Scanning: Velvia vs Provia?

[Ken Fong]

I've read the article at:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/velvia_vs_povia.shtml

The author favors Provia 100 over Velvia (presumably Velvia 50) as the superior film for scanning. If I like the look of classic Velvia and don't want to spend a lot of time in post-scanning manipulation, should I still consider Provia over Velvia as a primary landscape film? Are there any Velvia users out there that have switched to Provia because of these "superior" scanning characteristics?

[mbze430]

nope. I still use Velvia 50 for landscape over Provia. I rarely use Provia I find it too saturated for skin and not enough pop for landscape. I use Astia for portraits such as fashion and 3/4.

Provia seems to be the "general purpose". However I rather shoot something else for that.

[J Rabin]

I would say you should just try and see what consumer scanners do with it! I imagine there is variation in scanner performance handling the dense emulsion of Velvia. It's the dense emulsion, not Velvia's exaggerated (i.e.,non-natural fake) green and yellow E-6 processing colors, that make Velvia hard to scan.
On my Nikon 5000 scanner, I use the Nikon Wide Gamut Compensated icc profile to scan Velvia, which is Nikon's scanner implementation of Kodak's ProPhoto RGB in PhotoShop (which I use as my archival RAW to TIF format). That way I CAPTURE ALL that non-natural exxaggerated color without having to post process to re-saturate the colors.
Even if they are "out of gamut," and can't printed on an inkjet or viewed (yet...). If you scan Velvia, use the ProPhoto or wide gamut equal to get it all.

Sometimes my scanner chokes on Velvia. Just freezes, requiring a re-set. Yes, Provia is an easier emulsion to scan. Faster throughput. Nice results. No doubt. K-64 and others like Astia do equally fine. For scanning, Velvia emulsion is the toughest.

Maybe you can try and more film friendly forum on the net for scanner recommendations. I'm no expert.
Dust, scratches, archiving, film grain, scanner freezes.... The beautiful grain free luster of dSLR with L lenses has all but ended film for me. All the cards, batteries, cables. software money. Sheesh. We used to just go on a trip with camera and film. Batteries lasted months. What have I done to myself...J.

[mbze430]

I think another added value in scanning film these days is the HDR, and higher dmax film scanners. Unless the slide is really badly exposed I haven't have too much of a time "fixing" the scan from Velvia.

I have the Minolta 5400 II, and it does really nice detail scan in the dark area when you use multipass.

[UncleDoug]

The LL article has good technical merits.
If your photographic needs match those being addressed, switch.
But I would not change my aesthetic for only the arguments stated in the article.
When I look at film I take a "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" approach - What film provides the best image for the task at hand to MY eye in the end, the print.

I personaly like the colors of Velvia for landscapes.

[Ken Fong]

Thanks everyone. So it sounds like if I photograph more for colors and highlights (clouds), staying with Velvia is fine, and if I shoot more for deep shadows, I should consider Provia for easier scanning. I'm assuming the new Velvia 100 (not 100f) will have the same dense emulsion issues.

I would love to work completely in digital, but I have medium format and 4x5 to scan, and can't afford a 22+megapixel back at this time (my amateur level does not justify it.) I'm hoping to get an Epson 4990 in the late summer. Ken Rockwell seems to like its "DMax" capability...maybe it can handle Velvia a little better than the other consumer grade scanners.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/epson/4990.htm

[J Rabin]

Ken: I find Rockwell's site and writing too... pompous and "me" oriented. I think Steve Hoffman's site has more information I've really used in my photography, scanning, and digital. He walks the walk, not just talk, especially medium format.

http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/dslrvsfilm.htm

http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/wdtech.html

Norman Koran's website is also a gold mine of info. Helped me a lot.

[Ken Fong]

Thanks J for the balancing references...they look very rich. I've seen Koren's article on simplified zone...I printed out his color exposure compensation grid...quite handy. Yes, I've heard folks on this site refer to Rockwell as the William Shatner of photography...I couldn't stop laughing when I saw that description used... 8)

[kraterz]

I find that if I expose Velvia properly and don't clog the shadows, the scans are the absolute best I've got from any slide film - absolutely grain free, and I use an old Minolta scan dual II at that. There's just that much more bite to velvia. Provia-F doesn't get there. At least Provia-F scans better than EBX or E100VS / E100S. Not sure of the newer E100G/GX emulsions though.

[mdr]

Scan Velvia 50 if you get exposure mostly right, for as long as you can still buy Velvia 50.
Scan Provia 100 if your don't, and regain the Velvia effect using Fred Miranda's Velvia Vision (extremely easy and quick to use).
The judges are still out on veliva 100 and Velvia 100F.

[kellybundy]

Article...one of the best...at the articles section on this line...(from a Nikon guy, me not the article)

http://www.dl-c.com/

direct link:


ftp://ftp.bmtmicro.com/bmtmicro/DLC_WEB/Picture%20Window%20(BMT%20Micro)/Picture%20Window%20Doc/Velvia%20vs%20Provia%20100F.pdf

Velvia vs Provia 100F.pdf
Velvia vs. Provia 100F -- A Digital Perspective

This document describes the results of tests comparing scanned images from these two films for resolving power, smooth rendition of blue skies, color rendition and exposure latitude.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=190531