Why Velvia 50 was and is so well liked?

[Patrik Roseen]

The colour response of transparency films is one reason for using them. Another is that when you scan film, you have an easy to view image to which you can match the image file. Then there is a situation when a problem might come up in commercial printing, such as a client complaining about colour, and you have ready proof in the chrome that what you shot started out properly; of course now taking into account that most work is delivered as files.

Another reason for me is that the local pro lab that I prefer to use does not do C-41 processing of 4x5 films. So while I suppose I could shoot colour negative films, but doing that creates a new set of problems for me (developing, client meeting image reviews, editing, sorting, scanning).

Anyway, certainly no reason for people to use E-6 films, unless they have good personal reasons to make that choice. In 4x5, I predominantly shoot E100VS and Astia 100F, two films for which I have yet to see any similar colour negative films that even come close to the same rendering of a scene.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

I am with Gordon. I like shooting chromes so I can judge the quality of a frame without scanning it. If I want it printed I can point at the chrome and say that this is what it should look like.
Also, for 4x5 I have fallen in love with E100VS, really nice colors. For MF I have been shooting Agfa 100 RSX II, with very accurate and nice colors.

[Bruce Watson]

What is the point of shooting chromes at all, anymore? I mean I enjoy seeing them on a lightbox and sometimes I'll look at some old ones of mine to see how they're aging out of morose curiousity... but really there is no practical purpose to use E6 other than to make slides for old school art museums.

I'm with Frank on this one. Frank, don't look sooo shocked!

I quit shooting trannies years ago. All my landscape work is with 160PortraVC (because it comes in Readyloads) or 400PortraNC (nothing better when you need the speed). The Portra films drum scan beautifully.

The one point where negatives loose out to trannies for me is the instant gratification of seeing a tranny on a light box. But with practice one can learn to see past the orange mask and the reversed colors, just like evaluating a B&W negative, or that upside-down and backwards view on the ground glass. It's not a big loss as far as I'm concerned.

That said, I think people should use the tools and workflows with which they are most comfortable. If you like working with tranny film, go for it. Choice is a wonderful thing.

[Gary L. Quay]

I got into shooting Velvia becuse a wise person at my favorite camera shop told me that the color was sensational. He also said, "This film will make or break you hand-held metering technique. If you can cosistantly handle this film's exposure latitude, you can shoot anything." I added some words for clarity, but that's what he said. I used it as a learning tool, and shot miles of it over the years because people said "wow" when they saw my work. I haven't used much of it lately; however, because of the disappearance of reversal paper. I can't print from it in my darkroom until I can learn (and afford) Ilfochrome.

[Dan Fromm]

I've never understood why anyone likes Velvia. The colors are false and it renders some greens as black.

But there is a reason to prefer slow film to fast, and its not grain. I do a fair amount of closeup work out of doors with flash. I prefer (great stress prefer, not everyone shares my preferences) to overpower ambient completely and have all of the photographically useful exposure come from the flash. By Sunny 16, with shutters that have relatively low sync speeds (most 35 mm SLRs, all larger ones with focal plane shutters), using flash as I prefer with ISO 100 films sometimes forces use of an aperture that's too small.

With small leaf shutters that sync flash at 1/400 the problem isn't nearly as bad, so with LF the need for a really slow color film isn't as great as with 35 mm.

IMO, ISO 50 is too fast for full control of aperture as I shoot macro. ISO 25 is about right. That's why I mourned when KM was discontinued.

[roteague]

I've never understood why anyone likes Velvia. The colors are false and it renders some greens as black.

Obviously, those who shoot it don't agree with you. I see nothing fake about the colors, nor do I find it renders greens as black.

[Gary Tarbert]

Hi Ralph , Sorry didn't mean to sound like a smart A... ,as this thread shows opinion
can be divided anybody that shoots mainly portraits , iwould not reccomend velvia
Although can work for browner skin subjects forget it with fair skin european complexions,my suggestion would be seek out images you know are photographed on this film and determine whether you like the general feel of these images.
Or as you said try a box and see how you like it.
If you shoot landscapes i am sure you will enjoy using this film, but it is not a allrounder and for this reason i use provia as well.cheers Gary

[Dan Fromm]

Obviously, those who shoot it don't agree with you. I see nothing fake about the colors, nor do I find it renders greens as black.

When I tried out Velvia, some of my subjects were freshwater gobies with iridescent green in their dorsal fins. KM got the color right, Velvia rendered it as black. All slides well-exposed; the problem wasn't due to asking Velvia for more latitude than it has.

As a matter of empirical fact, yes indeed there are people who prefer Velvia to other color reversal films. You're one of them and I can't deny that you exist.

Cheers,

Dan

[QT Luong]

I think Philip Greenspun (remember him ?) said the difference between art and snapshot is the use of Velvia. I still like the Velvia colors for landscape, but with the control over color afforded by digital printing, it is not necessary to use Velvia to get those kind of colors. Ideally, one would use Velvia for flat light and other film for strong contrast. However, as an universal film, Velvia is no longer my choice.

[Sal Santamaura]

I think Philip Greenspun (remember him ?) said the difference between art and snapshot is the use of Velvia...

So which one was Phil saying use of Velvia is associated with?

[roteague]

When I tried out Velvia, some of my subjects were freshwater gobies with iridescent green in their dorsal fins.

As much as I like the film, I'll have to admit it isn't the best for every subject. Just recently I photographed a children's choir, using Fuji Astia, because Velvia is just too much for that. Mostly, I use Velvia 50 for landscapes and nature scenes, Velvia 100 for travel and city photography, Provia 400X for nighttime photography, and Fuji Astia for people pictures (which I do very little of). My last trip, I shot more Velvia 100 than 50 - I also did a lot of shooting in Sydney.