Slide film too dark (Fujifilm Velvia 50)

[alex_analogue]

Hi everybody,

I now that some time has passed since it was posted on this article the last time but I have to share my observations also (google sent me to your page, and now I even registered to reply )

I do a lot of E-6 develeoping in the tetenal kit and for some reason, the only film that pretty much always comes out too dark ist the Velvia. I do have some stock from 2007 (original RVP) which has been kept frozen ever since, and also some new Velvias (exp. 2020, also always kept frozen).

I shot 6 films whilst our holidays in the Normandy and all of the films came out perfect, except for the Velvias.
ISO 50 is way too dark in my opinion. I always go a little bit longer in FD with Fujichrome slides, so more like 6:30-6:45-7:00 (depending on FD-exhaustion), but the Velvia 50 is way off anyways.

So for I have developed in Tetenal:

Fuji:
Provia 100F
Velvia 100
Velvia 100F
Astia 100
Astia 100F
Sensia 100
Sensia 200
Sensia 400
64T
1600D

Agfa:
RSX II 100
RS50
RS 1000

Kodak:
Ektachrome 100
Ektachrome 100VS
Elitechrome 100
Elitechrome 200
Elitechrome 400
SO-366

Scotch Chrome 100
Scotch Chrome 1000


NONE of these films showed any behaviour like the Velvia. The last roll I developed was a Velvia together with a Provia 100F - the Provia was on spot, the Velvia way off. Both shot with the same camera.
It seems that the use of a polarizer increases the problems with Velvia 50 (just my experience..)

Greetings from Germany,
Alex

 

[benjiboy]

It's generally accepted by many photographers that Velvia 50 is better rated at I.S.O 40 or slower.
I suggest you shoot some at 40, and see if it improves matters.

 

[blee1996]

I have only developed two rolls of E6 recently in one batch, and the RVP50 (exposed at ISO 50, using incident light meter) turns out way too dark. The other roll was Kodak Elitechome 100, which turns out to be good. Both in same Paterson tank with Sous Vide temperature bath and using Unicolor E6 kit, thus the FD time was the same. Both film are quite expired though.

I will try processing RVP50 separately with slightly longer FD time in my next run, and shoot a XRite color checker.

 

[benjiboy]

I have only developed two rolls of E6 recently in one batch, and the RVP50 (exposed at ISO 50, using incident light meter) turns out way too dark. The other roll was Kodak Elitechome 100, which turns out to be good. Both in same Paterson tank with Sous Vide temperature bath and using Unicolor E6 kit, thus the FD time was the same. Both film are quite expired though.

I will try processing RVP50 separately with slightly longer FD time in my next run, and shoot a XRite color checker.

If you want the results to be lighter you have to give "reversal film" more exposure.

 

[alex_analogue]

I have only developed two rolls of E6 recently in one batch, and the RVP50 (exposed at ISO 50, using incident light meter) turns out way too dark. The other roll was Kodak Elitechome 100, which turns out to be good. Both in same Paterson tank with Sous Vide temperature bath and using Unicolor E6 kit, thus the FD time was the same. Both film are quite expired though.

I will try processing RVP50 separately with slightly longer FD time in my next run, and shoot a XRite color checker.

I have a roll sitting in my Nikon FE shot 25 exposures @ ISO 50. I will go for a slight push processing when I develop it. Regarding ISO 40 or 32 will be not a full stop I'll mediate somewhere inbetween, probably go for 7:30 - 8:00 min in the FD.
From my experience push processing needs even longer developing times then suggested in the kit, so when I push slide film, I rather go for even longer FD times.

 

[blee1996]

I did further tests, and it seems my batch of RVP50 (expired 2006-04) needs to be exposed around ISO 20 to look the same as what I'm used to. I did increase the FD time to about 7:30 min at 100F, but the chemical is half way through its useful number of rolls.

 

[alex_analogue]

Depending on how the rolls have been kept I never experienced any(significant) loss in speed with slide film.

This picture is Sensia 400, expired 1997 and exposed as ISO 320 about two years ago.

This film has been kept frozen since new, but I also have some stock of other films which were kept in the fridge which show similar results.

My velvia stock is mostly from 2007 (original Velvia RVP) and also some from 2015 and 2013 (Velvia 50).
I used to shoot some new stock velvia which didn't show any different results.

Do you have Velvia 50 or the old Velvia RVP ? Do you know how it was stored?

 

[blee1996]

Depending on how the rolls have been kept I never experienced any(significant) loss in speed with slide film. View attachment 317453

This picture is Sensia 400, expired 1997 and exposed as ISO 320 about two years ago.

This film has been kept frozen since new, but I also have some stock of other films which were kept in the fridge which show similar results.

My velvia stock is mostly from 2007 (original Velvia RVP) and also some from 2015 and 2013 (Velvia 50).
I used to shoot some new stock velvia which didn't show any different results.

Do you have Velvia 50 or the old Velvia RVP ? Do you know how it was stored?

I didn't realize there were two versions of original RVP vs RVP 50.

All my current collection have expiration date between 2006-2008. So I suppose they could be either one, and I need to look at the edge mark.

I do not know their history of storage, since I bought them expired.

 

[Photomultiplier]

If i remember correctly, the original Velvia boxes were marked with just "Velvia" and did not carry the film speed in the name. The code was RVP.

I was not into photography when RVP was around (i started in 2007), but that's what i think i have seen when doing research and at auctions where
the old version was sold.

 

[alex_analogue]

You can just have a look on the film canisters itself, it is either printed with Velvia or Velvia 50.

@Photomultiplier you are right, the edge mark is RVP with the old Velvia, and RVP 50 with the "new" version.
As far as I know, only the film base has been changed and some slight modifications to the emulsion to make it stick to the new base.
The visual appearance of the film has not changed (from my POV)

 

[destroya]

the main difference was that the base was changed fromm the original RVP to the new RVP 50. I still have a lot of the older RVP in quickloads with the old plastic base and they have a pronunced curve to them when the dry. not so with the new 4x5 RVP 50, which is likely due to the new base. I found that the speed changed as well, FOR ME. the original RVP in 4x5 and 120, I shoot at 40 while the new RVP 50 I shoot at 50. the results are very much alike.

 

[blee1996]

I doubled checked and all my remaining stock are of the older RVP variant (sans 50). I will try with Tetenol E6 kit soon, and figure out the best ISO for my liking.