Velvia - use of filters for landscapes.

[rayonline_nz]

Hi all - just want your assistance about filters. I know that Velvia can be saturated at times, a bit worried of when to and when not to use a CPOL filter? Also at sunset time when the color is a bit weak what is the strongest warming filter you would employ? I like to get my slides and see them on the lightbox without post processing. I have one warming filter so I have to check which is mine. What about cooling filters that is for an effect right? I don't shoot landscapes with incandescent, LOL. I think I have a slight blue and a deep filter.

Thanks.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I've never heard of a Kiwi shooting landscapes with an incandescent light either...
No POL when there is sky in the scene as only part of the sky will be polarised resulting in an unsightly, uneven patch. No POL at sunset or sunrise for the same reason (to accentuate colours at these times, re-rate Velvia down (EI64) to underexpose slightly). In forests (and New Zealand has some breathtakingly beautiful rainforests e.g. in The Catlins, ravines and deep, enclosed areas) a polariser will saturate the scene certainly, but this polarisation must usually be compensated +1.5 ~ +2.0 (+2.0 in very flat, overcast light — this is my end-point value, spot-metered in medium format) to avoid coming away with an under-exposed and poorly enunciated image. In bright sun (for which Velvia was not designed for) using a polariser in shadowed areas will result in a very strong blue cast — a lot of photographers fancy this — it can result in a very eye-catching image when everything is alien-blue, others use the warming filter you speak of (but never two filters on a highly corrected lens). If you are unsure of what effect you are going to get, bracket your polarised shots +/— 0.5 (third-stop bracketing is usually 'not quite right' in the smaller formats and marginal in medium to large format), lay them all out on the lightbox and refer to notes that you recorded at the time of the shot (of course you did...didn't you!? )

Ensure you have the correct polariser for your camera's meter e.g. circular or linear (though circular are predominant now). Any modern-era camera with multi-pattern/evaluative/matrix will use a circular POL.

Re Post-processing: It's better to sort out what you want by understanding filters and the effect they have on the film, in-camera, at the time of the exposure, and not rely on post-processing to correct errors because that can be very, very involved and potentially derange the colour balance across the image.

 

[Rick A]

At my house, post processing means mounting the slides and loading them into a tray for projection. I only ever use polarizer or UV/have filter with color film. The saturation looks outstanding when projected on a screen across the room, which is what they were intended for.

 

[Trail Images]

I've used Velvia 50 for years and find it very temperamental to much change with light and filters. Hence, I try not to shoot too much where light is too harsh or scenes requiring filtration.

However, admittedly I'll use filters as needed. For sunrise / sunset that requires either neutral density or reverse grads I won't hesitate. I will use a CP on a lot of water and or leaves that are wet or moist to prevent glare. Almost never with sky exposure, but will do it for certain effect with 1/4 to 1/2 dialed in. Must be closely viewed when applied. Very rarely I'll use a 81b warming filter in deep shaded areas.
Just my thoughts on the filter usages.

Although, I know a photog who very successfully uses a CP with Velvia 50 all the time with excellent results. Most often it is with a ND filter stacked as well. Again, CP dialed in only very slightly as he will clearly point out.

Overall, it takes field practice with the product you're using and in many cases a shot or two with and then without the filtration. Then deciding in the end what your personal preference is, as well as what gives the best representation of the scene at the time. Unless your preference is to want a very different look and then the radical usage is not a problem.

 

[DREW WILEY]

If you're trying to fake something, I can't address that. In terms of basic corrections, to help the film under certain lighting conditions, I'd
recommend a colorless or very pale pink multicoated skylight filter for distant scenes where UV is an issue, like high altitude or sometimes
seashore shots. Distant thing will come out a bit sharper. Modest amber light balancing filter like an 81A thru 81C can be useful for preventing
excessively blue shadows in deep shade under blue skies, though some people like this effect, so don't correct for it. Polarizers are going to
increase contrast with this already very contrasty film, and should be used with caution. I personally hate the promiscuous use of polarizers -
resembles amateurish Fauxtoshop tweaking.

 

[Alan Klein]

Here are shots some taken with but most not taken with polarizer. Suggestion. Don't overdo the setting when you use it. It strips the light off of vegetation making it look unreal. If you use it to saturate the colors, turn it down to leave some of the reflections to make it seem normal. Question I have for you guys, what stop increase do you use if the polarizer is at half effective vs. at full block?

Velvia 50 http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/tags/velvia/

Velvia 100 http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/tags/velvia100/

 

[Alan Klein]

I use Velvia 50 in all sorts of lighting conditions. I didn't know I wasn't suppose too.

 

[Hatchetman]

I recall taking a photo of my fair daughter at sunset. She turned out crimson like an apple! I bought a light blue filter but never got around to trying it.

 

[Trail Images]

I use Velvia 50 in all sorts of lighting conditions. I didn't know I wasn't suppose too.

Alan, if it works for you in all conditions then not to worry I would say. Looking at your examples they are excellent !!!!

For me, the majority of my desert shooting leads me to working in softer light. The exposure latitude just isn't there with most transparencies for real highs and lows. I usually only get to work in sunrise / sunset cycles. Too much past that golden hour and things fall off for the look I like.

 

[benjiboy]

The secret is knowing which filter to use for the colour temperature of the ambient light if you need to get the absolutely correct colour balance it would involve using a colour temperature meter.

 

[DREW WILEY]

For studio work mandating very little correction going straight to a publisher you do need a good color temp meter on hand, at least for initial
lighting setups. But when you work in the field, you quickly get accustomed what to do, because you can take the same transparency film,
bracket some shots with various filters, and easily compare them on a good lightbox. Or you can simply take your color temp meter out and
read certain common conditions, and know what to do under analogous conditions, leaving the temp meter home. With color neg films, it all
gets trickier, but otherwise, similar filters apply to similar conditions, apples to apples (daylight film in either case, vs tungsten-balanced film,
which is damn near extinct in chrome version, anyway). But Velvia per se can be restrictive. I am another person who rarely found it worthwhile in the desert. For soft lighting in fog or mist it's nice, but ya gotta be real careful in high contrast situations - it's is damn unforgiving in those cases.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

No correction or anything used for this image, just Velvia and a healthy spot metering technique!




AND— no filter used — it does not need it. Not even a Skylight 1B, which as most would know, would impart a discernible pink tinge.

For this image, full polarisation has been applied with +1.5 in hazy light. It can hardly be described as uber-saturated.



Another image with no filter — essentially, I let Velvia do the talking-up of colour for me.





Velvia is widely used here in Australia in the central and northern Australia desert environments; it dramatically ramps up the blood-reds of the Simpson Desert at sunset and most photographers shoot unfiltered, save for a UV(0) or "protector" filter.

What's all this about a colour meter being needed?? :confused:

 

[rayonline_nz]

Thanks I will do some tests. Yeah I have used Velvia in the above situations pastel type colors by itself. Now I am thinking about images of the "Filter" book by Lee Frost. In the bright sunlight afternoon he employs a CPOL or a Warming CPOL at other times. At sunset he would also add in a warming filter or a sunset filter. A no. of his other images also had him used graduated filters, warming filters and a CPOL, haha. I will go out today it's in the summer now over here will do one without CPOL and add a CPOL maybe on the third throw in a 81B that I have. I think I have a 80A also and I think the other is a 82C.

Edit -
Manged to find some of his images from that book on google search:
http://www.creativelens.net/index.cfm/articles/out-of-africa/

I am going to the library now and get that book out again

 

[DREW WILEY]

What you are doing is taking advantage of color reproduction errors in the film for creative purposes, which is fine. But what if you needed to
correct those very errors instead, for a more realistic effect? That's what I'm talking about. But no, I never carry a color temp meter into the
field. I leave it in the studio. And other than UV filters at high altitude, I rarely ever used filters for chrome shooting at all. I did find them very
important once I switched mainly to color neg, because the same kinds of color temp errors which might come across as pleasant in a chrome
might look abominable in a color neg, which is an entirely different animal. And no, you can't correct just anything in Fauxtoshop afterwards.
(I print color in a darkroom anyway). But what has become the almost universal color language of chrome scenics is often not very true to
life at all. And what separates the men from the boys is not the ability to capture vivid saturated colors, but how to modulate subtle ones.
Of course, I shoot saturated scenes as well as nuanced ones, depending on the subject matter. And I previously chose Velvia not for its
saturation, but for the fact it could actually differentiate certain subtle shades of green better than any other film, given a really superb apo
lens, of course.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Thanks I will do some tests. Yeah I have used Velvia in the above situations pastel type colors by itself. Now I am thinking about images of the "Filter" book by Lee Frost. In the bright sunlight afternoon he employs a CPOL or a Warming CPOL at other times. At sunset he would also add in a warming filter or a sunset filter. A no. of his other images also had him used graduated filters, warming filters and a CPOL, haha. I will go out today it's in the summer now over here will do one without CPOL and add a CPOL maybe on the third throw in a 81B that I have. I think I have a 80A also and I think the other is a 82C.

Manged to find some of his images from that book on google search:
http://www.creativelens.net/index.cfm/articles/out-of-africa/

I am going to the library now and get that book out again

Good! Experiment, out-there in the real world of wild New Zealand, as we all love to, and take notes of what you are doing!

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

What you are doing is taking advantage of color reproduction errors in the film for creative purposes, which is fine. But what if you needed to
correct those very errors instead, for a more realistic effect? That's what I'm talking about. But no, I never carry a color temp meter into the
field. I leave it in the studio. And other than UV filters at high altitude, I rarely ever used filters for chrome shooting at all. I did find them very
important once I switched mainly to color neg, because the same kinds of color temp errors which might come across as pleasant in a chrome
might look abominable in a color neg, which is an entirely different animal. And no, you can't correct just anything in Fauxtoshop afterwards.
(I print color in a darkroom anyway). But what has become the almost universal color language of chrome scenics is often not very true to
life at all. And what separates the men from the boys is not the ability to capture vivid saturated colors, but how to modulate subtle ones.
Of course, I shoot saturated scenes as well as nuanced ones, depending on the subject matter. And I previously chose Velvia not for its
saturation, but for the fact it could actually differentiate certain subtle shades of green better than any other film, given a really superb apo
lens, of course.

If people need to "correct those very errors" you speak of in Velvia "for a more realistic effect", then perhaps they should not be using Velvia at all. I emphasise understanding how to use Velvia, not making a swag of corrections to it to bring it into the real world. Give it enough rope to do what it does best without belting it behind the ear just because people use it in conditions where it responds garishly.

I would say Velvia is definitely not just the ticket for accentuating greens, though it does this well and good, but across the spectrum; filtered or not, it can lift the veil of gloominess and impart a radiant splash of colour, however so small. But poke it at flesh and see it go pear shaped, and this is when people start carping at me because they did not listen to what I said. RVP isn't a portrait film. They go and attack it in [quaintly termed] Fauxtoshop with disastrous, disastrous results. I see a few examples also of the uber-keen trying to correct intensely blue casting from shooting in the sun (waterfalls in rainforest): electric blue cast, totally thugged up shadows, blown highlights... and people surmise, "that's a wonderfully clever camera you use for those pitchers.." What!? A Pentax 67 is wonderfully clever!? :confused:

 

[Alan Klein]

Alan, if it works for you in all conditions then not to worry I would say. Looking at your examples they are excellent !!!!

For me, the majority of my desert shooting leads me to working in softer light. The exposure latitude just isn't there with most transparencies for real highs and lows. I usually only get to work in sunrise / sunset cycles. Too much past that golden hour and things fall off for the look I like.

Good point about the sun and stops. It doesn't work for me in all conditions. I've trashed a lot of negatives. So I try to avoid putting the bright sun or sky in the frame that late in the day (or crop it out later). I aim down and use the warm low light for it's effect on the landscape rather than incorporate the sun/sky. I cheat a little by bracketing. Also, medium format gives me extra real estate to work with so I can crop. I do have Cokin graduated ND filters. But I'm not good using them. I should really practice more but the light is changing so fast at the end of the day, it seems I just don't have the time to set it up properly.

 

[pcsaba1981]

Hi Alan, I like the colors of your photos. No labor was able to scan my Velvia in such a beautiful colors as yours.
What kind of scanner are you using?

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Good point about the sun and stops. It doesn't work for me in all conditions. I've trashed a lot of negatives. So I try to avoid putting the bright sun or sky in the frame that late in the day (or crop it out later). I aim down and use the warm low light for it's effect on the landscape rather than incorporate the sun/sky. I cheat a little by bracketing. Also, medium format gives me extra real estate to work with so I can crop. I do have Cokin graduated ND filters. But I'm not good using them. I should really practice more but the light is changing so fast at the end of the day, it seems I just don't have the time to set it up properly.

Bracketing is not cheating, Alan. It's standard professional practice in difficult situations.

 

[StoneNYC]

I almost always shoot Velvia50 with a Circ Pol.. Always seems to give me what I want...

4x5




120 (cropped to pano as planned)

 

[destroya]

i had read several places that one should not use a CPOL with velvia. so of course one day i decided to go out and break some rules. I shot in mid day on a bright cloudless summer day. half the shots with a CPOL and the other half without. looking at them I must say i like the pix with the CPOL better than those without just because of the rich blues in the sky. here is one example. only PP was a little sharpening and a size reduction, no color adjustments.

 

[Alan Klein]

I use an Epson V600 flat bed to scan.

 

[StoneNYC]

V750

 

[Alan Klein]

Hi Alan, I like the colors of your photos. No labor was able to scan my Velvia in such a beautiful colors as yours.
What kind of scanner are you using?

Thanks so much for your comments. As mentioned above I use a V600. But I wish I can tell you I have a recipe that works every time to get good colors. I've spent a lot of time trying different methods. Some of my pictures were scanned flat with all adjustments done in Elements or Lightroom afterwards. Sometimes I adjust during the scan and tweak afterwards using Elements and LR. What works one time, doesn't the next. Or vice versa.

However, adjusting light levels first, sometimes on Auto, seems to bring the colors about 90+ right. Either during the scan or in post. Fine tune afterwards.

 

[Alan Klein]

Stone I like your pictures and your scanner. The V750 does a really nice job. By the way my comment about my cheating by bracketing was a little bit of a joke about myself not taking me too seriously. I don't go out too often with my RB67 which is damn heavy. And I often only shoot one or two subjects while out on one roll of film. So anything that helps get me the right exposure to work with is just a lot less frustrating than coming home with too dark or too light.