Velvia 50 replacement

[Alan Klein]

So I can't get Velvia 50 for a reasonable price or seemingly for any price due to their discontinuance. I shoot 4x5 and 120. I'm down to my last full box of 4x5 sheets safely in my freezer and a couple of rolls of 120s.

What are others doing to replace Velvia 50?

[eric black]

I prefer and have used Provia for several years now after being a total Velvia addict years ago- give that a try and see what you think. Its not as saturated, but you can compensate for that if you wish after the scan in post processing. I do save a few sheets of Velvia 50 for special occasions that might warrant its use.

[koraks]

What are others doing to replace Velvia 50?
Shoot digital?
Shoot Ektar and scan or print to RA4?

Provia is nice, but (1) it doesn't look anything like Velvia and (2) since it's also a Fuji product, the risk of discontinuance and price hikes in the next few years is nearly 100%.

[Drew Wiley]

I was thinking the same thing. Fuji's commitment to sheet film seems questionable. If I had that dilemma, I'd standardize anew on Kodak E100. It's an excellent product better balanced than Provia, but less contrasty or saturated than Velvia. Shoot a roll of it in 120 and see if it appeals to you. It has a slightly cooler look than Provia or Velvia, being balanced to 5500K daylight rather than Fuji's approx 5200K.

[Alan Klein]

I was thinking the same thing. Fuji's commitment to sheet film seems questionable. If I had that dilemma, I'd standardize anew on Kodak E100. It's an excellent product better balanced than Provia, but less contrasty or saturated than Velvia. Shoot a roll of it in 120 and see if it appeals to you. It has a slightly cooler look than Provia or Velvia, being balanced to 5500K daylight rather than Fuji's approx 5200K.

I have shot Provia 100 and Ektachrome 100 in 4x5. I found the reds with Ektachrome redder than Provia's orangey look. The Ektachrome greens look more green too.

[j enea]

you scan your film, so I would shoot provia or E100 and you can add some post to get a look close to, but exactly, like velvia

john

[Alan Klein]

That really doesn't work too well. At least I haven't been able to duplicate Velvia that way.

[Alan Klein]

Try it on my Ektachrome and Provia samples a couple of posts ago to see what you could do. Then post it here and let us know what settings you used. Thanks.

[Kiwi7475]

Not sure how well it works but RawTherapee has a film simulation tool. It’s LUT based. May be worth trying.

https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/106261/how-to-reproduce-velvia-50-appearance-with-raw-processing

https://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Film_Simulation#RawTherapee_Film_Simulation_Collection

[Drew Wiley]

Simulation is not the same thing at all. The high contrast of Velvia and its specific dye formulation allows capture of certain hue subtleties which no other film can achieve. But the tradeoff is the fact that only works within a relatively narrow exposure range, and at the expense of neutrality in certain other spectral categories. The other problem is that much of its is lost in translation anyway, whether that involves scanning or some printing medium unequal to the task, almost any conventional print medium, in fact. It's kinda like comparing real ice cream to the same alleged flavor of imitation ice milk : it sorta works, and it sorta doesn't.

I did a very successful large print a few weeks ago that began with an 8x10 Velvia original, with some very subtle distinctions of early season green and other hues in it. But I had to jump through some awfully tricky hoops in order to correctly translate all that into a matching optical enlargement. It would have been well nigh impossible to resolve those vital tricky hue distinctions in something like an inkjet print. And it also meant the reproducible range of the hues I needed to precisely bag had to lie inside a third stop either at the top or at the bottom, at the time of exposure. No room for exposure error whatsoever; but the natural lighting itself was just right, at least for a few lucky seconds.

Current Ektachrome is not quite as fussy, and better balanced overall. Much better balanced than Provia. But I've made excellent prints with em all, going clear back to Ektachrome 64, Kodachrome 25, and pre-E6 Afgachrome 50. I love every one of these films, and numerous other chrome options too, but for different reasons. Don't try to beat any of them into submission. Instead, dance with em, and let them lead at their own pace. Each has their own specific personality and color signature.

[Alan Klein]

Simulation is not the same thing at all. The high contrast of Velvia and its specific dye formulation allows capture of certain hue subtleties which no other film can achieve. But the tradeoff is the fact that only works within a relatively narrow exposure range, and at the expense of neutrality in certain other spectral categories. The other problem is that much of its is lost in translation anyway, whether that involves scanning or some printing medium unequal to the task, almost any conventional print medium, in fact. It's kinda like comparing real ice cream to the same alleged flavor of imitation ice milk : it sorta works, and it sorta doesn't.

I did a very successful large print a few weeks ago that began with an 8x10 Velvia original, with some very subtle distinctions of early season green and other hues in it. But I had to jump through some awfully tricky hoops in order to correctly translate all that into a matching optical enlargement. It would have been well nigh impossible to resolve those vital tricky hue distinctions in something like an inkjet print. And it also meant the reproducible range of the hues I needed to precisely bag had to lie inside a third stop either at the top or at the bottom, at the time of exposure. No room for exposure error whatsoever; but the natural lighting itself was just right, at least for a few lucky seconds.

Current Ektachrome is not quite as fussy, and better balanced overall. Much better balanced than Provia. But I've made excellent prints with em all, going clear back to Ektachrome 64, Kodachrome 25, and pre-E6 Afgachrome 50. I love every one of these films, and numerous other chrome options too, but for different reasons. Don't try to beat any of them into submission. Instead, dance with em, and let them lead at their own pace. Each has their own specific personality and color signature.

Why match to the original colors of the Velvia 50 chrome? As long as they seem right for our eyes is what counts. The color palette for Velvia was developed by some Japanese engineer who's probably dead. His artistic expression doesn't have to be ours.

[koraks]

Why match to the original colors of the Velvia 50 chrome?
LOL!

I thought you were looking for a substitute of Velvia but apparently you're just looking for OK colors. Well, you're in luck - just avoid anything Lomo, watch out with ECN-2 film and otherwise shoot anything that produces color because it's perfectly fine!

[Alan Klein]

LOL!

I thought you were looking for a substitute of Velvia but apparently you're just looking for OK colors. Well, you're in luck - just avoid anything Lomo, watch out with ECN-2 film and otherwise shoot anything that produces color because it's perfectly fine!
The point I was making is that I don't try to match the Chrome with the edits on the screen. I just scan the picture, set black and white points, do a few minor adjustments and if the colors look good I stop right there. I just don't compare and match colors with the original chrome. Who cares?

[Drew Wiley]

I you don't even care about trying to replicate the specific color palette of Vevia, Alan, then why would a switch to Ektachrome bother you?

[Alan Klein]

I you don't even care about trying to replicate the specific color palette of Vevia, Alan, then why would a switch to Ektachrome bother you?

I suppose I wasn't clear. The ordinary and unheroic edits of the scanned image bring back Velvia colors in general. The same with Ektachrome and Provia. They also adjust to their designed colors. It's just that I don't bother to check if the final colors look like the original slides and then make final adjustments to match them exactly. The results of normal edits definitely result in very different palettes among the different chromes. I won't artificially push them beyond that or try to change them to another design. I can't imagine trying to change Ektachrome into Velvia.

[koraks]

You might try the various scene optimization settings in your scanning software, or one of the many 'filters' available for Photoshop etc. There's bound to be one that gives you colors that please you from, let's say, Ektachrome or Provia scans.

Since you're not trying to replicate Velvia colors per se, it doesn't matter all that much what you end up with exactly as long as you like it. I'd just take that approach and not bother too much about the Velvia name. It seems like that is only complicating for you what is mostly a search for your own unique flavor.

[unityofsaints]

Provia or E100 but more realistically C-41 because large format E-6 film and processing is quickly vanishing in parts of the world not called USA/UK/Canada.

[BrianShaw]

You might try the various scene optimization settings in your scanning software, or one of the many 'filters' available for Photoshop etc. There's bound to be one that gives you colors that please you from, let's say, Ektachrome or Provia scans.

Since you're not trying to replicate Velvia colors per se, it doesn't matter all that much what you end up with exactly as long as you like it. I'd just take that approach and not bother too much about the Velvia name. It seems like that is only complicating for you what is mostly a search for your own unique flavor.

... and take good notes along the way so you can replicate whatever gives you pleasing results!

[Alan Klein]

You might try the various scene optimization settings in your scanning software, or one of the many 'filters' available for Photoshop etc. There's bound to be one that gives you colors that please you from, let's say, Ektachrome or Provia scans.

Since you're not trying to replicate Velvia colors per se, it doesn't matter all that much what you end up with exactly as long as you like it. I'd just take that approach and not bother too much about the Velvia name. It seems like that is only complicating for you what is mostly a search for your own unique flavor.

Thanks for the suggestion. I wonder though if being so much removed from the film will just push me back to using digital exclusively? I want there to be some connection to the film I'm using. On the other hand, I have converted color film to BW digital photos. So maybe I'm doing that already.

[SergeyT]

The more I take pictures the less important it becomes to me what film I expose (including E6 and C41). And no, I am not looking forward to moving away from using film.

I love Velvia 50 in 120 but find it being my least preferable option in 4x5 (slow speed and bad reciprocity profile).

Given that it is gone in 4x5, the options in E-6 are Provia 100F and E100.

My preference is Provia 100F
Reasons:
- I see no issues with how it renders colors and, if needed, can be tweaked in post quite a bit one way or another. No, it is not Velvia 50 but why should my images look like taken on a particular film stock anyway? Should they?
- Till lately it used to be the least expensive E-6 film in 4x5 and still is in 120. Big deal on my list
- No reciprocity failure for exposure times up to 2 minutes
- I used it a lot in the past ( a 50/50 split between it and Velvia 100) and know what to expect

I have tried E100 in 120 only and I like the results.
Are they any shockingly different from Velvia or Provia? Are they any "better" for landscape than Velvia or Provia ? - No, not to me.
Will I be happy to use it if I had no other option? - Absolutely.

[Drew Wiley]

Specific films are just like any other tool - you need the right one for the right job. It makes a huge difference to me. For about ten years, nearly all chrome film from both Fuji and Kodak were on triacetate base. That stuff is hell to work with if you need accurate registration. It's dimensionally unstable. Only PET or Estar base is consistent. So the workaround? - fairly rapidly generate a precision duplicate with all the contrast and color masking adjustments built in. But to do that well, you again need very specific films designed for that. Now none of those exist, but neither does Cibachrome. And now there are analogous issues involving internegatives from chromes, or directly printing the right color neg to the right RA4 paper. But at least the remaining sheet films are on nice stiff polyester base (PET). So times are good.

Yeah, I know... why not just scan and digitally print, blah, blah? That would be a step backwards for me. Ain't the same thing as optical printing. Might be fine for many, but not for me.

But I did just finish off a fun roll of 35mm E100. No plans to do anything with it. Can't even get mounted slides anymore for projector use unless I mount them myself. But it's a good idea to periodically keep ones metering skills finely honed using limited range chrome film, which is easy to evaluate over a lightbox, and in this case, compare real-world spotmeter results with the Nikon TTL metering. The Spotmeter is always more accurate; but I don't like putting all my eggs in one basket.

[koraks]

Thanks for the suggestion. I wonder though if being so much removed from the film will just push me back to using digital exclusively? I want there to be some connection to the film I'm using. On the other hand, I have converted color film to BW digital photos. So maybe I'm doing that already.

I wouldn't worry too much about this, Alan. I take it that you're a hobby photograoher, like myself. And moreover it seems you're looking for your own preferential color palette and that you somehow value the connection with film in your photography. So happily shoot film, and happily adjust colors in any way you want (digital or analog) so that you get to enjoy the film-based process you like and also the resulting images you like. There will always be a connection between both, because you started out with one and ended up with the other. Would the same have been possible all digital? Of course not! The provenance would be different. The casual observer perhaps wouldn't even notice, but you do. In a way, the process is part of the final photograph, and by extension, you are part of it as well. See it as not just a technical matter, but a philosophical question of what a photograph is. Well, that would be my take on it, at least.

[Alan Klein]

I wouldn't worry too much about this, Alan. I take it that you're a hobby photograoher, like myself. And moreover it seems you're looking for your own preferential color palette and that you somehow value the connection with film in your photography. So happily shoot film, and happily adjust colors in any way you want (digital or analog) so that you get to enjoy the film-based process you like and also the resulting images you like. There will always be a connection between both, because you started out with one and ended up with the other. Would the same have been possible all digital? Of course not! The provenance would be different. The casual observer perhaps wouldn't even notice, but you do. In a way, the process is part of the final photograph, and by extension, you are part of it as well. See it as not just a technical matter, but a philosophical question of what a photograph is. Well, that would be my take on it, at least.

I appreciate your positive views. Those are mine pretty much as well. I like film for the contemplative process. But I don't have a darkroom. So using digital is required to get results I can see and present. I'm ok with that.