Tips 4 Shooting Velvia Slide Film with M6

[ghulkhan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Any tips would be appreciated regarding the exposure. This will be my first time using slide film. I have read that if you do not get the exposure right, it could lead to disaster.

 

So I was wondering if anyone could help me out...by maybe explaining how to use the M6 internal meter for slide film. I know how to use it but I have only used it for negative BW film.

 

and also

 

As for "exposing for the highlights" pictures of people with light blue sky in the background...

 

will exposing the people properly wash out the back ground ..is there any tip on a medium for correcting exposing both..

[Leitzmac]

Hello there,

 

I mostly shoot black and white in my M6, but have shot slide on various occasions including the old Velvia 50 (have tons of the stuff in the fridge) and have got some fairly decent shots on the M6 using transparency, so I'll see if I can help.

 

As you have mentioned getting the exposure wrong on slide film can lead to disaster! This is due to the limited latitude, i.e. it doesn't have any of the masking properties of neg and for the most part needs to be within 1/4 -1/2 of a stop from ideal exposure.

 

Because of the above I tend to use a hand held 1 degree spot meter (instead of my M6 internal meter) to ensure accurate exposure when shooting tranny. However there are times when using a separate meter would be too slow, I don't have one with me, or I know I'll be able to get a fairly accurate reading without need a 1 degree spot.

 

As you know the area that the M6 meter takes a reading from is fairly large, but if shooting black and white and roughly pointing it at the area that you would like to appear as a mid grey (according to the zone system) you can recompose and get a usable if not well exposed picture. This is true for tranny film too, except you might have to be a little more careful to ensure you are metering from the correct area (perhaps by getting closer to combat inaccuracies the wide field covered by the internal meter may produce) and that the reading is not being affected by things such as strong point light sources.

 

You mentioned photographing people against a blue sky. For simplicity's sake there are two scenarios here, the first is contre-jour (the sun is behind your subject), in this instance should you expose for the person then the sky will be burnt out, unless of course you can use a reflector or fill flash to balance the exposure. The second scenario is that your subject is front lit (the sun is behind you and is falling on their face), in this case you should get a fairly even exposure, particularly if the person is very fair skinned and you take a reading from their face.

 

To some extent it is a case of trial and error but, subdued, even lighting is for the most part easier to expose under than harsh midday sun which is very contrasty.

 

Just a quick note, forgive me if this sounds obvious, but if you are in a contre-jour situation, you don't have flash or reflectors and you want to retain information in both the sky and the person's face I would suggest taking a reading from the subject, then taking a reading from the blue sky and setting your exposure somewhere between the two - slower shutter/larger aperture for more subject detail, faster shutter/smaller aperture for more features in the sky.

 

All the best.

[Advertisement]

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

[atournas]

Hi,

 

Let me add some more to Leitzmac's answer. I'll assume you have no hand-held metering option and you cannot approach your main subject in order to take many spot meterings and then average.

 

First, whenever you load a transparency film, it is preferable to set ISO to 1/3 stop higher, that is, shoot underexposed. This will ensure that your pictures are a bit more saturated than the nominal ISO value would produce. (As a matter of fact, with color print films, do the opposite and perhaps down to 2/3 stop.)

 

However, this may give you harsh pictures if your slide film is already saturated from the factory; e.g., experiment a little with the Ektachrome VS. Also, in another thread, someone made an interesting observation that, with the Velvia 50, underexposed shots darken the darker areas to almost undetailed blacks.

 

Second, with tricky situations where areas reflect quite differently, use bracketing, that is, take more than one shot, some underexposed and some overexposed around the selected settings. However, always remember that an underexposed slide may be "interpreted" as artistic and having mood, but an overexposed one is so much washed out that it is just useless.

 

Best,

Paul

[ghulkhan]

Thanks for the help guys

 

But when you say set the ISO down 1/3 stop, what does that exactly mean. I am fairly new to this stuff (sorry)

 

I have read on some other sites that many people set the ISO to 40....but would that mean you are over exposing or under exposing. I thought higher iso speeds are equivalent to stopping down on the shutter speed or the aperture.

[ghulkhan]

Also, I have been reading a fair bit of stuff as in details in the shadows are lost when it is underexposed, however, if you overexpose the highlights blank out.

[atournas]

Thanks for the help guys

 

But when you say set the ISO down 1/3 stop, what does that exactly mean. I am fairly new to this stuff (sorry)

 

No problem to clarify a little. Saying UP 1/3 stop, I mean set the ISO dial one more small white line up towards the higher ISO. E.g., if you are using an ASA 50 transparency film, set the dial not at 50 but at the next small white line towards 100. That means your M6 "reads" an effective ASA 64 film now and therefore "assumes" a film requiring a bit less light when exposed, in other words, underexposed. The opposite holds with overexpose.

 

As for the black and white areas, I am afraid the best approach is trial and error, in other words, get to know how your favorite film behaves.

 

Don't hesitate to ask for more tips, if you feel like it.

 

Paul

[Leitzmac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

First, whenever you load a transparency film, it is preferable to set ISO to 1/3 stop higher, that is, shoot underexposed. This will ensure that your pictures are a bit more saturated than the nominal ISO value would produce. (As a matter of fact, with color print films, do the opposite and perhaps down to 2/3 stop.)

 

However, this may give you harsh pictures if your slide film is already saturated from the factory; e.g., experiment a little with the Ektachrome VS. Also, in another thread, someone made an interesting observation that, with the Velvia 50, underexposed shots darken the darker areas to almost undetailed blacks.

 

I agree with what Paul has said, but can confirm that Velvia 50 does block up in the shadows when underexposed by even minor amounts, the same with VS, but I feel Velvia 50 was more sensitive. Ideally you need to get the exposure bang on for these films, however others may vary as to whether they favour a hint of under of over exposure.

 

Like Paul and I have said it's trial and error - get to know your film that way and the lessons will stay with you. You shouldn't have any real disasters if you follow the basics.

 

Enjoy looking at the trannies, it's a special experience looking at a well exposed slide (that you took) on a lightbox for the first time.

[Jager]

Good advice above. Underexposing by a fraction of a stop when shooting transparencies was a common practice back in the day. I used to routinely shoot Kodachrome 64 rated at 80. Velvia was an exception for me, however. A lot of pros actually rated it at 40, given its quick propensitiy to block up the shadows. I usually shot it at box speed.

 

The two things to always bear in mind when shooting transparencies is its very narrow latitude - you need to be familiar with how your camera's internal meter works with different focal lengths (higher focal lengths will decrease the amount of area being measured, turning the M6's modest center-weighted meter pattern at wide focal lengths to more of a spot meter as you put longer lenses on it). That's not nearly as complicated as it sounds - just bear in mind that only the center portion of what you see in your viewfinder is falling under the meter pattern; and get in the habit of finding a mid-tone to meter against.

 

The second thing to remember is that detail can usually be pulled out of the shadows on an underexposed image; but blown highlights are gone forever. So err on the side of underexposure. You know how when metering with your M6 you'll often have both the red dot plus one of the red arrows illuminated at the same time? Well, meter so that it's the arrow on the underexposure side.

 

Like Leitzmac said, slides are a special treat. Enjoy 'em!

[JBA]

Here's an example of what happens with Velvia 50 exposed at ISO 64 under high contrast conditions. Note the black shadows. There is no way to salvage any shadow detail in post processing because there's no detail there to begin with. Exposing at exactly 50 probably would have worked better here. Also, I've found Velvia 100 to be a bit more forgiving than 50.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Leicaflex SL2, Apo 180 3.4 Telyt, f8 @ 1/250

[JBA]

Good advice above. Underexposing by a fraction of a stop when shooting transparencies was a common practice back in the day. I used to routinely shoot Kodachrome 64 rated at 80. Velvia was an exception for me, however. A lot of pros actually rated it at 40, given its quick propensitiy to block up the shadows. I usually shot it at box speed.

 

. . .

 

You know how when metering with your M6 you'll often have both the red dot plus one of the red arrows illuminated at the same time? Well, meter so that it's the arrow on the underexposure side.

 

Kodachrome was a vastly different beast from Velvia. It had a huge latitude, particularly for underexposure. Depending on conditions, I used to think nothing of underexposing Kodachrome by two stops.

 

As for the M6 meter, the classic has only two arrows, but they respond sensitively enough that you can easily adjust exposure by fractions of a stop either way. The MP has the dot in the middle but the M6 classic does not.

[budrichard]

There are scenes that cannot be correctly exposed for with film as the brightness range of the scene exceeds that ability of the film to capture that range i.e. deep shadows and bright sunlight is a simple example. Finding the perfect exposure for a scene is fraught with possible errors of cognition and equipment.

Bracketing whereby one shoots additional exposures both over and under your initial exposure determination is the only way to ensure you consistantly come back with a usable image. The amount/level of bracketing is determined by the sigificance of the scene and your ability to compute the correct exposure.

For some photos, I have bracketed in 1/3 stop increments up to a full two stops over/under. For others where I have more confidence, a 1/2 stop over/under.

Nothing but knowledge of the exposure process and then actual experience will make you confident in your exposure determination.-Dick

[Leitzmac]

Kodachrome was a vastly different beast from Velvia. It had a huge latitude, particularly for underexposure. Depending on conditions, I used to think nothing of underexposing Kodachrome by two stops.

 

As for the M6 meter, the classic has only two arrows, but they respond sensitively enough that you can easily adjust exposure by fractions of a stop either way. The MP has the dot in the middle but the M6 classic does not.

 

ghulkhan: You are probably getting the feeling that people find a film(s) that they're happy with? Many landscape photographers swear by Velvia 50, others Kodachrome, many of the fashion crowd favoured Astia (mostly digi these days!) and I've even come across pros who used Sensia despite it being not being branded as a professional film. I use several different tranny films including Fuji Velvia 50, Provia 100 + 400, Astia, Kodak VS and GX. I tend to use different film for different lighting and subject matter, for instance though VS, Provia and Astia are all 100 speed films they all react completely differently to the same lighting. For the most part I wouldn't use Velvia in the type of conditions present in the picture JBA posted. As he mentioned the detail has been lost in the shadows, however if you'd exposed for the shadows and given it more exposure the highlights would've been blown. It's a tough call in a situation like that, but JBA did what most would do and exposed for the highlights. Given the choice I would've opted for Astia, Provia 100 or Sensia, Sensia being less contrasty than Provia and therefore having more latitude. Of course this is not always possible as you have to get the shot with whatever film is currently loaded!

 

To reiterate, JBAs shot perfectly illustrates why many people regard Velvia 50 as a finickity film and to my mind is best used in more diffuse light or where ND grads can be used to balance exposure. 'Horses for courses' as they say, throw some different films in the bag and experiment, find the ones that work for you, or a way of rating each that works for you.

 

P.S. JBA: Jeff was probably referring to the M6 TTL.

[Jager]

I was, indeed, referring to the M6 TTL, JBA. Thanks for the clarification vis-a-vis the M6 classic. Regarding your posted image, I agree with Leitzmac - overexposing it more would have blown the highlights. I think you nailed it given the challenging contrast and exposure range you were trying to capture.

[ghulkhan]

Leitzmac

 

I have just really liked the way Velvia looks. However I am going to be mostly shooting people (I wanted to get color slide since I have friends coming from over sea) on the streets of New York City. That being the case, it seems as though Velvia is probably not a good option.

 

Is there a nice saturated, contrasty slide film better suited for the city. I really wanted to use Velvia 50 or 100 but it seems as though it would be better not to.

 

Provia or Astia?

[Leitzmac]

Don't avoid Velvia entirely - I have some pictures from the streets of Cuba that demanded a vibrant film and I shot Velvia 50, sometimes rated 100 which was fine, I will try to post some here when they are scanned.

 

Astia is a relatively subtle transparency and I like the understated rendering, particularly where people (skin tones) are concerned.

 

Provia is a good punchy film and works well in a variety of situations, however, as is the way with some Fuji emulsions it can have a cool cast - particularly under overcast skies. The majority of Kodak films are warmer, particularly the GX which is definitely worth a try, but can be susceptible to magenta casts.

 

I'm afraid I haven't tried Velvia 100 so can't speak about that, however I did try Velvia 100F when it came out and I wasn't really a fan. Having said that I have heard from friends that Velvia 100 is a vast improvement on 100F.

[gyoung]

There are scenes that cannot be correctly exposed for with film as the brightness range of the scene exceeds that ability of the film to capture that range i.e. deep shadows and bright sunlight is a simple example.

 

snip

 

.-Dick

 

I had just this problem in the south of France last summer even with Provia, never mind Velvia. I wished I had taken some Astia with me!

 

Gerry

[Leitzmac]

Astia is wonderful stuff and in my experience has very fine grain.

[JBA]

I was, indeed, referring to the M6 TTL, JBA. Thanks for the clarification vis-a-vis the M6 classic. Regarding your posted image, I agree with Leitzmac - overexposing it more would have blown the highlights. I think you nailed it given the challenging contrast and exposure range you were trying to capture.

 

I know ghulkhan from another forum and happen to know that he has an M6 classic, which is why I offered the clarification. I thought you might have been referring to the TTL.

 

I was also pleased with the way that photo turned out. It illustrates what I love about Velvia -- the color, contrast, and fine grain -- as well as its biggest weakness -- narrow latitude. Fortunately, there's not very much shadow in the photo, so the lack of shadow detail doesn't really detract. At least Velvia doesn't render shadows with that muddy greenish cast so common with color films.

 

Another thing it shows is the retina-searing sharpness of the Apo 180 Telyt-R, which was a major reason I got into the R system.

[NZDavid]

I've never had a lot of luck with Velvia. It's just that I find its highly saturated colors artificial, especially as I live in a country where we already have highly contrasty light. For landscapes, it may work better in countries with softer light and overcast skies, for example, England. For people, Velvia skin tones can be too ruddy. I have had some nice results on one occasion when I overexposed by setting the meter for 40 not 50 ISO.

 

A lot also depends on the accuracy of the meter and will vary from camera to camera. The M6 seems bang on. The M6 meters a central area approximately equivalent to the field of view of a 90mm lens.

 

For people against blue skies, you could come in close and meter their face (which may leave the sky washed out), use an incident meter (Sekonic 308 is good), use a reflector or fill flash, or just go for character and strong shadows.

 

In any case, it's worth experimenting with slide films. Fuji Astia 100F is very neutral and has extremely fine grain, Kodak 100G is more saturated but less so than Velvia. There's still plenty of choice, thank goodness, so have fun.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Photoskeptic]

Frankly, I like Velvia 100F quite a bit. A bit more muted than 100. The point of color slide film is COLOR and I want a lot of it. I know the properties of Velvia well and personally have never had a problem with over/under exposure and I don't use a meter with my M3. I would post some 100F images but I'm on a borrowed computer until my new one arrives

As to Astia - terrific stuff. Accurately records the scene and seems to have more latitude.

Don't just shoot one roll and draw conclusions. Accuracy with any film improves the more you use it.