Velvia 50 @ ISO 40?
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.
Yeah, I shoot it at 40 with great results.
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?
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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! :p
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.