Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,847   Posts: 1,582,794   Online: 791
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    252

    recommendations..

    Ok, for too long have I been sticking with the same kind of film, I'd like to try something new...

    Spring is here, sommer is coming, there is a lot of green around..
    But i find that the negative films I use (portra films) give this weak
    bright shade of green, I don't know maybe they are accurate, maybe not, but
    that's not the point, I'd like something different..

    I have two questions:

    1.which negative film in your opinion would give me really deep dark heavy 3D greens, sort of like old Velvia 50 would, but I'm talking negative film here...
    (and also which paper do you recommend THAT film to be printed on)

    2.Also, I haven't tried new Velvia 100 yet, and haven't used 100F either, so what's the difference between the new velvia and the old one, and where does 100F fit in there? What's the difference between these 3 emulsions.
    I've used only Velvia 50 for a long time. So what's the difference between 50, 100 and 100F ?

    thanks

  2. #2
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    I would try some of the Kodak UC(Ultra Color) films, has better saturation than most that are around..

    Velvia's If your used to the 50 I would try the 100(no F) over the F, the F does not seem to have the saturation that I like and is flatter in the saturation dept, of course this is my opinion, but I like the non-F better than the F, another one to try that can be nice and saturated, which I use all the time is Kodak 100VS, that has been replaced with the 100GX(if I remember right) both great films.

    Dave

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    252
    100VS is still made, 100GX is not a replacement for it, it's a different "actor" in the series, which is supose to be a warmer version of 100G

    But anyway, I could try UC films as you suggest, I haven't yet...

    But, let me clarify a bit more what I am looking for, not really saturation as much as depth, high-quality reproduction of green plants, but still with nice saturation (not too much though, otherwise I'd go for slide film)

    Here is the thing, the most common negative for outdoors that I've been using in the past few years was Portra 160VC and 400VC. Though I like these films for outdoor scenery of city and people, I really don't like the greens, I find that they are a bit "weak", lack depth and a a bit on the yellow side, and don't really work good in darker parts.
    So, what I'm looking for is a colder reproduction of green, that works well with dark shades and has great tone separation (doesn't dumb down every shade to the same puked-out yellow green), fine gradations, and nice saturation (but not as much as Velvia)

    I'd expect Fuji to come up with something like that, but currently they only seem to have two moderate speed negative films, Reala was nice, but doesn't exist any more. How is that 160 speed (was it S or C?) film from Fuji, any good with greens and cyans?

  4. #4
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    Interesting, we were told almost 2 years ago, but the Kodak rep at the store I was working in, that the E100VS was a discontinued film, and I can't find it in the curretn Kodak Master Catalog, but I am sure they could have mis-communitcated what they were doing, I have been known to hear things differently than what was being said, The only way I would suspect you will find a film that works in your opinion is going to be try a few of the various emulsions to see what delivers the goods for you.

    Dave

  5. #5
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Ed,

    I can't help you with #1 since I don't shoot color negative film.

    As for #2. Velvia 50 is no longer produced, it has been replaced by Velvia 100. The 100F came out a couple of years ago; I suspect as a replacement for the 50, but it was so badly received that Fuji had to come out with an alternative, hence we have Velvia 100. IMO, the 100 comes close to the old 50 in color, is sharper and has better response to low light. I've always found the 100F to be pretty "blah" in terms of color.

    I would suggest trying Velvia 100, to see if you like the results.

    One little trick I picked up when shooting in the woods, is to use a warm polarizing filter (like the Tiffen) - it does wonderful things with the green. I have not tried this with color negatives, so I can't tell you how it would react.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  6. #6
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Ed,

    I've been shooting Velvia 50 since it appeared on the shelves, and one of its great strengths is its ability to differentiate nuances in greens. I had a chance recently to shoot it alongside Velvia 100, along with two other photographers, all with different camera systems. One of the other photographers is a botanist, has shot tens of thousands of Velvia 50 frames, and sells nature work, especially wildflower and botany shots. In looking at our results, we found that the Velvia 100 was more strongly biased towards cyan than Velvia 50. Skies, greens in spring trees and fall color shots, all tended to have a somewhat more cyan bias, and less red content. This might be in agreement with Robert's finding that a warming filter (shifting the film back to the traditional Velvia 50 response) helps with the greens. One of the things that Velvia 50 does is give a reddish cast to dead brown leaf litter and pine needles, but this became more orange than red with the new Velvia 100, again indicating a bit less red content.

    I also tried a couple of rolls of Fuji Pro 160S a few months ago, and was very impressed with it. It has great dynamic range, and captures color nuances, including greens, extremely well. I was impressed to the point that I ordered a brick. I've had it printed on Fuji Crystal Archive and Agfa Sensatis papers. The greens tend to go more Kodachrome dull on the Agfa paper. On Fuji Crystal Archive, the greens are vibrant, and green nuances are differentiated in a manner similar to Velvia, although comparing print and transparency film is a bit of a stretch. I haven't had prints from 160S made on Kodak paper, so I can't speak to that. I've done a lot of "spring green" shooting with the 160S over the last month, in which differentiation of greens was critical to the shot, and am very pleased with its performance. To get the best from it you'll need a good lab or DIY. You don't say if you're doing your own printing. I'm wondering if your current disappointment with the greens you're getting from color negatives isn't really at the printing stage. Labs often print too light for good color saturation, so perhaps you should request denser prints. I had to have a roll reprinted last week because the nearly all green content in the photo threw the printer much too magenta. I just asked them to throw in the "spring channel" and reprint.

    The Fuji Pro 160S is well worth a try, and I suspect may achieve what you want.

    Hope this helps.

    Lee

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,075
    I usually dislike Velvia, but for this application, try it. The new Velvia 100 has corrected many of its predecessors faults while keeping excellent saturation and particularly good greens. If you need really exagerated saturation, try the 100F. For a negative film, Kodak 100UC is excellent overall. Although they give good greens, I have had some problems with the shadows with Fuji negative films. (Fuji has recently introduced improved versions of those films, and the problems (mainly crossover-like color changes) may have been corrected.)

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    252
    can someone please explain what crossover is?

  9. #9
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed_Davor
    can someone please explain what crossover is?
    Color crossover is a characteristic that requires different filtration for neutral color balance in different parts (shadows, midtones, highlights) of the negative. An example: If your highlights are neutral, your shadows may be too green, and if you balance for neutral shadows, the highlights would then shift too magenta. If you were to draw a characteristic curve for each color layer of the film, the curves would have different slopes, and would cross each other when normalized, ergo "crossover".

    I've heard this complaint about the Fuji line of print films in the past, especially when comparing their consumer film line to Kodak. A review of the Fuji Pro 160S by Ctein in Photo Techniques last year didn't indicate that this was a big problem with the film, and he's pretty sensitive to it.

    Lee

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L
    Color crossover is a characteristic that requires different filtration for neutral color balance in different parts (shadows, midtones, highlights) of the negative. An example: If your highlights are neutral, your shadows may be too green, and if you balance for neutral shadows, the highlights would then shift too magenta. If you were to draw a characteristic curve for each color layer of the film, the curves would have different slopes, and would cross each other when normalized, ergo "crossover".

    I've heard this complaint about the Fuji line of print films in the past, especially when comparing their consumer film line to Kodak. A review of the Fuji Pro 160S by Ctein in Photo Techniques last year didn't indicate that this was a big problem with the film, and he's pretty sensitive to it.

    Lee
    oh, I get it, thanks

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin