Velvia 50 @ ISO 40?

[jphendren]

Hello,

I just received another roll of Velvia 50 back from the lab, and I am beginning to notice a trend. Out of 5 or 6 rolls that I have shot since August, I have noticed that in a three shot, 1/3 stop bracket series, that I tend to the prefer the 1/3 over-exposed image. It seems to be slightly brighter, with more detail visible. How many here shoot Velvia 50 @ ISO 40? I'm not sure that I am ready to change to ISO 40, but I am thinking about it.

Oh, and that EOS-1V evaluative meter seems to be pretty accurate. Not one poorly exposed slide in the roll.
Jared

 

[Darkroom317]

Yeah, I shoot it at 40 with great results.

 

[hrst]

Many people teach that Fuji films, especially Velvia 50, should be overexposed by 1/3 stop.

In addition, many people teach that Fuji films should be overDEVELOPED. They give different extensions to first developer time. Sometimes it's much more than 1/3 stop push. The official instructions doesn't say anything about this; E6 is E6, a standard process.

And probably, if your lab uses longer FD time for Fuji films, then I wouldn't overexpose.

Is there any official truth concerning overexposure or overdeveloping, by Fuji?

 

[jphendren]

"And probably, if your lab uses longer FD time for Fuji films, then I wouldn't overexpose."

I have no idea if they do. BTW, I send my Velvia through Wal-Mart. I have read that they send their film to Dwayne's.

Jared

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

It is true that Velvia can look better at EI40, but a lot depends on the conditions under which it was exposed. It also looks fine at 50, just more contrasty (which is a problem with the Velvia reversal stock).

My shooting on Velvia does vary from EI40 (or less) to 50 (or more), depending on prevailing lighting. Rainforests, which form a dominant component of my work, are by nature very contrasty, even with a slight change of illumination, and my shooting is as far as possible organised for conditions where diffuse will ensure the best possible results, with carefully considered exposure. In these conditions Velvia is fine at 50. Recently I shot scenes in quite poor light at EI40 where an element of doubt niggled, then another at EI32 (EI40 was best, with better detail in marginal shadows). Why two? My Ilfochrome printer will have 2 identical trannies at different ratings to experiment with (any tranny will still require contrast masking).

It's best for you to experiment at 50 and 40 on various subjects, but especially the subject you specialise in, noting however that Velvia is not by design a bright (point) light film, though many artists do exploit this in a fun way where its gaudy colours clash and bang. Exposed carefully at any rating (EI64 is also common for very flat light) it delivers the results it is renowned for. Occasionally there are reports of "interesting results" with processing; don't get too carried away with options in processing i.e. push, pull over- under-development. Velvia is fine 'straight-through'. One thing to be cautious of is that longer Tv speeds can blow highlights at EI40: more detail in shadows often at the expense of highlights. At least this is much more graceful than D***!

Canon's EOS Evaluative meters (right back to the EOS 1N, which is my weapon of choice) can be considered extremely accurate, but partial and spot metering on Velvia in difficult light are also exceptionally useful.

 

[jphendren]

My type of photography is outdoor wilderness landscape photography. I have not really paid much attention to the type of lighting conditions in which I prefer the +1/3 frame over the metered frame, but maybe I should go through some of my slides and take note. I also admit that if you just shoot it at its rated 50 that the slides look very good as well. However, sometimes when I have three frames side by side (ISO 40,50,64), I prefer the +1/3 frame.

"Canon's EOS Evaluative meters (right back to the EOS 1N, which is my weapon of choice) can be considered extremely accurate, but partial and spot metering on Velvia in difficult light are also exceptionally useful."

I use the spot meter quite a bit when shooting extremely contrasty scenes, and find it quite accurate if you know where to place certain tones around middle-tone. However, if the dynamic range of the scene will fall within what Velvia can handle, then Nikon's or Canon's multi-pattern meters do indeed deliver perfect results.

Jared

 

[wildbill]

I ALWAYS shoot at 40, unless it's a scene full of snow. I'm not making analog prints and I'm guessing you aren't either. I use a handheld spotmeter unless i'm using my eos 1-n or 67II where I frequently use +exp compensation when needed.

 

[keithwms]

It depends on your final purpose. If you plan to scan, esp. from a non-drum scanner that can't handle the DMax, then you'd better meter to keep the slides a wee bit thinner than normal. If you plan to project optically, then you may actually want to do the opposite. Saturated slides look yummy when projected!

In any case, I don't see much point in dueling with velvia 50, when the newer velvias and astia 100F give you more range at normal exposure.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Keith,
The problem with the "newer Velvias" is their atrocious palettes that have raised a few temperatures. In this category I put RVP 100 (especially) and its less gaudy 100F. A rainforest shot on 100 takes on the peculiar appearance of tinsel-draped Disneyland — with browns rendered red, greens rendered yellow and sandstone rockface rendered purplish, polarised or not. Compared to the quite striking rendition Velvia 50 returns, these two Velvias raise questions that Fuji is trying to emulate the ghastly platee of ProPhoto gamut.

For those producing for gallery work, RVP 50 remains the gold standard for positive-to-Ilfochrome at any speed and well worth duelling with carefully — just sharpen your knives!

 

[epavelin]

If you consistently prefer the +1/3 exposure, then rating at 40 would be the way to go. That's exactly what I do. Continue to bracket and you won't go far wrong.

 

[benjiboy]

An I.S.O is just a speed to start experimenting at and not written in stone, if 40 give you the the most acceptable results rate it at that, but it depends also on how you are viewing them they look different viewed on a viewer or light-box,than with a projector with a 150watt QI lamp. I find generally that the Fuji Pro range of films are all pretty accurately rated.

 

[ZoneIII]

I realize that this thread is old and that Velvia 50 is no longer in production but I have to add my two cents worth.

First (this is a pet peeve of mine), you are not "over-exposing" film by changing the E.I. if the results are what you are after. I am amazed at how often the terms under-exposure and over-exposure are misused. For example, if you find that rating a film at it's box (ISO) speed produces dark transparencies, then you are under-exposing the film but you are not over-exposing it if you increase exposure by reducing the exposure index.

As for Velvia 50, from my experience, the vast majority (almost all!) large format photographers rate it at E.I. 40 or even E.I. 32. I do that as well. However, I have always found the 35mm version when rated at E.I. 50 to give me the best results in that format. But keep in mind that that can be due to different meters, shutters, etc.

I am surprised at how new film photographers are often afraid to rate film at other than the box speed. The box speed is simply a recommended starting point, that's all. The film manufacturer's will even tell you that. But some new photographers act as if the sky will fall if they change the E.I.

Also keep in mind that even if your meter and shutter is precisely calibrated and accurate, your metering changes everything. You could rate the film at it's ideal speed and then meter the scene improperly and get terrible results. This is fundamental.

What struck me about the original question is that David says that he found that he was getting better results at E.I. 40 but he isn't sure if he is ready to rate the film to E.I. 40! What's the issue? If you are getting better results at E.I. 40, switch to ISO 40. Your eyes are telling you that it's better but you were still (when you wrote this long ago) unsure whether to go with what you could see for yourself with your own eyes!!!??? David, your tests told you all you need to know. Why would you hesitate to rate the film at the speed that gives you the best results.

One more technical thing: When you rate a film at other than it's box speed, you are not chaning the ISO. In other words, if you rate Velvia 50 a E.I. (exposure index) 40, it is NOT ISO 40. ISO only refers to the box speed. When you use a speed other than box (ISO) speed, it is then referred to E.I. E.I. is the TRUE speed of the film for you with your equipment determined by testing.

There are almost no films that I rate at the ISO speed. Knoweledgeable photographers have no qualms at all and do not hesitate to test their film and rate it at whatever produce the best results. For example, I rate 100Tmax at E.I. 64, Tri-x sheet film at E.I. 200, Tri-X roll film at E.I. 250, etc. Those are NOT over-esposing the film. In fact, if I rated them at their ISO (box) speeds, I would be under-exposing them.

I just had to respond so that someone else who is unnecessarily agonizing over whether to rate a film at a speed other than the box speed will not heistate to do so. Again, the box speed is just a starting point and nothing more.



BTW, I have found that for me, with my lenses and meters, Velvia 100 performs best at about E.I. 125 but that's just me.

 

[LJSLATER]

Hi ZoneIII, they still make Velvia 50, at least in the smaller formats. Unless of course you're referring to the original Velvia, which Velvia 50 replaced.

I too shoot Velvia 50 at EI 50 and Velvia 100 at EI 125.

Whether you want to call it ISO, ASA, or EI, it doesn't matter to me, but I agree that you shouldn't be afraid to experiment and expose your film the way that works best for your particular look.

 

[benjiboy]

Hi ZoneIII, they still make Velvia 50, at least in the smaller formats. Unless of course you're referring to the original Velvia, which Velvia 50 replaced.

I too shoot Velvia 50 at EI 50 and Velvia 100 at EI 125.

Whether you want to call it ISO, ASA, or EI, it doesn't matter to me, but I agree that you shouldn't be afraid to experiment and expose your film the way that works best for your particular look.

Fuji Velvia 50 has been discontinued again in July Last year http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j.../fujifilm-discontinues-two-professional-films

 

[Stephen Schoof]

Fuji Velvia 50 has been discontinued again in July Last year http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j.../fujifilm-discontinues-two-professional-films

As that article states, Velvia 50 is still being produced in 35mm and 120, but was discontinued in large format. Velvia 100F has been discontinued in all formats, but existing stock is still available.

 

[benjiboy]

As that article states, Velvia 50 is still being produced in 35mm and 120, but was discontinued in large format. Velvia 100F has been discontinued in all formats, but existing stock is still available.

Sorry on second reading you are right I misinterpreted it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

You can tweak exposure a tiny bit if you prefer how it looks. The more relevant question would be, how
does the final output (like printing) like it? Or are you doing this just due to a metering oddity? The
related question, whether to "pull" process it, is via my own testing, a waste of time. There is very
little forgiveness in this film for that kind of thing. The older Provia II pulled well, as did both generations of Astia, but none of these newer Fuji films, or any Velvia. The limitation kinda comes with
the territory of high contrast and high saturation.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Velvia at EI40 is for contrasy scenes, not the intended diffuse illumination that the film was designed for. At moderately short (<1 sec) EI40 will lighten shadows, but will also blow highlights easier. It is a risky thing to do and most risky with cameras using evaluative/multipattern/matrix meters because they do not provide implicit bias to elements (individual luminances) as a manual spot meter would. Ideally, meter the scene with a spot meter (Hi/MID/LO/AVG) at box speed (ISO50); nailing the exposure in the right light is very easy and produces beautiful, beautiful images (more difficult with 35mm, but it can be done, and done well), then even more startling when printed (by whatever means, either darkroom or digital). If people are getting blocked up shadows, grossly blown highlights and the like at EI32, EI40 or ISO50, the film is not being exposed correctly. None of this is a secret. All of the Velvia films (including the pasty 100F and bold 100) require diffuse lighting. Provia 100/100F is Velvia with a reduced primary palette spread and better shadow tolerance and highlight control. It is preferred in illumination that is not or could potentially throw Velvia off.