Velvia 50 versus Velvia F100

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by roteague, Nov 19, 2004.

  1. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    All,

    I would like to ask for your thoughts on Velvia 50 versus Velvia F100. I've been primarly shooting the F100 version for about a year, but was considering a switch back to the 50 version. I feel that the F100 version loses some of the subties of color that the 50 version has.

    Your thoughts would be appreciated.
     
  2. Deniz

    Deniz Member

    Messages:
    334
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2004
    Location:
    Montreal,QC
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I tried a box of 4x5 100F and did not like it as much as i like the 50.

    I really enjoy the surreal colours of the 50.
    If i wanted true colour representation or if i was scanning then printing i would use the Astia 100F which has more exposure lattitude.
     
  3. Dave Parker

    Dave Parker Inactive

    Messages:
    4,049
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I shot one roll of 100F and did not think the colors were there and the 100F seems grainier to me, so I have stuck to the 50 shot at 40 and processed normally.

    Dave
     
  4. Baxter Bradford

    Baxter Bradford Member

    Messages:
    772
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Location:
    Lymington, S
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I use both, mostly the Classic 50 (also at ISO 40) which is warmer and renders stronger colours. The Velvia 100F is good when pushed to ISO 200 as this warms it up and gives a useful speed increase when shooting in the forest in wind etc.This is how I now use this film.
    The 100F does not pick up pink dawn skies at all well, alarmingly so! Which you can see in the film test on my website www.baxterbradford.com in the "Just in" gallery. The film test is on the "Tried and Emulsional" link at the bottom of LHS frame, below the red anorak alert warning!! Sorry I couldn't find a direct way of supplying the link to you. That's frames for you I suppose.
    I did this test to see what to use in different circumstances. Sheet film made it easy to switch near instantaneously using same filtration.
    Just to complicate matters, I understand that in Japan there is Velvia 100 (not 100F) in Japan which is much more like the Velvia 50! This hasn't officially reached the UK yet.

    Bax
     
  5. Dave Parker

    Dave Parker Inactive

    Messages:
    4,049
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There is also a limited edition film in Japan right now that ups the saturation about 10 times over the standard Velvia 50, it is called fortra(SP) and talk about surerealistic colors!

    Dave
     
  6. Baxter Bradford

    Baxter Bradford Member

    Messages:
    772
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Location:
    Lymington, S
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I always think of Velvia classic 50 as the equivalent to Spinal Tap's 11 on the amplifier. So where does that leave Fortra? - "The Darkness"?
    It must look like all of those images in the public domain which show why digital is such a bad idea!
    This when apparently the latest Fuji S3 digital camera is offering different curves to simulate various film emulsions.
    Nevertheless would be interested to see some accurate images from this Fortra.

    Bax
     
  7. BruceN

    BruceN Member

    Messages:
    585
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2004
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've been using the 100F primarily because it doesn't have the reciprocity issues that the 50 does. My exposures typically run several seconds (waterfalls and such) and Velvia 100F can go up to a minute without any exposure or color correction filters at all. 50 needs all of the above. 100F seems to do a nice job on the greens and yellows in these waterfall and outdoor settings.
     
  8. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Thanks Bax, I think that is the very reason I have become dissatisfied with the film; I shoot a lot around sunrise and sunset and I feel that there are subtle tones missing from my shots that used to be there.
     
  9. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I haven't done a lot of multi-second exposures, but will keep that in mind. It's easy to keep a box of both on hand.
     
  10. John McCallum

    John McCallum Member

    Messages:
    2,410
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    My experience of the 100F is similar Robert. I really don't like its' rendering of sky colours and greens. Especially cyan/blue which I found tends to mush out to greyish.
    This put me off very quickly, and havn't gone back again.
     
  11. tim atherton

    tim atherton Inactive

    Messages:
    552
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    I've used the 100F quite a lot and find I like it a bit more than the original Velvia. I also got some Velvia 100 to try and that was different to both the 50 and the 100F - it seemed like the real replacement for the 50. It was like Velvia 50 but much much better (for me they fixed the few things I didn't really like about Velvia50)
     
  12. John McCallum

    John McCallum Member

    Messages:
    2,410
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What things Paddy?
     
  13. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I read that David Muench uses the F100 version as his primary film; sadly, I also read that he is now using PS to correct images, as opposed to using filters. One look at his website, and you can see how much he has gone digital, with regards to inkjet printers.
     
  14. tim atherton

    tim atherton Inactive

    Messages:
    552
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Mainly it's love of blocking up shadow detail to an unacceptable level (even on relatively low contrast days) as well as how easily effected it is by the tiniest amount of mixed light. And, of course, it's slow speed.