Thoughts on underexposing/pushing of slide film

[fatihayoglu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As the subject says, what are your thoughts on underexposing or pushing of slide films in my case Velvia100. I am thinking to get Provia100 and E100 as well at some point. The reason why I am looking to do so is to get a bit more shutter speed when the day starts to get darker.

I have done many times underexposing or pushing color negative films, ie Portra400 and TriX400. As many knows underexposing is pretty much ok with those films, intact some people always shoot in that way. I do it in a way that I can't always change films during the day, load a Portra400 at the beginning of the day and change ISO during the day according how the light plays. So in a roll, I might have pictures rates at 100, 200 or 400. It is also possible that, I don't know which photo is rated where but to me as long as I make my photo, that detail is not very important.

I know I cannot do this with slide films due to their narrower DR, however it is know some photographers push their slide films in the past, so I want to hear your thoughts. (and also about underexposing them)

 

[a.noctilux]

In the past ( long time ago ), before digital I used only slides (thousands of Kodachrome, Velvia, Provia, Fujichrome, etc. ).

When Kodak released "non-succesful" Kodachrome 200, I was happy user but regretted the K64 and K25 renderings.

The dream K200 was not as nice color/sharp/pleasant as the slower Kodachrome.

So after that deception, I wanted to see how Velvia 100 or Provia 100 can give at 200 ASA so only one "EV push".

My conclusion was that the results at 200ASA Velvia/Provia varied a lot from excellent to really bad in color rendering.

Since then I used them at their 100 rated ISO and take a pockettable tripod ( yes in a pocket 😋  14100 + 14110 if need be) or bigger/wider open lenses ( Noctilux in place of Summilux 😉 ).

As usual, you may try by yourself if the pushed Velvia or Provia can give good results.

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[fatihayoglu]

Ah, that's disappointing

[adan]

On 10/28/2018 at 9:50 AM, fatihayoglu said:

As many knows underexposing is pretty much ok with those films, intact some people always shoot in that way. I do it in a way that I can't always change films during the day, load a Portra400 at the beginning of the day and change ISO during the day according how the light plays. So in a roll, I might have pictures rates at 100, 200 or 400.

I don't understand what you are saying here.

If you are taking a rated ISO 400 film, and exposing it at 100 and 200 - you are OVEREXPOSING (at 100 or 200) or exposing normally (at 400). Not underexposing.

And overexposing color neg film (giving it more light than it needs) does work reasonably well (up to a point) - stronger saturation, less grain, and good shadow detail.

Underexposing color neg film (that is, shooting 400 Portra at 800 or 1600) usually results in pretty poor quality - grainy, thin, color-stained (purple/blue/green) shadows, as well as overall graininess.

 

[fatihayoglu]

15 hours ago, adan said:

I don't understand what you are saying here.

If you are taking a rated ISO 400 film, and exposing it at 100 and 200 - you are OVEREXPOSING (at 100 or 200) or exposing normally (at 400). Not underexposing.

And overexposing color neg film (giving it more light than it needs) does work reasonably well (up to a point) - stronger saturation, less grain, and good shadow detail.

Underexposing color neg film (that is, shooting 400 Portra at 800 or 1600) usually results in pretty poor quality - grainy, thin, color-stained (purple/blue/green) shadows, as well as overall graininess.

 

Adan sorry, I meant overexposing as both subject title and my context. Yes I meant up to a point it works well.

And I was looking for a feedback overexposing slide films and pushing slide films.

 

Admin - is there a way to change the subject to reflect this?

[oldwino]

I saw this morning that someone is trying out Ektachrome 100 at 200, 400 & 800 (and processing accordingly). Hard to really see with this posting, but the 200 & 400 look pretty good. 800 seems a little dodgy. 

Might be fun to play with this.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, fatihayoglu said:

Adan sorry, I meant overexposing as both subject title and my context. Yes I meant up to a point it works well.

Slide film is like digital (or vice versa) - overexposure tends to "blow the highlights" (blank film base). Although not as abruptly as digital. Slide film can be "pulled" in the processing, by perhaps a stop, to compensate for overexposure and get a lower-contrast, lower-saturation image, with more open shadows.

And, of course it depends on the subject contrast range - on a gray cloudy day, you can overexpose slide film more than in harsh light.

The rule of thumb is to expose to avoid "empty film" - if you must be "off", aim for more exposure with negatives, and less exposure with positives (slides).

Unless, of course, you have a specific effect in mind. Cinematographers often blow their films with overexposure intentionally, to capture the sizzling blinding heat and light of desert scenes, for example. Or any other time you want a "high-key" look - studio background blown to pure white, etc. https://www.pinterest.com/caldwell_liam/high-key-lighting/

These days of course, that can be adjusted digitally - but back in the day, when pros showed "original transparency portfolios," they had to get it right in the camera.

Edited October 30, 2018 by adan

[fatihayoglu]

56 minutes ago, adan said:

Slide film is like digital (or vice versa) - overexposure tends to "blow the highlights" (blank film base). Although not as abruptly as digital. Slide film can be "pulled" in the processing, by perhaps a stop, to compensate for overexposure and get a lower-contrast, lower-saturation image, with more open shadows.

And, of course it depends on the subject contrast range - on a gray cloudy day, you can overexpose slide film more than in harsh light.

The rule of thumb is to expose to avoid "empty film" - if you must be "off", aim for more exposure with negatives, and less exposure with positives (slides).

Unless, of course, you have a specific effect in mind. Cinematographers often blow their films with overexposure intentionally, to capture the sizzling blinding heat and light of desert scenes, for example. Or any other time you want a "high-key" look - studio background blown to pure white, etc. https://www.pinterest.com/caldwell_liam/high-key-lighting/

These days of course, that can be adjusted digitally - but back in the day, when pros showed "original transparency portfolios," they had to get it right in the camera.

Thanks Adan, my main goal here is to achieve a bit more shutter speed. So I was thinking underexpose 1 or 2 stop and push it 1 or 2 to compensate it.

As slide films are already slow, I don't think I need to overexpose it at EI50 any way. (As I do for TriX400  or Portra400, when I rate them EI100 or EI200 and process as if EI400)

[fatihayoglu]

2 hours ago, oldwino said:

I saw this morning that someone is trying out Ektachrome 100 at 200, 400 & 800 (and processing accordingly). Hard to really see with this posting, but the 200 & 400 look pretty good. 800 seems a little dodgy. 

Might be fun to play with this.

this is great and I like what I see here. So hopefully I'll get my E100 soon to try as well.

[oldwino]

Please post your results!

 

[fatihayoglu]

17 minutes ago, oldwino said:

Please post your results!

 

as soon as they ship E100 to UK and I can get it from my dealer

[farnz]

I've shot thousands of rolls of (the original) Velvia 50 and I wouldn't advise pushing it at all particularly if the 'Velvia look' is important to your pictures.  You might get away with 1 stop sometimes but you're likely to fall into the non-linear part of the response curve, also known as Reciprocity Error.  With Velvia you're looking for the strong contrast and punchy colours and if you start pushing the film then those very often disappear.  

I was using 120 Velvia in a Pentax 67 and I experimented with pushing the trannies for the same reason as you and decided quite quickly that the better option was to use a tripod.  The colours were often washed out and the blacks were deep grey but it was very unpredictable.  If you're shooting for your own amusement then that's fine but if you're shooting for an exhibition or a commission then you're likely to be in trouble.

Pete.

 

[rpittal]

1 hour ago, farnz said:

I've shot thousands of rolls of (the original) Velvia 50 and I wouldn't advise pushing it at all particularly if the 'Velvia look' is important to your pictures.  You might get away with 1 stop sometimes but you're likely to fall into the non-linear part of the response curve, also known as Reciprocity Error.  With Velvia you're looking for the strong contrast and punchy colours and if you start pushing the film then those very often disappear.  

I was using 120 Velvia in a Pentax 67 and I experimented with pushing the trannies for the same reason as you and decided quite quickly that the better option was to use a tripod.  The colours were often washed out and the blacks were deep grey but it was very unpredictable.  If you're shooting for your own amusement then that's fine but if you're shooting for an exhibition or a commission then you're likely to be in trouble.

Pete.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2018 by rpittal

[adan]

The very first color slide film I ever shot "creatively" (as opposed to family snapshots) was the ancient High-Speed Ektachrome (EH, ASA 160 = ISO 160 today, process E4) which came with instructions for pushing to 400 - which I did, with an E4 kit. 1971 It worked.

But as Farnz says, when push-processed, slide films do tend to lose their maximum black density (DMax), as the extra time in the developer "fogs" the film slightly. Gray, or even sometimes color-tinted "blacks" with more than 1.5 stops or so. Somewhat correctable in scanning or other post-processing, of course.

For a while in the late 1990s, Kodak made Ektachrome P1600 (EPH - nominal ISO 400) which started out a bit greenish, and went very red in the shadows pushed to 3200. Some examples here:

https://www.lomography.com/films/871928255-kodak-ektachrome-p1600/photos

My own feeling is that contrasty, punchy Velvia is not the best candiate for pushing - Fuji Provia or the new Ektachrome 100 are probably better.

And in any case there is not the same flexibility to change ISO in the middle of a roll - slide film's high density range (pure black to pure white, as opposed to neg films "dark orange" to "pale orange" scale) means you fall off the decent exposure cliff with less than a stop difference either way - blown highlights or impenetrable shadows. Unless - of course - it produces a desirable effect.

[oldwino]

Here's the full article on Emulsive:

 

https://emulsive.org/reviews/film-reviews/kodak-film-reviews/film-review-kodak-ektachrome-e100-shot-at-ei-100-200-400-800-first-impressions