Preferred film - Velvia 100 or 100F

[Paul O]

Just wondered what people's preference was regarding the choice of Velvia 100 or Velvia 100F - I'm looking to use a film for landscapes. What do people rate these films at? TIA

[Joanna Carter]

Just wondered what people's preference was regarding the choice of Velvia 100 or Velvia 100F - I'm looking to use a film for landscapes. What do people rate these films at? TIA
I really don't like Velvia 100F, its colours are not as pure as Velvia 100. As for rating it, stick to 100 ISO and allow 2 stops over and under the measured zone 5 exposure.

[DJGainer]

Definitely Velvia 100. Experiment with exposure at EI 100 and 125 to decide what you prefer. Great reciprocity characteristics for low light photography.

[Harley Goldman]

Between the two, I much prefer 100. I bought some 100F and did not like it all. That said, I like 50 better than either.

[PaulRicciardi]

Another vote for 100

[Justin Black]

I choose between Velvia 50 and 100, and Provia 100F depending on the situation and color palette. They are all exceptional films, but each has its strengths and weaknesses.

[aphexafx]

I have also found little use for Velvia 100F where Velvia 100, 50, and Provia serve my needs, but I am sure Velvia 100F serves some niche and I'm always interested to hear from anyone who uses it for their work. Skin tones, blue/violet, where does Velvia 100F fit in to actual workflows, exactly?

[timbo10ca]

I haven't used the 100, so I can't compare. I've used the 100F and 50, and it seems I have to rate them at 80 and 40, respectively, using an incident meter. Provia 100F, on the other hand rates at 100 for me.

Tim

p.s.- I haven't used alot of it yet, but I can say I prefer the 50. So, I guess the 100 (non f) would probably look better to me also. I have a bunch of the 100f because i bought a bunch 2nd hand when no 5x7 color sheet tranny film was available...... The one shot I have that I really like looks excellent on the light table, but when I scanned it in (V750) I had to add a bit of yellow to reduce the blue cast. So maybe I'd use it for scenes with alot of blue, but not alot of green (hard to do in the landscape....). Or you can do what I did- color correct in PS and make it look however you want!

[Lon Overacker]

Paul,

I'll toss in a vote for V100f. Not necessarily because I think it's a better film - frankly, it's not; as usual it depends on the situation. I spent about a year and a half carrying V50, V100, V100F, Provia 100 and Astia 100. Nothing scientific, but I would sometimes shoot the same scene with at least two of the films, but never all five at once. In the end, I concluded that each and every one of these films had some issues, but also performed beautifully, depending on the scene, exposure range, etc., etc.

Both V100 and V100f have a magenta cast. Provia can go funky in the blues and of course we all know about V50's lack of shadow detail/range. The Astia I had was outdated film (as is most of the film I buy,) and I found it was "brown" and lacked any punch that I was used to the Velvia films (any of them.) I may have had a bad batch and will probably try it again.

To make a long story short, there isn't one film that will give us everything we want in a landscape/nature film. So, having said that, I settled on V100f as a good overall film that is excellent in grain size and better than V50 in terms of shadow detail. As I've become better at scanning and PS, the magenta cast can certainly be adjusted.

As far as rating the film, I personally wouldn't go with anyone's speed rating of a film. You should test it yourself. Everyone has slightly different metering tendancies and not unlike calibrating monitors and printers, you should "calibrate" your film and lens combos and settle on a rating that works for you.

Regards,
Lon

[Paul O]

Thanks for the advice/suggestions!

[timbo10ca]

Oops- I looked again at this film after reading Lon's post- It was actually on Provia. Hence the blue cast. I don't actually have a landscape I shot on the 100f- they're all still-lifes.

Tim

[AFSmithphoto]

I prefer the 100f. Not because I don't like the 100, but I've always got some 50 with me, and I think the 50 and 100 are pretty similiar films. Too similiar for me to carry both.
I take the 100f along because it has MUCH better skin tones, slightly better latitude, and still keeps those crazy blue velvia skies.

[sgelb]

I dont like any of them.

Velvia sucks at shadows and the colors are way over done.

Ektachrome 64 is such a superior emulsion its not even funny. I shot a roll of 120 the other day and the colors are rich but not overdone, the highlights jump off the lightbox if u hit a 1/3 or so under and it has an amazing super detailed full range.

[aphexafx]

Velvia sucks at shadows and the colors are way over done.

Velvia doesn't "suck at shadows", you just have to know how to shoot within its limited dynamic range. It is absolutely fantastic for product/food work, when appropriate, for instance - at least I think so.

I am not a fan of Ektachrome, but I don't think either is superior - they are just different, as are other people's styles of photography...

[Frank Bunnik]

I used Velvia 100f on a 3 week trek in Nepal's Everest area and was very pleased with the results. Some of these can be seen in my mountainset on www.flickr.com/photos/asialover

I tried Velvia 50 before in the Himalayas but because of the very high contrast situations the results were not always that good.

[Eugene van der Merwe]

I shoot 100 at at 80 iso. It seems a little more punchy and colourful than 100f, which i also used for a few years, but a little less forgiving in the dark shadows.