Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,956   Posts: 1,586,030   Online: 767
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by kodachrome64 View Post
    Is Velvia 100 any different than 50? I like RVP, but it isn't a good general use film. Is the 100 version any better for skin?
    Velvia 50 was the original. It is not accurate and bad for portraits. Velvia 100F is a "watered down" version which is more accurate, so I'd assume it's better for portraits. Velvia 100 is like velvia 50 but cooler.

    I would just use portrait films for skin, like provia.

  2. #12
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,440
    Images
    148
    Velvia 50 was not the same as the original Fuji 50D, which I much preferred, along with the 100D.

    The quality of the Fuji 50D & 100D along with its fast, readily available E6 processing meant many of us stopped using Kodachrome (with it's very slow turnaround on processing) many years ago.

    Ian

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,622
    Well, I shall continue to use K64 while available, but certainly Astia would also be my future choice. As with K64, very accurate colors and gentle contrast. Lovely film.

  4. #14
    AutumnJazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Fairfield, Connecticut
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by tiberiustibz View Post
    First velvia is the least accurate film ever produced. It's supposed to be that way. When fuji "fixed" it with velvia 100f everyone hated it. It's not a portrait film. Try provia.

    Kodachrome is unique in it's structure and color palette and as such there is no emulator for it. That's the truth. You'll just have to find a different film.
    I use Velvia for 'scapes, and non-human things, mostly. I want those insane colors when I use it.

    I use Kodachrome for every kind of subject (as I do B&W).

    Astia looks interesting, from what I can see off of Flickr. I guess I should order some from B&H.

  5. #15
    accozzaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweet home Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    Also, try looking at what people have posted (by film type) on PhotoSIG. It's where I'll look up varieties and results of film I've never tried before.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Sorry to burst your bubble there, but looking for qualities like color palette and accuracy in a digital image tells you exactly zero. There is no way to verify how the image was manipulated before it got posted. It's too easy to change the colors around with the photo editor of your choice. Witness the plug-ins, filters, etc. that are sold to make C-41 films emulate the look of B&W films. That's just another form of color manipulation, so who's to say it can't be done differently? The only way to be sure is to shoot a few different films of similar subjects under similar lighting conditions, then compare them on a light table or by projection.
    Frank Schifano

  7. #17
    accozzaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweet home Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    Whose bubble are you bursting here, fschifano? I don't think anyone was discussing digital palettes and accuracy. I certainly wasn't.

    If by my mention of PhotoSIG it was somehow inferred that this is accepted as gospel as a reference for different emulsions, then it was misread. It's not a mystery that people can and do manipulate their scanned film with regularity. A photographer's time and experience with film photography can of course help parse some of what is claimed by using personal wisdom as a reference guide. Generally, though, if I go to a film category on PhotoSIG or flickr, I pay attention to the overall selection of what people have posted for an idea in a film category to learn what I might expect with a film stock I've never used before. Likewise, use manufacturer reference photos when available.

    Sure, someone might dump a Photoshop filter to make something look like Velvia and then gleefully trick people on a web site, but given the scores of other people who use Velvia, it's reasonable to conclude that others are probably posting unretouched content. And for stupidly obscure emulsions for which there might not be one of those Photoshop filters (like cross-processing Ektrachrome EIR in C-41), there really isn't a ton of incentive for some poster to "fake" it.

    That said, of the regular and favourite stocks I do use (Fujichrome RMS, KR64, RDPIII, HP5+), I know their characteristics very, very well. What I see on PhotoSIG under those emulsion subcategories jibes with my own results, my own reference points, and my own experiences.

    Take PhotoSIG and their ilk with a grain of salt, but I find the resource to be useful in its own way. YMMV.

    (Also, if it's unretouched, look for dust and dirt on the full-size scan. I can't imagine many digital fanatics wanting to manually add in image detritus, but I might very well be way off here.)

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    I know you were not, but other folks read this stuff too. My comment was directed more to the folks who may not realize that these sorts of manipulations can be and are done. You're right that there isn't a whole lot of incentive for most of these images to be heavily modified. But you just don't know and can't guarantee that they are faithful representations of the originals. Differences in the machinery used to scan the original, the user's settings of the display equipment, and a number of other factors come into play. Some of the manipulation might be intentional, but I'll hazard a guess and say that most of it is mere happenstance.
    Frank Schifano

  9. #19
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    861
    Fuji Astia 100F or the near equivalent Kodak E100G. Slightly warmer would be Kodak E100GX. My preference is for Astia 100F for skin tones. Honestly, I shot one job on Kodachrome and I never liked the look. My preference has always been E-6 films over Kodachrome, though I should mention that I did not grow up with Kodachrome, so there is no nostalgic reason for me to want to use it.

    Ciao!

    Gordon Moat Photography

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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