Thank you!
John
Dave Bulger wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Hermanson [SMTP:omtech@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 1999 7:46 AM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] Ektachrome VS
>
> I've heard this new Ektachrome is great. Does anyone have any
> experience with it?
>
> John
>
> All,
>
> Below is an edited note I wrote to another listee re VS and Velvia. Take
> it for what it's worth...
>
> George,
>
> Thanks for the info on RF & Velvia...
>
> Get ready for another dissertation. I'm really not this verbose in person,
> BTW... <g>
>
> RVP vs EVS. Let's go:
>
> Note: I did some scanning of DejaNews last night looking for reciprocity
> stuff & Velvia. This debate (RVP vs EVS) has been going on a while! No
> conclusions, of course, but it was interesting to see the number of posts
> saying "Velvia is the best! I don't need to test VS or anything else!"
> Kinda reminds me of the PC/Mac debate. Sadly, preferences count, facts
> don't. We have sharp lenses to accurately depict reality, we have smart
> meters to accurately depict reality, but hell! More color is better,
> regardless of it's adherence to what was actually in front of the camera!
> Kinda scary. In the 70's we had to take little pills to achieve the same
> effect...
>
> Conditions: Outdoors, partly cloudy day with strong, overcast,
> directionless light. Overall the light was a bit on the contrasty side,
> but not by much. 3:00 in the afternoon. Subject matter included 2 of my
> daughters, green plants/trees, the neutral gray of an overpass, water,
> dirt. I shot these on a hike-n-bike trail at Wolf Creek just outside town.
> Pretty much identical shots and exposures (taking film speed into
> account). RVP at 50, VS at 100. I've traditionally shot Velvia at 40, but
> used 50 this time. Lots of 1/3 & 2/3 stop bracketing. I rarely shoot Auto
> or Program, sticking to the zone system philosophy, metering & placing
> highlight & shadow zones with the spot meter on the 2sP.
>
> Overall VS did very well -- better than I expected. Kodak managed to push
> the saturation up to but not over the line that Velvia has crossed.
> Excellent transparencies with lots of saturation/contrast while staying
> out of ToonTown.
>
> Exposure Latitude: Velvia was far more forgiving than EV was, particularly
> on the overexposure side. +2/3 stop w/Velvia gave me a useable shot,
> whereas EV was pretty out there -- too overexposed to do much good. I'm
> also being picky, however. When the exposure with EV was on, however, it
> was on. Excellent shadow detail, it held the highlight detail very, very
> well. I shoot trannies exposing for highlights and kinda letting shadows
> fall where they have to, and tend to aim for that often elusive "bright as
> it can be and still have highlight detail" area. I seem to be able to find
> that edge with EV easier than with RVP, even with a single roll! Being the
> anal guy that I am, I can sit down with a loupe and find something, no
> matter how miniscule, wrong with just about every exposure I make. Not so
> with about 5 shots on the EV roll -- that's an excellent record with me!
>
> Saturation/Contrast: EV is pretty darned contrasty. Not as much as RVP,
> but pretty contrasty. Subjectively, that's a good thing. I personally
> like contrast as long as my highlight/shadow detail doesn't get lost, and
> EV looks like it's going to deliver. Punchy greens without going overboard
> as RVP does -- you know how Velvia likes green! Both films delivered on my
> youngest daughter's bright red shirt. I didn't have any blues or yellows
> in the shots so I can't comment on those. RVP delivers a bit more red in
> the neutral gray areas of concrete, etc., though still very acceptable. EV
> produced more neutral grays than RVP, but the red caught up to you in the
> shadows, again within acceptable limits. Neither film is gonna cut it if
> you're a gentle, pastel kinda guy, but I'm not, so...
>
> Flesh tones: Hehe -- I'm not subjective on this. EV produced far more
> accurate flesh tones than RVP did, which is to be expected. Velvia is not
> a portrait film! However, I actually like my flesh tones on the cold side,
> and RVP delivers that without a problem! I don't shoot the portrait stuff
> with reversal film anyway -- I use neg for that. EV's flesh tones were
> much more accurate, though again going red pretty quickly in the shadow
> areas. My middle daughter has dark brown hair and was wearing a white
> sweatshirt in strong indirect sunlight, and EV kept full detail in her hair
> while ensuring that every thread in the white shirt was visible -- I'm
> pretty impressed with that. RVP blocked up the shadow detail in the hair
> in one shot, and blew out the white shirt highlights in another.
>
> Sharpness: From what I can see through the glass, they're both pretty
> sharp. RVP with it's saturation/color contrast appears on the surface to
> be sharper, but I believe that's an illusion. When I crank up the darkroom
> upon my return from vacation we'll see...
>
> Grain: Again, we'll see when I do some printing. Unlike you LF format
> guys (insert jealous grumble here), being a 35mm guy I'm real, real
> concerned about grain. While I rarely print larger than 8x10 with 11x14
> being the absolute max, I've gotten some pretty crappy 8x10s from perfectly
> exposed negs, and so I'm wary. I'll tend to use the slowest film I can,
> i.e. Agfa APX25 for B&W work, despite it's tendency to fall from zone V
> directly into zone I or II dark stuff, simply for the tight grain. I can
> dodge, burn and drag a zone III from it if I have to, but I can't
> compensate for grainy negs. Gee, I miss Panatomic X! That + HC110/C could
> give you a 16x20 you could view from 3 feet even if you could celebrate
> multiple birthdays during development... Contradicting myself, I LOVE
> HP5's tonal gradation for portrait stuff when shot at 400. Just don't go
> above 5x7 for that, though. It's better than Tri-X as far as I'm
> concerned. I'm a bit concerned about EV's T-grain structure -- I've shot
> about 10 rolls of T-Max and haven't been impressed at all. I'm processing
> it w/D-76 1:3 rather than T-Max developer, though. Might make a
> difference. My results have been flat negs with mediocre grain...
>
> Speed: EV is a stop faster! That's a good thing...
>
> End result: I'm taking 10 rolls of Velvia and 10 rolls of EV to Utah,
> along with the APX25. After the money I paid for the two I hope I'll have
> enough money for gas to drive back with. <g> With 3 bodies I can pretty
> much limit RVP's use to things I want oversaturated, and use the EV for a
> pass at depiction of reality <g>, as if them mountains in Utah can be
> considered reality to this Texas boy who considers anything over 1000 feet
> in height as a funny shaped building...
>
> Pls let me know your impressions...
>
> >From the trenches,
>
> Dave
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|