Velvia in Super8

Matt Wells · December 13, 2006

Does anyone have any experiences to share regarding this emulsion in Super8?

I want to shoot some reversal (will make a change having only shot neg in super8 now for some time) and I love this emulsion in stills.

I would also be keen to buy from the US as there is a rather attractive exchange rate situation at present! ($1.90 to £1GBP) - if anyone can recommend.

Thanks,

Matt

Douglas Hunter · December 14, 2006

Does anyone have any experiences to share regarding this emulsion in Super8?

I want to shoot some reversal (will make a change having only shot neg in super8 now for some time) and I love this emulsion in stills.

I would also be keen to buy from the US as there is a rather attractive exchange rate situation at present! ($1.90 to £1GBP) - if anyone can recommend.

Thanks,

Matt

its great you'll love it. You can get it from Spectra in Burbank http://www.spectrafilmandvideo.com/index.html

Francis Kuhn · December 14, 2006

If you shoot it properly (keeping in mind the narrow exposure latitude) it is without question the best reversal stock out there if you are looking for saturated colors and fine grain. Noticeably finer grain and better detail than even Kodak 100D.

Victor Mejia · December 14, 2006

It's a great stock. With proper telecine, it can pass for 16mm film. I've shot about 20 rolls of this stuff and plan to shoot another six for a project I'm working on.

Victor

Anthony Schilling · December 14, 2006

If you shoot it properly (keeping in mind the narrow exposure latitude) it is without question the best reversal stock out there if you are looking for saturated colors and fine grain. Noticeably finer grain and better detail than even Kodak 100D.

I would have to disagree in comparison with 100D. They are nearly identicle in grain and saturation with the Velvia at lower speed, slightly higher contrast, and less stable. 100D is more red biased, Velvia is more green biased... although both have excellent greens and reds. Both films are at a near tie for being the best looking reversals the format has ever seen, but go with the 100D... It's more suited for MP (stable) and easier to get. The extra stop of speed doesn't hurt either.

Matt Wells · December 14, 2006

Excellent - thanks for the advice - Iwilldefinitely be examining the possibilities of 110D too.

thanks,

Matt

Francis Kuhn · December 14, 2006

I would have to disagree in comparison with 100D. They are nearly identicle in grain and saturation with the Velvia at lower speed, slightly higher contrast, and less stable. 100D is more red biased, Velvia is more green biased... although both have excellent greens and reds. Both films are at a near tie for being the best looking reversals the format has ever seen, but go with the 100D... It's more suited for MP (stable) and easier to get. The extra stop of speed doesn't hurt either.

Hi Anthony,

With all due respect, I have my head on a lightbox looking at transparencies more hours per week than I care to mention. I have shot both stocks in every format from 35mm to 8 x 10 in stills and S8, S16 and 35mm motion film. There is no comparison between the grain structure of Velvia (RVP--the 50 speed version) and Kodak 100D. Velvia is finer and renders fine detail better. Anyone interested in these two film stocks should shoot a test to see what I'm talking about.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)

Alessandro Machi · December 14, 2006

Hi Anthony,

With all due respect, I have my head on a lightbox looking at transparencies more hours per week than I care to mention. I have shot both stocks in every format from 35mm to 8 x 10 in stills and S8, S16 and 35mm motion film. There is no comparison between the grain structure of Velvia (RVP--the 50 speed version) and Kodak 100D. Velvia is finer and renders fine detail better. Anyone interested in these two film stocks should shoot a test to see what I'm talking about.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)

I'd say for being a whole f-stop more sensitive, the Ektachrome is remarkably good, but the Velvia is probably "slightly better" in terms of less visible grain and chroma saturation. I would be comfortable with either stock in most situations, perhaps the Ektachrome 100D has more more versatility because of it's higher ASA rating, however, in the mid day sun, shooting outdoors, Ektachrome 100D may actually be too sensitive for some cameras and could in theory in automatic mode lower the f-stop until no light was getting in.

Francis Kuhn · December 14, 2006

. . .Ektachrome 100D has more more versatility because of it's higher ASA rating, however, in the mid day sun, shooting outdoors, Ektachrome 100D may actually be too sensitive for some cameras and could in theory in automatic mode lower the f-stop until no light was getting in.

Alessandro,

I have to agree. In my experience, higher ASA isn't usually an advantage with daylight stocks in most shooting situations. Even 50 ASA is usually far too sensitive for a lot of outdoor scenes unless you like the t22 look. I'm always adding ND filters to get to a reasonable working stop.

BTW, Kodak 100D is a fantastic film in its own right but it's still not the same thing. Even Fuji's new 100 ASA Velvia still films (there are two versions) are no match for RVP Velvia 50 (which, sadly, is no longer available in still camera formats).

chris buddy · December 14, 2006

If you shoot it properly (keeping in mind the narrow exposure latitude) it is without question the best reversal stock out there if you are looking for saturated colors and fine grain. Noticeably finer grain and better detail than even Kodak 100D.

I am interested in Shooting some Velvia as well. Could you explain its "narrow exposure latitude" ? Thank You.

Francis Kuhn · December 15, 2006

I am interested in Shooting some Velvia as well. Could you explain its "narrow exposure latitude" ? Thank You.

I don't have the exact figures in front of me, but for the sake of discussion I'll say the range between shadow and highlight in a transparency film like Velvia is compressed to maybe four or five stops; negative films have a wider latitude and are typically eight stops or more.

Anything that falls out of that exposure range will be either too dark or too overexposed to hold detail.

Patrick Cooper · December 15, 2006

True, reversal films have less exposure latitude than negative films. But when comparing reversal films with other reversal films, Fuji Velvia has greater exposure latitude than Kodachrome 40. People who have shot Velvia in super 8 comment that it has better shadow detail than K40.

Anthony Schilling · December 15, 2006

I did do a scene comparison in S8 with Velvia and 100D a while back... If the Velvia is finer grain and more saturated, it is very slight. Not really noticable enough to sacrafice stability, where 100D does much better in MP cart format. Over all, I can't complain about the look and performance of either stock... both are amazing to me (K40 isn't even in the same realm as these newer stocks). The deal breaker comes down to availability and dependability. Spectra will be offering their version of 100D, made with fresh Kodak DS8 perfed stock. I've used some of that with my Scoopic already and it's incredible.

Edited December 15, 2006 by Anthony Schilling

Charles Doran · December 19, 2006

I did do a scene comparison in S8 with Velvia and 100D a while back... If the Velvia is finer grain and more saturated, it is very slight. Not really noticable enough to sacrafice stability, where 100D does much better in MP cart format. Over all, I can't complain about the look and performance of either stock... both are amazing to me (K40 isn't even in the same realm as these newer stocks). The deal breaker comes down to availability and dependability. Spectra will be offering their version of 100D, made with fresh Kodak DS8 perfed stock. I've used some of that with my Scoopic already and it's incredible.

Where is your comparison? I'd love to see it.

Here is one I did a few weeks ago -- QT file with side-by-side links of velvia and E100d:

http://www.westsiderfilm.com/clips2.html

Personally I love the Velvia...but the E100D is nothing to be upset over...

Anthony Schilling · December 20, 2006

Where is your comparison? I'd love to see it.

Here is one I did a few weeks ago -- QT file with side-by-side links of velvia and E100d:

If you recall, I posted some WP stills on filmshooting a few months back. When I watch the reel projected, it's not that easy to tell which is which at first. But once you do, the differences in grain and saturation are very minimal. The extra speed of the 100D sees more into the dark areas, or gives the appearance of lower contrast. It's definately a lot more versitile for me up in the Pacific NW with the long overcast season. It just drives me crazy that it's not coming fresh and cheap from Kodak, when it's so many miles ahead of K40 and 64T... It would be like a new beginning for S8. Velvia can only be a custom loaded stock, and never measure up to the QA and low cost possibilities of 100D from Kodak. If the high speed/overexposure is a concern... Is an ND filter any harder or expensive to obtain than the 85B required for 64T? I keep a .6 and .9 in my box. They also come in handy with the B&W stocks, and daylight time exposure shooting.