Scanning Veliva 100 vs ?

I'm getting ready to do some landscape photography and am wondering if anyone

has any experience scanning/working with Velvia 100 (not to be confused with

Velvia 100F) in digital editing. Any feedback you might have on how easy it

is to scan/work with in photoshop in terms of color/color cast/density/shadow

detail as compared to other slide films such as Astia or Provia 100F would be

greatly appreciated. This is strictly for landscape and not for portrait work.

Also, while I have used a small amount of Astia for portrait work, I've never

used it for landscape, so any comments on using it for landscape and punching

up the colors in photoshop would also be greatly appreciated.

 

 

Best Regars,

Brian

It is as easy to scan one reversal film as another if you calibrate your scanner. Then scanning is WYSIWYG.

 

Scanning is nearly as easy with negative film. If you'd like to expand your horizons and get 8 to 10 stops dynamic range instead of 3.5 to 4 stops with reversal film, try Fuji Reala or NPS160 (or Pro 160S). Be prepared to actually have shadow detail instead of lip service.

The answer to your question might depend on what scanner you're using. I use a drum scanner and probably get as much dynamic range with Astia as I'd get with reversal film and a flatbed. Astia has considerably more dynamic range than Velvia 50/100 and is preferable, at least for me, when photographing scenes with a lot of contrast. For instance, this Astia shot would have been much more difficult to shoot and scan with Velvia 100:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/4674088&size=lg

 

On the other hand, for relatively low contrast scenes like this one that wouldn't tax the Dmax of most scanners, Velvia is great:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/4674082

 

From what I can see in my scans, Astia 100F and Velvia are virtually identical in terms of resolution and grain structure. My strategy is to shoot whichever film best corresponds to the dynamic range of the scene. That said, if I had to pick only one film for scanning, Astia would win hands down. There is simply more information in the scan for adjusting density than you get with Velvia. You can punch up the color saturation with any film but being able to pull out a great deal of shadow detail is much easier with Astia, or reversal film. And of course, with a drum scanner!

I agree with Brett. I shoot landscapes with both Velvia and Astia, but use them according to the conditions. One of the reasons being how well each films scan. For scenes with strong light and lots of contrast I use Astia. For scenes in overcast light and low contrast, I use Velvia. Generally speaking though, I get much nicer scans from Astia than Velvia. And the Astia scans are much easier to fine tune the saturation, color cast, contrast, etc. than Velvia scans. Astia has just about become my go to landscape slide film.

Edward's statement about one reversal film being as easy to scan as another isn't true for all scanners. The extreme Dmax of Velvia-type films gives real headaches to all but the best scanners.

 

My scanner (Canon FS4000US dedicated film scanner, no slouch) has a lot of difficulty with the dynamic range and I need to scan each frame twice- once for the shadows and once for the highlights. I have no such difficulty with Sensia, and only modest issues with Provia. My scanner *is* calibrated with a Fujichrome IT8 target.

In my experience, if you plan to print your work, use print film. I finf Fuji Reala to be great for landscape work.

Slide film gets too dense on darker areas and is very very difficult to achieve a decent scan especially if you are using anything else but a drum scanner.

I'd use slide film only if I intend to project my work on a screen.

http://www.photo.net/photos/arie07

Does anyone know about scanning Astia as opposed to Provia 100. I usually shoot Provia and at times have a problem with excessive contrast.