpassed in this respect.

We've also intensively tested all the ISO 400/27° films (and all the others, too ) under a microscope with 40x enlargement and 100x enlargement.
In the professional film range Provia 400X delivered the highest resolution (see also my first posting in this thread) with clearly separated 105 lp/mm (with Zeiss ZF 2/50, object contrast of 1:4) and best edge sharpness, followed by Pro 400H with 90 lp/mm and Portra 400 with 80 lp/mm.
Concerning grain 400X has a little bit finer grain than Portra 400 (the difference in grain is smaller than the difference in resolution and sharpness) and 400H (which has a bit coarser grain than Portra, but a bit higher resolution).

DREW WILEY said:

"Fine-grained for its speed" is not the same thing as fine
in the sense Astia 100F was.

Click to expand...

Again, please read what I had written: I've clearly said Astia 100F is the colour film with the finest grain. Of course it is much finer grained and higher resolving than Provia 400X (see the test results in my first posting). That is not surprising, 400X has 4x the speed of Astia.
But 400X has a comparable grain level to E100VS.
How much photographers do you know who have complained about being E100VS a film with too much grain? I don't know anybody who has complained.
Therefore 400X is not only a very fine grained film in relative terms, for it's high speed, but it can also be considered a quite fine grained film in absolute terms.

I am using this film a lot in 135 and 120. And 35mm projected on 1m x 1,5m, which is my main format in projection, it is excellent. Fine grain (not visible in structured details from normal viewing distances), high resolution, excellent sharpness, wonderful colours.

DREW WILEY said:

And you obviously have a radically different definition of what constitutes a crisp print than I do.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you consider a 'crisp' print. But I like my prints very 'crisp' in general (of course when it fits the subjects, some subjects look better soft printed).
Therefore I make often prints from the sharpest, highest resolving films available, Agfa Copex Rapid and Adox CMS 20 II. And from films like Retro 80S, Ilford PanF+, Delta 100, TMX, TMY-2. And in the colour range from Astia, Velvia, E100G and both Provias. CN film I mostly use when softer prints are needed fitting the subject better.

Best regards,
Henning

Yes, thank you for the clarification, Henning.... projecting slides is a totally different ballgame. Wish all these web addicts could see a well-done old-fashioned slide show, esp MF. I still have my old trays of Kodachrome 25 (my favorite projection film of all - slightly underexposed, and projected onto a smooth light neutral gray wall which seemed to do more justice to the hues and sharpness than a conventional screen),
and I've still glass Gepe mounts with 6x7 chromes in them, including the brief era of Kodachrome 64.

Nothing beats projection. Except 4x5 or 8x10 chrome at light table

Hello. I've been reading this post and it made me join APUG! I recently used some provia 100f to test out my new 28mm lens for my contax G2. I'm disappointed in how cold all the shadows are, and how blue anything that is grey or silver becomes. Particularly asphalt, concrete or aluminum. Please see the attached photos. I wonder what filter i should use to correct this, in particular the train photo. Yes, i know i can "fix" it in photoshop. However i would like a accurate looking slide that every one here seems to speak of. I wonder if i should use a skylight 1A, 1B. Or even go more extreme and use a 81A, B, or C.

redstarjedi said:

Hello. I've been reading this post and it made me join APUG! I recently used some provia 100f to test out my new 28mm lens for my contax G2. I'm disappointed in how cold all the shadows are, and how blue anything that is grey or silver becomes. Particularly asphalt, concrete or aluminum. Please see the attached photos. I wonder what filter i should use to correct this, in particular the train photo. Yes, i know i can "fix" it in photoshop. However i would like a accurate looking slide that every one here seems to speak of. I wonder if i should use a skylight 1A, 1B. Or even go more extreme and use a 81A, B, or C.





View attachment 69184






View attachment 69183 View attachment 69182

Click to expand...

81B filter. A skylight 1B (pale pink) also works. But also like most Fuji E6 films, Provia responds best in diffuse light. You are shooting in very bright light, with shadows, and E6 emulsions will give this cold, gaunt look when there is point light and shadow. It's not the film's fault, but your lack of preparation in the light. Next time, go out when it is overcast (the degree does not matter, so long as the light is diffuse). Shoot a roll of Provia and compare the results. It's one of those revelations I see on the faces of beginners asking me why "those expensive films" give a "horrible blue look". Education comes first, the working with the film, rather than against it.

Thanks for the info. I've looked back at some other provia 400x slides taken at a beach, and in a shaded Forrest. No blue casts, I think you are right that it's the time of day and my exposure. Since those beach and Forrest shots were done in the early afternoon, and the shots I provided were taken between 6pm-8pm. Would it be safe to say that I should use a 81B filter a few hours before the sun goes down?

After some practice your own eyes can easily detect color temperature issues well enough to know when some balancing might be needed.
Time of day has little to do with it unless you further refine those parameters to weather conditions, altitude, latitude, time of year, etc.
If you need to be precise, buy a good color temp meter. Enveloping atmosphere (like the coastal fogs around here) act like a softbox giving
very even neutral illumination. An overcast cold gray sky is a completely different matter, and deep shade under a strong blue sky still another.
You can judge the effect somewhat just by viewing your scene through respective filters. I'd recommend owning a good quality skylight filter
(pale salmon color), an 81A and 81C. If you have extra budget you add an 81B and colorless UV filter. After that, it's just a matter of practice.

redstarjedi said:

Thanks for the info. I've looked back at some other provia 400x slides taken at a beach, and in a shaded Forrest. No blue casts, I think you are right that it's the time of day and my exposure. Since those beach and Forrest shots were done in the early afternoon, and the shots I provided were taken between 6pm-8pm. Would it be safe to say that I should use a 81B filter a few hours before the sun goes down?

Click to expand...

When the sun goes down there will be the normal bluish light of evening leading to darkness. You don't want to correct this really but it's a personal choice: Skylight 1B (pink) or 81B to lift it a little, but the effect will still be contrived as the light at the time is natural, in the same way as the preglow and burnished orange to red of daybreak, another time when bluish light will be experienced (before the sun rises). Many photographers exploit the evening light after sunset e.g. with tungsten film, giving a rich blue interpretation.

Doing deliberate color errors with chrome film is easier than with color negs, simply because you can instantly review the result on a lightbox to
see if you like it or not. Exploiting excessive blue has been popular for a long time with slides, but not with negs, where people seem to enjoy
different categories of error. Experiment. Have fun.

It doesn't make sense to me to say "just shoot slide film in overcast light." Or rather, it wouldn't make sense if we had a selection of slide films. Some of us still shoot slides for projection, and shoot them to record memorable times and events, which don't all happen to occur in diffuse light. Astia handled contrastier lighting much better. E100G did pretty well, and going a few years farther back so did Kodachrome.

The closest thing to an alternative to Astia I've found now that E100G is also discontinued is...Provia, but Provia 400. Yes, it's quite a bit grainier, amazingly good for a 400 speed slide film but still nothing like the fine grain we've come to expect from 400 negative film. But if you can live with the grain, which I often can for projection, it seems to be considerably lower in contrast and saturation than Provia 100. It's a really good film. It's even worth what it costs these days.

My next roll i'll try to recreate the shots i posted above. But use a 81B filter and then a skylight 1b filter and post the examples.

Thanks for everyone's advice.

Roger Cole said:

It doesn't make sense to me to say "just shoot slide film in overcast light."

Click to expand...

Me neither. I do love its behavior in overcast light, but I've shot lots and lots of Provia 100F in full sun and I think of that as sort of its natural habitat. I do use an 81B routinely, because otherwise shadows tend to look too blue---it may be accurate but it looks wrong to the viewer---but that seems like a small price to pay compared to "don't shoot on sunny days"!

-NT

It's not that "it doesn't make sense" in that I disagree that it works best in diffuse light and doesn't handle contrasty lighting well. That does make sense, but it doesn't help when faced with an outdoor middle of the day glaring sun family or friend activity I want to record for projection. Then it's "do the best one can" and, ideally, choose a film accordingly but all the mid contrast and less contrasty slide films are gone. Best I can do is Provia 400, which is fast for that light but quite workable, albeit usually without the option of opening up to blur backgrounds.

It's not my problem when amateurs go writing angry letters to Fujifilm complaining about "your stupid film!" because they loaded a roll of Velvia and exposed it at noon with everything blocked and blown like there's no tomorrow. Good for Fuji that they summarily delete such diatribes. Letters are even being written to retailers complaining. A few twats does not a good review for film maketh.

Part of the problem is a profound lack of education and the other is the limited range of films we have. We are saddled with E6 and its inherently high contrast, but the results we can achieve can be better or worse depending on the format of the film (35mm generally is more difficult, 120 and LF easier by way of metering). This contrast issue is what causes so much distress to people not switched on about how to get the best results from it. Again, quite a bit of my time is spent explaining at length spot metering (not incident!) technique to tip-toe around the chasm of contrasty extremes; this is critical with Velvia (sometimes also Provia) if people are going to expose it in bright sunlight with shadows: competent additive spot metering will get you over the line, holding shadows and highlights marvellously because you are working within the range of Velvia (a narrow 3 stops), but you've got to know your stuff to take the risk. Of course, amateurs with their bells-'n-whistles, wings-'n-things' all singing and dancing SLRs think the onboard meters will work the mojo with Velvia.Sometimes they do. A lot of time they don't, and you can hear them screaming and hissing. I exposed Velvia in the most God-awful conditions imaginable when I first started with it a good 20 years ago. I did the same with Provia photographing groups with Rotary. I alternated between RVP and RDP, experimenting with light and scenery, tone and contrast. Provia is a good general purpose film but it too can suffer extremes of cast and contrast (the cold blue look is one of its characteristics, but looks tame compared to Velvia). It is the first choice for shooting in contrasty conditions if you know what you are doing. I don't let one type of film dictate how I shoot: I work around it with metering, photographing in any conditions, but the best results are obtained in diffuse light, as legions of established landscape professionals will attest, not just me!

There is a bit of rocket science involved and generally (but not always) the design intent of diffuse illumination exposure is ideal — the results will be predictable and consistent, even with polarisation (assuming you know what this does to Velvia, Provia, and why, but more importantly, how much is too much and when not to use it). Two weeks ago I shot a roll of RVP in 120 format in shadow and bright sun — I had to, no choice and no sweat! The meter told me how extreme things were getting until everything was smoothed out with additive and duplex metering. I cannot stress enough the need for people here to understand selective/discriminate metering with E6 emulsions, and not rely lblithely on camera meters to do with difficult work for them. Funny that the day after my shoot it rained and rained and rained and would have been "sort of" ideal for Provia or Velvia, but with the flat lighting requiring additional exposure.

So, there's a lot to learn about E6 films and their behaviour, and making do with the limited choices we have. But it's no good crying foul when things go pear-shaped in challenging conditions. It's up to you to learn how to tame these Vaudevillian emulsions.

The only time I used Velvia so far was 35mm on top of White Face Mountain in New York on a sunny day around noon. I didn't know better, but I loved the results. This thread has made me look at the photos again, and I see what all the fuss is about. I can see that I can use Velvia better and make better choices with slide films.

No complaints, though; I still love those photos, pear-shaped and all.

Take the plunge - get out of color photography alltogether, it has no future. Get into B&W

DF said:

Take the plunge - get out of color photography alltogether, it has no future. Get into B&W

Click to expand...

LOL, people are telling me to get into digital for the same reason.

DF said:

Take the plunge - get out of color photography alltogether, it has no future. Get into B&W

Click to expand...

LOL! That is funny.