Astia 100F question for Scott Eaton...

[donald_davis2]

Scott, I have viewed your photographs made with Astia and I am

impressed. I just have a couple questions as I want to try it

myself for a change of pace. I mostly shoot E100G at ISO125. But,

do you shoot Astia at its rated speed or do you use your own EI for

it? Also Scott, how would you compare Astia to E100G in terms of

color balance, and other things? I thank you in advance.

[scott_eaton]

Biggest diference between E100G and Astia-F is contrast. The Fuji film is the lowest contrast slide film on the market while the Kodak film is more in the middle.

 

The good news is that E100G still retains good exposure lattitude, while moving from Astia to Provia to get more 'snap' takes a big penalty in this dept. Basically, E100G has some decent exposure lattitude due to it's rather high density range, while Provia can get into big trouble if over-exposed even slightly. This is why I recommend either Astia (Sensia) or E100G for beginners or general shooting, and why I lump Provia closer to Velvia in terms of fussy exposure habits.

 

Being that E100G is the higher contrast film, it will tend to exagerate scene balance more than Astia. If it's a warm scene, E100G will look warmer, if it's a cool scene, E100G will look cooler. Being lower in contrast, Astia gives us the perception of looking 'warmer' if we're shooting portraits or soft subject matter, but it's perceptual only. both films are neutral. There is a warmer version of E100G that's shifted purposefully to the warm side.

 

Color saturation is a complicated issue. The higher contrast of E100G will give the impression of higher saturation in middle tones, but Astia will handle strong colors much better than any Kodak slide film (for that mater so will Velvia or Provia). E100G is an improvement over previous Kodak E-6 films in this dept, but it's still not a film I'd use for wild paint jobs or flower/macro.

 

I prefer skin tones with E100G or even pulling Provia 400F a stop. Astia is just not my thing for portraits because I like a more 'crisp' and neutral rendition of skin tones that E100G delivers vs the soft and rosy skin tones of Astia. Too many years of proofing classic portraiture from VPS and Reala I guess. Personal preference only.

 

Astia F has better grain, and it's easier to scan than E100G. However, I find E100G easier to scan than Provia unless Provia is shot *dead on*. I normally rate Astia at EI 100, but will shoot it at 150 if it's a scene with high contrast because of it's ability to keep good shadow detail. I have no issue shooting 'G' at 125.

 

I do see a tonal difference between the new and old Astia, but haven't quite put my finger on it. E100G is a much further departure from E100S.

 

Anybody else feel free to chime in on this one.

[d_y]

Interesting comparison between Astia and E100G.

 

I too enjoy Scott's Astia pics - recent non-Astia car pics too!. I suspect that this is not only due to film choice and exposure, but Scott's scanning technique. Scott, your scans are darn good. Care to share any tips? I'm not intentionally trying to sound like some shameless sycophant, but I bet a lot of us here could benefit from your expertise. I've visited the usual suspects but could still use some pointers...

[scott_eaton]

The JPG filter used for personal folder uploads tends to have a problem with high RGB indexes, and I'm pretty good at testing it's limits :-). I'm not complaining, just uploading that red truck again here to show how clean Astia is with strong colors.

 

E100G would have a problem with that intensity level, but then again this is a pretty extreme test for any color film. If it were overcast out, E100G would be more in it's environment with this subject matter.

[donald_davis2]

Scott, thank you for your prompt reply. I often shoot contrasty landscapes and E100G, while nice, does often leave me having to bracket often if I am not sure. While I do not expect any slide filme to have the contrast of NPS or Portra NC, some of my photos, such as thos taken under heavy shade with a sunny background, could benefit from reduced contrast.

 

So when I place my next B&H order, I will give Astia 100F in both 35mm and 120 (6x7) a try. Once again Scott, thanks a lot! :-)

[aquilanebula]

Scott, these are excellent answers, and I like the fact that you take the time here to explain your comments and to point out which are your personal preferences. Any comments on Sensia, which I understand is (or was?) the amateur version of Astia?

[scott_eaton]

Sensia 100 is the amatuer version of Astia. I shot a lot of it last summer and concluded *if* it wasn't actual Astia, it was sure darn close because it sure isn't Provia. When bought fresh it tends to be on the cooler side because it's not a pro film with optimum aging, but the color difference is slight.

 

I'm not sure if the new Astia 100F (much improved grain over the previous version) has trickled down to the Sensia line yet. As much as I respected the 35mm version for it's versatility, I really found the mushy grain to be annoying in that small format. Fuji has pretty much fixed that with new Astia 100F.

 

If you shoot slide, you should always carry a roll or two of Astia/Sensia 100 for high contrast situations.

[patric]

Regarding the difference between new sensia and astia (looking for an alternative being cheaper but equal good to astia) I again did some personal, non reliabel testing comparing this two.

35 mm version of Sensia does indeed have more grain and tends to react with a blue cast to underexposure which I know and dislike from Provia (some of you don't find this to be). Bright colours are not that exact and crisp at the same time which seem to be an unique feature of new Astia. On the bottom line Sensia does not represent a real alternative to new Astia, still high volume shooting during a vacation may be an exception here. Maybe I manage it to upload two files.

 

Other than that I am still struggling if Astia or E100G/GX is my new favourite slide film. Thanks for Scotts decent and important comments on that. In contrast to his point of view I find Astia especially pleasing for outdoor portraits because of his warm but not to rosy skin tones compared to GX. Another advantage of Astia comes with low contrast and scanning. Comparing histograms of equal motives shooted with either Astia or 100G one can "count" the lower contrast from the reduced tonal range towards the dark and bright end of the scale. But with fine-tuning contrast this can be improved for personal preference without loosing colour accuracy! There is no other slide film capable of this. Disadvantage of Astia: Visible mainly with high-key motives it tends to be a bit more on the magenta side than 100G/GX like known from other Fufji films.

[william_yu]

I myself can benefit hugely from Scott's elaboration. I am exactly at this time trying to decide whether to try the Astia 100F again or E100G in my next week's trip. Scott confirms my previous observation the Astia handles strong color very good, and is an excellent film when used with flash. I just want to share my experience using Astia in landscape. It is kind of flat and dull under the normal outdoor situations, and prone to a blue cast under cloudy sky. Outdoor shoots do not appear to be sharp on the light table on well. For outdoor shoots to complement Provia 100F, I will give E100G a try for contrasty scenes. I hope it will scan well.

 

Thanks Scott and all of you.

 

William

[bill_tuthill]

Did anybody find Astia 100F (not old Astia) samples in Scott's

portfolio? Thanks, I couldn't.

[scott_eaton]

<I>I find Astia especially pleasing for outdoor portraits because of his warm but not to rosy skin tones compared to GX</i><P>I tend to more of an NPH guy over Portra NC so that's why I like E100G more for skin tones over Astia. Both films, just like NPH vs Portra NC, do very well but have their own character in terms of skin tones. <P>*If* the new Astia 100F emulsion *has not* trickled down to the amatuer Sensia 100, I strongly urge you stick to the new 100F version if you want that much improved grain.

[l_a_k_h_i_n_d_e_r]

Scott, how do you go about testing a film? Are you looking at the manufacturer's curves or doing your own testing.

 

Also, would you say a film like the new Astia has more exposure range than an average slide film (i.e 5 stops).

 

Thanks.

[pphaneuf]

<blockquote><em>The higher contrast of E100G will give the impression of higher saturation in middle tones, but Astia will handle strong colors much better than any Kodak slide film (for that mater so will Velvia or Provia).</em></blockquote>

 

<p>My favorite way of explaining this is that if you have rather boring colors, the higher contrast film would make them pop more, but if you have <em>actually</em> strong colors, then you need a lower contrast film that actually has the saturated pigments to go with it.</p>

 

<p>In the neg films, Fuji Reala is a common victim of this misconception. It's pretty damn low contrast, so people tend to say that it's a dull film that is not very saturated. It's not <em>artificially</em> saturated, that's for sure, but give it strong colors, and it'll take them up and above what many supposedly saturated films will.

 

<p>I will also back Scott's opinion that the Fuji films handle strong colors much better than the Kodak films. I went to Prince Edwards Island two years ago on vacation, and I took landscape pictures that had the place's red dirt. While this dirt is pretty strong colored, it's nowhere near as red as the car in Scott's picture, obviously, but the one roll of Kodak E100VS that I had was at the very edge of color blocking, while the Sensia 100 and Provia 100F had no problems at all, I wouldn't want to see what E100VS would do to that red car!

 

<p>Last I checked (about a month ago), Sensia 100 was similar to the older Astia, not to the newer Astia 100F.