Shooting Fuji Velvia 100 at EI50 instead of EI100

[ted_smith]

Hi

As a rule of thumb, I rate my colour neg films a stop higher than their box speed, e.g. ISO 100 film shot at EI50 as I read some time ago that it allows for better shadow details without blowing out highlights.

Howevever, I shot a role of the newer Fuji Velvia 100 the other day at EI50. The pictures I got back from the lab do look great, but they are much brighter than I expected them to be.

Should Velvia always be shot at it's box speed and is it less accepting of this technique (I read Velvia is particular about exposure) or are these brightness aspects more likely to be due to my exposure in camera rather than the EI50 setting?

I can't paste the link, but if you're interested in looking, it's www.tedsmithphotography.com, click 'Portfolio' --> 'Landscapes' and then scroll to the bottom. They're the one's labelled 'Combe Martin Bay'.

Ted

 

[MaximusM3]

Ted,

I have personally gotten fine results shooting it @ 125 or box speed. I was talking to Ken Rockwell about it and he says it is really a bit faster than 100. Over exposing it by one stop is a bit much for that film. Some people shoot Velvia 50 @ 40 but that's purely subjective, as I have yet to see any meaningful differences.

Best,

Max

 

[Steve Smith]

If you are metering correctly and your shutter speeds (and apertures) are correct then it should give the best image when shot at box speed.

If there are some consistent differences in your metering technique from what is considered normal or your shutter speeds are a bit off, you may need to use a different EI to compensate. You may even be doing this without realising why.


Steve.

 

[Ian Grant]

You can't shoot any transparency film at half the box speed without over exposing, it's more usual to under expose for better saturation usually a third to half a stop.

Some how you seem to have the concept the wrong way around, with negatives it's more normal to reduce the box speed, with transparencies increase it.

Ian

 

[ted_smith]

Some how you seem to have the concept the wrong way around, with negatives it's more normal to reduce the box speed, with transparencies increase it.

Oh right! Yep, that might explain it then. So if a speed other than box speed is to be used for Velvia 100 it should be along the lines of EI125+, rather than < 100?

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I usally shoot Velvia 100 at 80 and got good results.

Jeff

 

[thuggins]

Overexposing slide film by one stop will make a significant difference in the finished image. The "correct" speed of any film is what the manufacturer rates it at. Many people will give their opinion that Velvia 50 is rated "wrong" and should be adjusted one way or another. This may be a personal preference for lighter or darker images, or it may be that their camera is off.

 

[Ian Grant]

Usually it was the clients that asked photographers to under expose slide films slightly to increase the colour saturation for publication. Normally the box speed is ideal for projection but depending on your camera/meter etc sometimes speeds need tweaking anyway.

Ian

 

[benjiboy]

I find all the Fuji professional films correctly rated at the box speed and I've been using them for about twenty years.

 

[benjiboy]

Oh right! Yep, that might explain it then. So if a speed other than box speed is to be used for Velvia 100 it should be along the lines of EI125+, rather than < 100?

Ted , transparency films are colour positive films and the more exposure you give them the lighter the image gets unlike negative film which is the opposite way round and gets darker the more exposure it gets, so you have to learn to think backwards as far as exposure is concerned.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Use it at box speed or do some bracketing +- 1/2 f-stop to see which look will suit you best.
Minor exposure differences one would not recognise with colour negative film often make a visible difference with slide film.
I think your pictures came out pretty well nethertheless, can´t see any burnt out highlight detail.
By the way, Cornwall is great!

Best, Benjamin