4X5 Velvia exposure methods

[Jamie Bennett]

Hi all, terrific site. I have been involved with photograhy for about 15 years now and have always lusted after a large format camera as my passion is land and seascapes. Have finally got what I wanted in the form of a Linhof Color 4x5. I might be opening a big can of worms here but would be very interested in how you all go about getting consistantly good exposures using trannie film?

[Walter Calahan]

Test your film to learn what its true ISO is with regards to your meter.

Expose for the highlights. Standard for all transparency film.

[Vlad Soare]

Get a good incident lightmeter. Meter the highlights. Pray for the shadows.
That's all. :)

[Gem Singer]

Purchase a spot meter. Learn how to use it to measure shadows and highlights.

Trannie film is sensitive to a narrower range of tones than negative film. A spot meter will help you to keep your exposures within that range.

[Joanna Carter]

If you are planning on using Velvia 100, then you will only have 4 stops of usable range, before either blocking shadows or blowing highlights; Velvie 50 has even less - around 3-3.5 stops.

You would be advised to get a good spotmeter. The range of Velvia 100 is fairly evenly split between 2 stops over the "zone 5" reading and 2 stops under. I tend to take a reading from the darkest shadow that I want to contain detail, then reduce that exposure by 2 stops. Then I scan the scene for anything that exceeds the reduced exposure by another 2 stops. If the "highlights" can be covered by a graduated filter, then that is all that is required to give you a good exposure; if not, then you will have to decide whether you are prepared to sacrifice either shadow or highlight detail.

[Jamie Bennett]

Thanks Guys, thats very interesting. Does Velvia 100 have the same characteristics as the 50 in regards to color and saturation? Also, has anyone tried Ken rockwell's idea of using a digital SLR as a exposure meter? He takes several shots to get the look he wants on the LCD and then converts that exposure info to his view camera, what do you think?

[Walter Calahan]

Velvia 100 is its own unique creature. Shoot side by side tests of 100 verse 50 to have your own live comparison. Testing is the best way to educate yourself 'cause what I like isn't what you might want from a film.

Film and digital are two different creatures. I never use my digital camera as an exposure meter for film. 99% of my transparency metering is done with an incident light meter. Your method may require a totally different approach.

[Stephen Lewis]

Does Velvia 100 have the same characteristics as the 50 in regards to color and saturation?
No. They're two entirely different beasts.

Also, has anyone tried Ken rockwell's idea of using a digital SLR as a exposure meter? He takes several shots to get the look he wants on the LCD and then converts that exposure info to his view camera, what do you think?
This won't give the control you're looking for. The DSLR has perhaps 6 stops of latitude and on-board image processing. Tranny film (any film?) has completely different characteristics.

Buy a good spot meter and learn how to use it. Exposing for the highlights and checking the shadows is a good starting point, but it's just that; a starting point. The beauty of a spot meter is that, with practice, it allows you to measure and visualise how the tones will reproduce on the film.

May I suggest you start with Provia 100F. It's very neutral in its colour and contrast, and very forgiving in its exposure characteristics. Useful if the odd push or pull is needed in the exposure or development. It's very tolerant of long exposures (something Velvia 50 isn't) and has around four to four and a half stops of latitude. HTH :)

[Michael Gordon]

I wouldn't limit yourself to only using Velvia. Its a rich film and has its place, but if prints are your primary output, there are better film choices for both exposure latitude and ease of scanning. Have a look also at Fuji Astia or Fuji Pro160S (color neg).

[Joanna Carter]

As others have said, it would be a total waste of effort to attempt to use digital cameras for light readings. The distribution of exposure range is very different; e.g. a Nikon D100 has a range of 4.5 stops below the "standard" exposure but only 1.5 stops above.

I, along with several others that I know, tend to set such cameras to consistently under-expose by 2/3 to 1 stop; something that is totally different from most films.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Extensive use of various density graduated neutral density filters is the traditional way of keeping landscape exposures within the latitude of Velvia 50. For transparency work, you need also to know precisely what speeds your shutter is providing-- most will not be dead on one or more of the indicated settings. Hopefully it will at least be consistent.

I'd been manually metering with 35mm color transparency film for two decades myself before making the jump to both large format, medium format and DSLRs in the past couple of years. I learned early on that bracketing is always the best plan in sketchy light, back in the days when I had a film-only workflow, though I find it less and less necessary these days since I'm shooting with Astia 100F, and first proofing with a DSLR.

Personally, I'm finding histograms/blown highlight warnings and the instant feed back of a DSLR with spot metering to be extremely useful. Too, Matrix Metering on my Nikons is nearly foolproof for not blowing whites, my Pentax 645N matrix a bit less so in high-contrast. Though I do have a D300, my D200 has a lower dynamic range, and an ISO 100 setting so it's a better fit with LF metering. Outdoors in either snow or low-key situations I first use the spot-meter to find a known good middle toned (18˚ gray) value as a starting point, and bracket around this until I'm happy with the histogram.

So far, I've had far more problems with sluggish LF shutters in cold weather than picking the right exposure using this method.

(I'm with KR here. You can buy a whole camera for what a lightmeter costs-- and if it has an X-sync terminal, use it to proof your flash output as well. With either, you'll still have to factor in bellows extension, reciprocity and filter factors though.)

[dsim]

Personally, I'm finding histograms/blown highlight warnings and the instant feed back of a DSLR with spot metering to be extremely useful. Too, Matrix Metering on my Nikons is nearly foolproof for not blowing whites, my Pentax 645N matrix a bit less so in high-contrast. Though I do have a D300, my D200 has a lower dynamic range, and an ISO 100 setting so it's a better fit with LF metering. Outdoors in either snow or low-key situations I first use the spot-meter to find a known good middle toned (18˚ gray) value as a starting point, and bracket around this until I'm happy with the histogram.


The in camera histogram of a DSLR is far from accurate. At the golden hours I've measured deviations by as much as a stop. The reason being is that the histogram is based on the white balance set in camera which is basically two multipliers used to equalize the sensitivity of red and blue channels to the green channel. In order to view an accurate histogram white balance should be disabled and a linear curve loaded in camera.

In my opinion a spot meter will produce better results.

:)

[Richard M. Coda]

Color Zone system...

Get a spot meter
Get a MacBeth Color Checker Chart
Meter the middle gray patch in both sun and shade, mark down your EV readings.
In the SAME sun and shade (best to do all sun together, and then all shade together) then meter each patch and mark down your EV reading.
Calculate the difference between each patch and the middle gray patch (eg. +1/3, -2/3, etc.) and write each down.
When you're out in the field... if the main color you want is yellow, meter the yellow. Then look at your notes for yellow. It should be give-or-take +1 stop. Whatever your meter gave you for yellow in the field, give it one extra stop of exposure. Done. It is bullet-proof (within the limitations of the film).

[Ivan J. Eberle]

The in camera histogram of a DSLR is far from accurate. At the golden hours I've measured deviations by as much as a stop. The reason being is that the histogram is based on the white balance set in camera which is basically two multipliers used to equalize the sensitivity of red and blue channels to the green channel. In order to view an accurate histogram white balance should be disabled and a linear curve loaded in camera.

In my opinion a spot meter will produce better results.

:)

Perhaps you've misunderstood me. I'm not using a DSLR on autopilot. I almost always manually dial in the exposure with an in-camera spot meter when the light or subject is tough. Coming from 30 years of shooting film it's become fast and intuitive and I trust it most when there's sufficient time. However, I also find that in fast-changing light, Matrix metering is quite excellent and can well be relied upon, with an understanding of what subjects and situations tend to fool it. (Matrix and spot are both metering options on my film-based Nikon F5 and Pentax 645N, incidentally.)

In using a DSLR to calculate my 4x5 exposures, a histogram is most helpful to graphically show the dynamic range of an image and the distribution (e.g. whether to use a GND filter) and the highlight clipping warning can be similarly useful. Though I wouldn't rely on either to try to tweak and correlate a film exposure directly, as film and sensors behave differently in the highlights. One can recover highlights somewhat with digital when "exposing to the right". No getting it back with transparency film.

A spot meter is a spot meter, they all measure an 18% gray reflectance (or else should be calibrated to do so). Used in manual mode I'll put my Nikon D200, D300 or P645N up against anything out there. My meters also happen to also take nice images, albeit admittedly at something of a weight penalty over a 4x5 and a spotmeter alone. But if you have a DSLR with an accurate spotmeter already, and tend to carry it with you even when shooting with a view camera, as I and apparently others do, a handheld meter seems rather superfluous.

(All that to say I'm rather pleased with my Velvia 50 exposures on 4x5 sheet film.)

[Doug Dolde]

When I shot tranny film I always metered the brightest spot, usually a white cloud then opened up 1.5 stops. Of course grads were also employed sometimes but with the same principle, just factoring in the grad.

[dsim]

Perhaps you've misunderstood me. I'm not using a DSLR on autopilot. I almost always manually dial in the exposure with an in-camera spot meter when the light or subject is tough.
Used in manual mode I'll put my Nikon D200, D300 or P645N up against anything out there.

Ivan I understood what you were saying and didn't mean to allude to you using a DSLR on autopilot. The fact remains that histograms are based on white balance which will affect an exposure decision especially in fleeting light. To have an accurate in camera histogram you need to load a UniWb with a linear curve.

A simple test demonstrates this fact. In manual mode, calculate exposure for a scene, WB 10,000k, shoot. Repeat test with WB 4000K. Don't change exposure. Even though the exposure doesn't change, the histograms will be radically different hence affecting exposure judgement. Failure to nail the white balance can impair one's assessment of the tonal range of a histogram.


A spot meter is a spot meter, they all measure an 18% gray reflectance

18% grey value actually comes from the print world. The ANSI standard calibration for light meters is a luminance value that is approximate to the reflectance of 12% gray. I've used meters calibrated to 13% but that's another thread.

Regards :)

[Jamie Bennett]

Thanks for all the advice, this is a really great site with lots of help. Many years ago I had a Hasselblad as "option 2" in my wedding bussiness and would shoot Velvia 50 through this when out doing landscapes. I would basicly take a incident light reading and bracket to get something decent. Using negative film is a good idea, NPS was my prefered film for shooting weddings and I love its good handling of high contrast subjects and smooth tonal range, I have been dreaming of a 4x5 Velvia trannie on my light box though! I think I will get a spot meter and educate myself on its use.
I am also looking forward to shooting some black and white and have been educating myself for a while now on understanding the Zone system. Have read AA's "The Negative" as well as Chris Johnson's "The practical zone system" which is a little easier to get my head around. Thanks again for all your help, Jamie.