File :-(, x, )
Teus !QbSstcPD6U
Properly exposing Velvia = hard. Not possible at all under hard daylight, where shadows or dark things fall away immediately.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:05:06 14:58:59
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
My slides look much bette, scanner doesn't capture the dynamic range or vividness. I should try projecting them, but it's pretty useless when I want to share photos over the net.

Anybody knows some guides/tricks to get the best scanning out of Velvia, and what light/circumstances to choose?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
So what? If you want to shoot at high noon, use negative film, like everyone else.

Here's some Ektachrome 100 at high noon.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelQSS-29_31Camera SoftwarePicasa 3.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:28 12:45:01Unique Image IDF97DD47E5500D36F69A1250315840C96
>> Anonymous
don't pick at your thumbnail.
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
Hopefully Liska will be around, she practically specializes in velvia. In high contrast situations much of the time.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
     File :-(, x)
>>Hopefully Liska will be around, she practically specializes in velvia. In high contrast situations much of the time.
yeah, I found out she has a lot of nice film photos when I was browsing her older photos on flickr

I'll try HDR-ing scans. Single scan here, edited so it looks pretty close to the slide

Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:06 15:16:40
>> Anonymous
>>176093
Don't use an incident meter with velvia. You need to meter for highlights, and an incident meter makes that very difficult. That applies to pretty much any slide film.

A spot meter works the best, but if that's not available any reflected meter should work. Just know the angle of incidence of the meter.

Meter for the brightest part of the scene that you want to maintain detail then overexpose by 1-1.5 stops.

Another option, when using a center weighted meter or an incident meter with a wide angle of incidence is to meter then scene then underexpose by 0.5-1 stops. It's fairly dependent on the contrast range, but generally velvia handles underexposure pretty well so try to err in that direction.

As far as scanning, get drum scans. Barring that, a good negative scanner capable of doing multiple passes to build up shadow detail can help. Slides with a lot of shadow detail are hard to scan on cheap scanners.

For lighting, I like bright, contrasty light. Evenings with lots of color are good. I just pick subjects that work well with high contrast. Velvia also looks good on cloudy days if you find a subject that can handle soft light and not look like mud.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>176116
I'm getting warming filters for overcast days/evenings. I scan with a minolta scan dual III

As for metering, I'm still learning how to use the incident meter and measure brightness ration across the scene. Bright contrasty light, well, photos are flaky quickly here... got some photo of yours that works out well?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>176117
>> Martin !!ve2Q1ETWmJH
>>176141
jesus c!
his posture :o
.. my teenage mind instantly thought "he can self suck".. ¬¬
>> Anonymous
>>176144
GTFO.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
velvia exposes fine. it's just got a narrow dynamic range compared to negative and monochrome.

either shoot sunny 16, or underexpose by a 1/3 to 2/3 stop in contrasty situations. if you blow any highlights with slide film, you get clear plastic. shadow density is preserved much better, and you can always bring your highlights up in post.
>> Anonymous
I've never found sunny 16 to be very effective with slide film. Exposure errors of 1/4 of a stop show up pretty readily, so there isn't much room for error in guessing your exposure. I'd stick with a spot meter, or reflected meter at the very least.

Sunny 16 is great for B&W though.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>176196

it works fine for me most of the time. the rest of the time i'll use in-camera metering. it's been my experience that an external meter is pretty superfluous and time consuming with an slr anyway. probably 95% of the time my sekonic matches exactly what my camera is reading, and the other 5% it's not off by more than a 1/2 stop.

plus, i don't have a camera that can adjust in 1/4 stops, so the point is moot.
>> Anonymous
fence

on digital, if you shoot at iso 1600 with -1 EC, then bring it back to 0 in processing, is that simulating iso 3200
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>176209

yeah, that's exactly what it is.
>> Anonymous
>>176215

and what would -2 be after pushing back to 0?
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>176216

6400
>> Anonymous
>>176218

oh, i could've guessed that

thank you
>> Anonymous
>>176207an external meter is pretty superfluous and time consuming with an slr
Sure, if your SLR has a built in meter. Most of mine don't.

When I'm shooting with my Leica, I use a voigtlander meter clipped to the hot shoe. I just take a meter reading for the general lighting conditions, then I know how much exposure compensation I need for subtle changes in the scene. I just find that sunny 16 doesn't get my close enough to the base reading for the scene as I would like sometimes. I don't find it significantly more time consuming to work that way though, since I'm not metering for every shot.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>176262

most of your slr's don't have meters? sounds like someone's living in the past. contemporize, mannnnnnnnnn.
>> Anonymous
>>176274
Looks like someone doesn't understand photography.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>176293

it was a joke, a simpson's quote. lrn2readingcomprehension
>> Anonymous
I dont like using meters, I just calculate EV with my own sight when I'm on my cybershot, works every time to very pleasing results.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>176207
>an external meter is pretty superfluous and time consuming with an slr
Not really true in my experience, given the value of incident metering, especially with transparency film. But, you can get away without one if you have a built-in meter most of the time, so long as you understand what's going to fool your meeter and how to compensate for it. Still, I think my first meter paid for itself in the first year in transparency film I didn't waste through poor exposures.