Professional Web Applications Themes

Velvia 50 - Photography

A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends shooting Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I am assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct? This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any different than Velvia now? Thanks ~matt...

  1. #1

    Default Velvia 50

    A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends shooting
    Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However
    he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I am
    assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    different than Velvia now?
    Thanks
    ~matt



    matt Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    "matt" <blyehotmail.com> wrote...
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends
    shooting
    > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However
    > he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I
    am
    > assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    That's what I've heard from other shooters as well. Basically,
    overexpose every shot by 1/3 of a stop.
    > This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    > different than Velvia now?
    I strongly doubt it. However, there is a new Velvia. Perhaps
    you should try it as well. It's 100, and I've not heard about
    a need to rate it as 80.

    Victor


    Victor Bazarov Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    I've always achieved excellent results just shooting at 50. Very saturated
    already. 50 is already painfully slow for any shots with movement, so the
    last thing I want to do is slow it even more! For scenics, that's another
    thing, but if Fuji thought 40 was better, why didn't they rate it thus?

    "Victor Bazarov" <v.AbazarovattAbi.com> wrote in message
    news:vhdla0qv2t9e7ecorp.supernews.com...
    > "matt" <blyehotmail.com> wrote...
    > > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends
    > shooting
    > > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation.
    However
    > > he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I
    > am
    > > assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    >
    > That's what I've heard from other shooters as well. Basically,
    > overexpose every shot by 1/3 of a stop.
    >
    > > This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    > > different than Velvia now?
    >
    > I strongly doubt it. However, there is a new Velvia. Perhaps
    > you should try it as well. It's 100, and I've not heard about
    > a need to rate it as 80.
    >
    > Victor
    >
    >
    >

    Wes J Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    Processing remains the sam - E6 no special treatment. You can put shots at
    EI 50 and EI 40 on the same roll and decide for yourself if you like them.
    If Velvia looks too bizarre for you try Provia F 100, which has a
    considerably more natural look. I do most of my slides on Kodak Elite 100
    which has larger grain but colours I prefer to Fuji. But colour, of all
    things is in the eye of the beholder.

    --
    [url]http://www.chapelhillnoir.com[/url]
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    [url]http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html[/url]
    New email - Contact on the Menyou page.
    "matt" <blyehotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:vhdkkclvouj536corp.supernews.com...
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends
    shooting
    > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However
    > he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I
    am
    > assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    > This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    > different than Velvia now?
    > Thanks
    > ~matt
    >
    >
    >

    Tony Spadaro Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Velvia 50



    matt wrote:
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends shooting
    > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However
    > he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I am
    > assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    > This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    > different than Velvia now?
    > Thanks
    > ~matt
    >
    I expose it at 50 and I am generally happy. However, some flowers I did
    a couple weeks ago were definitely "under" looking, while others were fine.
    A good number of people expose it 1/3 stop under.
    I can't say for a fact that the Velvia of today and 10 yrs ago are the
    same, but I doubt they are different.

    Alan

    Alan Browne Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Velvia 50


    "matt" <blyehotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:vhdkkclvouj536corp.supernews.com...
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends
    shooting
    > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation.

    Doing this desaturates the colours, making velvia look a bit like Kodachrome
    64 (IMHO).


    d


    Dave Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    Thanks for the tips, guys.
    I must have read it wrong as to the reason why the author overexposes. Maybe
    there was too much saturation for his liking. Still its not quite clear why
    the author does this. If he wanted less saturation, he would have used a
    different film, like provia or sensia, or Kodak equivalent. I have to
    re-read it again.
    Since I have 10 rolls of Velvia in my fridge, thats what I will be using!

    ~matt


    "matt" <blyehotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:vhdkkclvouj536corp.supernews.com...
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly recommends
    shooting
    > Velvia 50 at iso 40. He says this improves the colour saturation. However
    > he does not mention anything about compensation during development, so I
    am
    > assuming that it is to be processed normally. Is this correct?
    > This book is about 10 years old... so would Velvia at that time be any
    > different than Velvia now?
    > Thanks
    > ~matt
    >
    >
    >

    matt Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    In article <3F16E4F0.5020804videotron.ca>,
    Alan Browne <alan.brownevideotron.ca> writes:
    >
    > I expose it at 50 and I am generally happy. However, some flowers I did
    > a couple weeks ago were definitely "under" looking, while others were fine.
    > A good number of people expose it 1/3 stop under.
    > I can't say for a fact that the Velvia of today and 10 yrs ago are the
    > same, but I doubt they are different.
    To my possible ill informed eyes provia looks and definitelty scans better
    at 1/3 stop over ( I can't remeber the stop 1/3 stop slower than 100ASA).

    --
    [email]petepetezilla.co.uk[/email]
    [url]http://www.petezilla.co.uk[/url]

    Peter Chant Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    >From: "matt" [email]blyehotmail.com[/email]
    >Still its not quite clear why
    >the author does this. If he wanted less saturation, he would have used a
    >different film, like provia or sensia, or Kodak equivalent.
    When Velvia first came out (1990) Provia wasn't very good and I don't think
    Sensia was around, the other Fuji E-6 films were Fujichrome 50 and 100. And
    Kodak E-6 films were really crappy then (the E-100's are much better).

    So a lot of people like Tim switched to Velvia (often from K64 or Fuji 50) for
    the fine grain and high resolution but were a bit overwhelmed by the brilliant,
    super-saturated colors, hence the idea of desaturating it a bit by shooting at
    40.

    Now that Provia 100F offers finer grain than Velvia with less saturated colors,
    and now that a wider palette of colors is available with the three Kodak E-100
    films and Sensia/Astia, people who preferred Velvia dulled down a bit by asa 40
    seem to have switched to one of these other films. Most of the people I know
    who still shoot Velvia do so at 50, including such super-stars as Jack Dykinga
    and David Muench. If the colors are too intense now you can switch films and
    still get tight grain and high resolving power.

    Bill
    Bill Hilton Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Velvia 50


    "Karl Winkler" <kwinklersennheiserusa.com> wrote:
    >
    > Count me among those who rate it at 40. And as others have said, it
    > decreases the saturation, which, if shot at 50, is just to dark,
    > heavy, and out of control. Overexposing it by 1/3 stop and developing
    > it normally, to me, is the right compromise and renders things like
    > fall foliage, etc., just right.
    >
    > A friend of mine talked me into Astia, though, and I've mostly been
    > using this 100 speed film lately. And now Fuji has two new films:
    > Veliva 100F and Astia 100F.
    Three new films: Astia 100F, Velvia 100, and Velvia 100F. Are we confused
    yet???
    > And although I haven't heard any comments
    > about the need to rate the new Velvia at 80, my guess is that Fuji
    > realized they had to have it "right" at 100 since there are a ton of
    > people out there shooting transparency films at ISO 100.
    The reviews in the Japanese press have it that the Velvia 100 and Velvia
    100F need to be shot at ISO 160 to get the Velvia 50 ISO 50 look.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan


    David J. Littleboy Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    matt writes:
    > A nature macro book (by Tim Fitzgerald?) I have strongly
    > recommends shooting Velvia 50 at iso 40.
    I shoot Velvia and all other films (except Tech Pan and T-Max P3200) at
    the speeds marked on the box, and I get excellent results.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 06:46:32 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanichotmail.com>
    wrote:
    >I shoot Velvia and all other films (except Tech Pan and T-Max P3200) at
    >the speeds marked on the box, and I get excellent results.

    Is there anything about you that's less than perfect, Anthony?


    rafe b.
    [url]http://www.terrapinphoto.com[/url]
    Rafe B. Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    "David J. Littleboy" <davidjlgol.com> wrote in message news:<bf7hbt$mv7$1nnrp.gol.com>...
    > "Karl Winkler" <kwinklersennheiserusa.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > Count me among those who rate it at 40. And as others have said, it
    > > decreases the saturation, which, if shot at 50, is just to dark,
    > > heavy, and out of control. Overexposing it by 1/3 stop and developing
    > > it normally, to me, is the right compromise and renders things like
    > > fall foliage, etc., just right.
    > >
    > > A friend of mine talked me into Astia, though, and I've mostly been
    > > using this 100 speed film lately. And now Fuji has two new films:
    > > Veliva 100F and Astia 100F.
    >
    > Three new films: Astia 100F, Velvia 100, and Velvia 100F. Are we confused
    > yet???
    Not for the US. As far as I can tell (has anyone else seen the
    incredible mini-poster Fuji inserted into some of the photo
    magaiznes?) there's only Astia 100F and Velvia 100F. What would be the
    use of a 100-speed Velvia if it wasn't "F" rated? <g>
    >
    > > And although I haven't heard any comments
    > > about the need to rate the new Velvia at 80, my guess is that Fuji
    > > realized they had to have it "right" at 100 since there are a ton of
    > > people out there shooting transparency films at ISO 100.
    >
    > The reviews in the Japanese press have it that the Velvia 100 and Velvia
    > 100F need to be shot at ISO 160 to get the Velvia 50 ISO 50 look.
    That makes sense, although it's a little off from where I would have
    expected it to be (ISO 125 is closer to 1/3 stop up from 100, right?)

    I've not been a fan of Provia 100F because to my eye, it takes on too
    much of a blue cast (I shoot a lot in open shade, fog, etc.) and
    compensating with an 81a filter doesn't seem to work. So having new
    Astia and Veliva emulsions are just what I was looking for. I'll be
    shooting some this weekend!

    -Karl
    [url]http://pages.cthome.net/karlwinkler[/url]
    Karl Winkler Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    "Peter Chant" <co.uk> wrote in message
    news:bfa0lp$bfd$fire... 
    As I understand it from the UK photo press, Velvia 100 F will run alongside
    Velvia 50 for the foreseeable future. I've never seen any reference to a
    non-F Velvia 100 in any of the UK press (or come to think of it anywhere
    else except this NG). So I'm assuming if it really exists it isn't coming to
    the UK


    Tony Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Velvia 50


    "Tony Parkinson" <com> wrote:
    "Peter Chant" <co.uk> wrote in message 
    > > Astia 100F -lowish contrast and saturation
    > > Provia 100F - fairly contrasty normal to moderately saturated colour
    > > Velvia 100F - Part way between Provia 100F and velvia 100
    > > Velvia 100 - rather like Velvia 50
    > > Velvia 50 - very contrasty and very saturated.[/ref][/ref]

    Basically, although Fuji says all three Velvias are equally saturated but
    differ in accuracy of color reproduction. (They claim Velvia 100F is _more_
    accurate in color rendition than Provia 100F.)
     
    alongside 
    to 

    It exists and is on the shelf in Tokyo: I just bought two rolls each of
    Velvia 100F 220 and Velvia 100 220. This month's Asahi Camera (on the stands
    today) has a 20-page flyer inserted titled in Japanese "A Reader on the New
    Velvias: Everything Explained" and in English "The World of Velvia".

    In all 20 pages, there's only one photograph that's noticeably different: a
    flower that's lavender in Velvia 100F and a somewhat lighter reddish purple
    in Velvia 100. (Reading the fine print, Fuji seems to be saying that Velvia
    50 has reds that have a life of their own, and that while they've toned that
    down in Velvia 100, the reds can still get out of hand.)

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan



    David Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Velvia 50



    Peter Chant wrote: 
    >
    >
    > To my possible ill informed eyes provia looks and definitelty scans better
    > at 1/3 stop over ( I can't remeber the stop 1/3 stop slower than 100ASA).
    >[/ref]

    80

    Alan Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    >Subject: Re: Velvia 50 
    >
    >I don't shoot enough slides to really comment and nowhere near enough
    >Velvia, but why would you want to launch a new version of Velvia that was
    >less like Velvia and then yet another that is more like it?
    >
    >So now we have:
    >
    >(note only my guess)
    >
    >Astia 100F -lowish contrast and saturation
    >Provia 100F - fairly contrasty normal to moderately saturated colour
    >Velvia 100F - Part way between Provia 100F and velvia 100
    >Velvia 100 - rather like Velvia 50
    >Velvia 50 - very contrasty and very saturated.
    >
    >Its nice to have a choice but surely 3 films would do. Will they drop
    >Velvia 50?
    >
    >If they keep this lineup going I suppose it proves that film is not dead!
    >
    >--
    >co.uk
    >http://www.petezilla.co.uk[/ref]

    I don't have the URL handy but somebody did a test that showed the Velvia 50
    "classic" (I'll call it) was the sharpest film and one of the Velvias (100 or
    F, I forget which one) had the finest grain. I actually prefer the Velvia 50
    for its sharpness.

    More than a decade ago, when I lived in Santa Barbara, either a Fuji or some
    lab rep had samples of Velvia (50) processed at different labs - if I remember
    correctly "best"/correct exposures varied from E.I. 25 to I.S.O. 50 depending
    on lab. All labs are different in their processing deviations and all cameras
    (like wathces) are different as far as proper exposure is concerned. Box speed
    may or may not work for you, therefore its imperative to do your own testing
    and not just blindly rely on "common wisdom" to determine which E.I. is best
    for your camera, lab, subject and lighting conditions.

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: Velvia 50


    Reversal films, as a class, have a fairly narrow exposure latitude.
    This is the chief reason why exposure is so critical. (Negatives give
    you wider latitude and a printing stage to play with).

    Reversal gives a latitude ca. -1 to +1 stops (a bit more, really).
    There is some difference, film to film, but as a class...

    Negatives give about -2 to +4 stops (and some a couple more).

    Cheers, Alan.

    Pieter Litchfield wrote: [/ref]

    Alan Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    In article <aol.com>,
    comnospam (Lewis Lang) wrote:
     

    Probably this page:

    <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/velvia100f.shtml>
    --
    Julian Vrieslander
    Julian Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: Velvia 50

    >Subject: Re: Velvia 50 
    <u.washington.edu> 
    >50 
    >(100 or 
    >
    >Probably this page:
    >
    ><http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/velvia100f.shtml>
    >--
    >Julian Vrieslander[/ref]

    For some reason my browser is having trouble loading the page, but thanks for
    the URL anyway, Julian, though I can't confirm it/deny it as the one I was
    referring to because I can't see it (probably a problem w/ my computer
    somewheres) ;-)

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Guest

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Expired Fuji Velvia
    By John O. in forum Photography
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 9th, 07:43 PM
  2. Provia or Velvia for static aircraft?
    By Peter Chant in forum Photography
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: July 20th, 10:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139