PDA

View Full Version : How do YOU shoot Velvia - Aimed at full time Velvia 50 users.



Brian_A
1-Aug-2008, 04:21
Hey Everyone,

I'm sure this has been asked somehow some way, but after doing a light search I couldn't find exactly what I wanted. These questions are aimed for those who shoot Velvia regularly. I would like to achieve images that look much like the lighting and colors in work by many people, but put a name of someone I have seen recently on here, Mel (Username: mrladewig http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=28157&page=21 ). I am assuming he uses a Velvia of some sort. I understand crazy colors have a lot to do with being there on the perfect day at the perfect time. But I see soo many beautiful crazy colored shots attributed to Velvia and would like to make some images like that.

1. How do you shoot your Velvia 50? At EI 40? At full 50? Do you vary depending on weather conditions or lighting conditions? If you do shoot at a different E.I., do you have it processed normally or do you have it custom processed? Please note what EI, what weather conditions and what, if any, special processing you did to the film.

2. I've read that going over 1 second, and especially over 4 seconds is a no no with this film. I've also read that with the right filters the problems can be fixed or at lease minimized. What has been your experience? Do you only use Velvia in a certain shutter speed range? Are there many problems with aperature

3. I've read in some places people are very adamant about not using filters (Other than ND Grads/polarizers/UV filters) and some that are on the opposite side of the spectrum. What do you do? If you do use filters, other than the above mentioned, which ones and under what lighting conditions.

4. What other things may you do that you don't do with other films I haven't brought up?

Thanks!

-Brian

Walter Calahan
1-Aug-2008, 04:47
I shoot Velvia with great joy and excitement! Always amazed how it renders a scene.

My technical approach many not be correct for your way of seeing. With my meter shutter combinations, I tend to shoot ISO 32. Calculating reciprocity failure isn't hard, and Fuji does provide a starting point for using color correcting filters.

I've had no problem with ND or polarizing filters, but then the results match what it is I'm envisioning. Perhaps other haven't like their results.

The only why for you to know is to test. 10 people here can give you 20 different opinions, but none could be right for you.

Test, test, test.

Greg Miller
1-Aug-2008, 06:58
EI40. When I was using Velvia I often used exposures up to 30 or 60 seconds. Since my workflow involves digital output, it isnl;t hard to correct for unwanted color shifts in Photoshop. The only filters I use are GND and polarizers. It is hard to imagine making good landscape images with Velvia (at least anything during the golden hours where the scene includes ground without direct light plus sky) without the use of GND since it is such a contrasty film.

But I switched to to Astia for LF because it is an easier film to work with than Velvia and and desired saturation can be added during post processing.

Brian Vuillemenot
1-Aug-2008, 09:11
1) Not sure the exact EI- probably around 40. I callibrated my light meter to work with RVP and then forgot about the EI setting, since I shoot just RVP and Velvia 100 ( which I rate as one stop faster).

2) This is nonsense- I regularly shoot up to several minutes on RVP for dusk/night shots. Sometimes you get a bit of a green shift, but this can enhance the effect of low light. Experiment and see how you like it!

3) I use polarizers and warming polarizers.

4) Avoid high contrast light. If you shoot Velvia in low contrast warm light, such as around sunset and sunrise, it just sings!

Don7x17
1-Aug-2008, 10:10
I use Velvia in 8x10 size - which means longer times due to depth of field choices with lenses

I have regularly made images up to several minutes in the landscape with Velvia using reciprocity correction and Heliopan correction filters (KR3, KR6, KR12, and Kaseman Warming Polarizer).

EI 40 works very well.

YMMV

jetcode
1-Aug-2008, 10:29
Brian notice the mountain tops in the print you refer to. They are burned down which means the sky was burned down likely with the burn tool to increase presence and color saturation. One of the reasons I went to the digital darkroom is to be precise in the way each subjective element is corrected. This is not to discount in any way the image you are referring to. It is the artists choice to print as they see and I am learning that my eye is different then that of others.

I have heard of Velvia being exposed at 32 for clean whites and 50 or 60 for slightly underexposed and more saturated color. In my opinion Velvia works best in muted lighting where the colors can pop without contrast issues which defeat subject balance. An example is breaking morning fog on a patch of wildflowers on a remote hillside or subjects in soft light. There is no cure to fix Velvia's contrast issues except to exploit them in the right light.

Graduated ND filters are best for horizontal planes. Unfortunately using a graduated ND means leaving artificially introduced horizontal imbalance in the image against elements that are usually anything but horizontal such as a mountain range. Soft grads alleviate the problem somewhat but it requires a good eye to deliver a print that appears natural.

I have found that since using really high end glass I have less trouble capturing an image the way it really is in terms of color and contrast and that by using a higher contrast tolerant film such as color or B/W negative I get all the fuel I need to print a well balanced interesting image, interesting being highly subjective of course.

Velvia has it's own characteristics that can aid an image but personally if saturated color is required to make an image work then the image doesn't work in the first place. I would view Velvia as an enhancement of the image. The image must be relevant to the viewer or not for that matter speaking of subjectivity. The image must be relevant to my eye and interpretation. I say this because I have viewed what I might consider a less than fulfilling image lathered in super saturated color. The saturated color did not appease me in understanding the image. I have made prints along these lines myself and still prefer a full contrast image rather than a muted limited tonal range visual interpretation which is quite popular with many artists. The tides may change because I find that my tastes change and my printing and visualization skills are getting better.

In the end I think it's great that Velvia rocked the boat in the film department because it generated more choices for the photographer and is embraced by many photographers. Viewing a transparency on a light box really tells the story.

As it stands I haven't shot Velvia in years partially because I am enamoured with B/W and partially because it doesn't fit my vision. I am not a landscape photographer so much as a wannabe impressionist.

If you use a filter the ideal is one that imparts it's stated functionality but does not disturb the optical quality of the lens it is mounted to. Sometimes all the rules are tossed out with the bath water as is the case when using a Holga with whatever to achieve something far more impressionistic than accurate. It is a tool of choice for you the artist.

Brian_A
1-Aug-2008, 12:39
Velvia has it's own characteristics that can aid an image but personally if saturated color is required to make an image work then the image doesn't work in the first place. I would view Velvia as an enhancement of the image. The image must be relevant to the viewer or not for that matter speaking of subjectivity. The image must be relevant to my eye and interpretation.

I completely agree. If an enhancement (Whether it be saturation or a crazy amount of contrast) is what one thinks "makes" the image and not the actual content of the image in and of itself, the image wasn't worth taking. I have always loved landscapes with reasonably over-saturated colors. Nothing too crazy, but I really enjoy the image I mentioned and what I've seen from him. I've always wanted to accomplish taking a few photos like that. Not make my whole portfolio like that, but to just have a few to prove to myself that I can make an image like that. I've always thought the Velvia 50 oversaturation give me a very surreal feeling. I know that's probably not how the photographer saw it, but it's what they felt when they did. It's my goal to try and be able to make photographs in all the styles that I like. Some I may end up doing more of, some I may only do a few of.

As far as transparency versus black and white, I am kind of split on that one. I have been kind of partial to transparencies as of late, but I just got some Ilford PanF 50 to play with at the DC gathering this weekend. I think that every type of film has it's place and time. We'll see what comes out of this weekend with my new 6x17 back and the 90mm Caltar-Ilex that I bought this weekend. (Well, not expecting a whole lot from the Caltar.... It's no Schneider..)

Thanks for you and everyone else's input. I'm taking it all to heart and am going to try different things to see what works for me.

-Brian

jetcode
1-Aug-2008, 12:46
Transparency is beautiful and the medium contrast films such as EPN and Astia have more latitude and realism in terms of visual accuracy.

Jeffrey Sipress
1-Aug-2008, 14:13
I have finally stopped using Velvia. It's super high contrast and severe color shifts in shade were getting on my nerves. Scanning it is a bear. I use Astia now, and everything is easier. I can always work selective colors to create the Velvia effect IF I WANT TO!

Harley Goldman
1-Aug-2008, 15:39
I shoot the new 50. I rate it at 50. I rated the old Velvia at 40. For long exposures, I compensate per the charts and add time and it works fine. I use filters just like I would with any other film. At high elevation, you have to be careful with a polarizer as the sky can go black on you, but otherwise, no problems at all. Velvia 50 will block up in deep shadows.

I have tried what Jeffrey does, using Astia. I do not like Astia skies. Some of them turne out with a strong yellow cast. I do use Astia quite a bit, but rarely when I include a sky. No single color tranny film is perfect, so you have to use what works for what you are trying to accomplish.

Velvia 50 is my primary landscape color film, with Astia also used a lot. I have tried Velvia 100 and 100F and do not like either. I am not a Provia fan. That leaves 50 and Astia.

Gary L. Quay
3-Aug-2008, 22:33
I have used Velvia since the mid 1990s. It's a wonderful film. I have always shot it a 50 asa, because I've always heard that it's better to slightly underexpose it than overexpose it. This has worked fine for me. I've gotten some incredible images from it over the years.

When I shoot sunsets, I shoot at 25 and push it a stop to bring out the vibrance to the reds. An enhancing filter also helps. I've had it pushed up to 2 stops occasionally when I want to bump up the contrast even higher. This is mostly for scenes that would benefit from having part of the image as a silhouette. You do tend to lose shadow detail. I'm a more recent convert to LF (3 years) so most of my experience has been with medium format. I am working my way through a 10 sheet box as we speak. I saw an ad in View Camera Magazine for a lab that still does Ilfochrome, so I may send a few sheets there to see what they are capable of.

--Gary