A Celebration of E6

Tijmendal said:
That's good to hear. I'm just scared by blowing out the highlights. Will a normal incident reading without any compensation be good? And better to underexpose by half a stop than overexpose, right (considering my camera doesn't have half stops)
Click to expand...

Do you use digital? Exposing for slide film is similar to exposing for digital (expose for the brighter areas) except that the highlights are less prone to blowing out. And because it is film you won't get the harsh transition to pure white even if you blow the highlights.

Some people reduce the exposure a little to intensify the colours. My advice (for what it's worth) is to see what results you get at box speed before you make adjustments to suit your taste. Particularly as you can scan and make adjustments after the event.

I started photography using slide film. I had a simple compact rangefinder with unsophisticated metering (Ricoh 500ME) and my exposures in the early days were fine. It's not so hard!

That said, I would be wary of trying a new medium for all my photos on a special trip. Not because slide film is difficult to use but because I might have less fun if I was worrying about how the results. Maybe take a few rolls to try out on the foliage alongside your usual film/digital? Better still, take a couple of rolls at home before the trip.
 
Thanks Tsiklonaut and J J! I do have a digital camera and will just take a test shot. That's actually really good advice I hadn't even thought about.

As far as the zone system goes: I've read the negative and understand the zone system, but haven't practiced it, so I'll definitely *not* rely on that.

I guess I shouldn't worry too much. Just have fun and shoot, right?!
 
Don't worry about exposure as you and others have noted slightly under is better than over if there are lots of highlights.
The zone system isn't really applicable to E6, as it was designed for B&w negative.

I shot my first E6 in 1979 as a 14 year old boy; it loaded in an Olympus Trip with a Sunpak SP140 manual flash.
I then developed the film myself in the kitchen:

83147071.jpg

My mother younger then than I am now....

My advice is just shoot, don't worry be happy.
 
Tijmendal said:
Wow. Such beautiful work. I'm very hesitant to shoot E6 because it has so little lattitude. I'm going to New York next week though and I'm also making a trip to look at the beautiful autumn foliage. I really want to shoot some medium format E6, but am afraid I'll mess up my exposures. I've recently gotten a lightmeter. Any tips?
This thread truly is inspiring. If only E6 weren't so darn expensive!
Click to expand...

I mainly shoot Provia 100f, and I'm always a bit surprised at the latitude that it has--I've had similar experiences with Velvia 100 (I shot 50 a while ago, and I don't really recall my experiences with it).

I don't do dramatic landscapes/seascapes (there are some really impressive ones in this thread)--my stuff tends to be more street/documentary/culture/travel (i.e. people in the photos, unposed), and I always shoot 35mm, as opposed to MF.

Anyway, Jim Doty has a good breakdown on using an incident:

http://jimdoty.com/learn/exp101/exp_inc_meter/exp_inc_meter.html

Read the part titled "Where to Point the White Dome."

The essence of his philosophy (which contradicts some common wisdom) is point the dome at the light source. Additionally, he discusses compensation for sidelight, windowlight and backlight.

This is what I do 95% of the time. I have a little Gossen Digisix, and when I'm out during the day, I generally point it at the Sun, and try to keep the Sun to my back--and I add stops for side and backlight when needed. I generally just check the light periodically while I'm out, whenever I think it's changed (alternating cloud cover, late-day failing light, and whatnot).

With this method, my exposures are generally spot-on.

Occasionally I'll use a reflective meter (Voigtlander VC-II), but that's generally when I want an average reading, or the background of a scene is brighter than the foreground. For example, these two photos where reflective metered:

9730768423_8aebfd9795_z.jpg


9734722331_2ab67f1bdc_z.jpg


Both are Provia 100f, and while it's very contrasty, there's a fair amount of latitude there.


Get some rolls--you'll love it.
 
Tijmendal said:
Wow. Such beautiful work. I'm very hesitant to shoot E6 because it has so little lattitude.
Click to expand...

Forget that. It has much more than you think. Don't judge it by all the crappy scans you see on the internet. Most of them are done by cheap scanners, and with those you cannot exploit the full dynamic range of slides.
What reversal film can really deliver you see when you look at it on the light table with a good slide loupe, and especially in projection, where slides are absolutely unsurpassed in picture quality. It is impossible to get the same quality with digital or prints from negative film.

Generations of photographers have shot slides and got well exposed results. And they did that even without all the excellent light meters we have today.
It is not difficult!
Are you a normal intelligent person who is able to use a light meter (either a build in camera meter, or an external meter, it does not matter)?
If yes, you will not have any problems exposing slide film.

Did you get proper exposed shots with your digital camera?
Then you will also get it with slide film.
Provia 100F, 400X, Elitechrome 100, E100G, Wittner Chrome 200D etc. all have a dynamic range of 8-8,5 stops (tests from Tim Parkin even result in a higher dynamic range).
So the contrast range from a little texture in the shadows to a little bit texture in the highlights is about 8 stops, that is more than enough for most subjects.
That is even more than lots of digital cams have, especially those with APS and smaller sensors.

And you always can extend the contrast range with diffuse pre-exposure, fill-in flash, gradual filters, reflectors.

Tijmendal said:
This thread truly is inspiring. If only E6 weren't so darn expensive!
Click to expand...

E6 is even cheaper than using colour negative film:
With slide film you always have a finished picture:
Just hold it to the light and look at it, even better use a daylight light table and a very good slide loupe (like the Schneider and Rodenstock loupes), then you have an enlarged picture in outstanding quality (much much better than scanning and watching the scan on the computer monitor, which has an extremely low resolution and cannot display real halftones).
And of course the best of all: slide projection with its unsurpassed image quality.

With CN film you need prints, that is what they are designed for. But very good prints are expensive. So if you consider all costs, CN film with good prints is more expensive than using slide film, where you don't need prints.

If you compare your 120 format slides on a light table with a 3x Schneider loupe (18cm x 18 cm image in best quality) with a 18cm x 18 cm print, you will immediately see the much better brillance, better sharpness and resolution of the slide.
You get better quality at lower costs with the slide.

Even much much bigger is the difference when you enlarge bigger:
With slide projection you can enlarge as big as you want.
Let's say you project your image on a 1meter x 1,5 meter screen. That costs you less than a buck. But you get the best picture quality.
A print from negative film in that size in good quality costs you more than 100 bucks! And it can't compete in quality (and excellent slide projectors are very cheap, even new ones).

So if you use slide film in the right way = best quality options (light table with good slide loupe and projection), it is
- much cheaper than using negative film
- you get even better quality compared to prints.
 
I do like the colour from Velvia and pretty well just follow the exposure suggestions from my little Twinmate 208. Using the Mamiya 7 doesn't hurt either. Peter

med_U41336I1382315871.SEQ.0.jpg
 
If you read The Negative closely you may note that there is a section where Ansel talks about transparency film and instant film using the zone system. He notes that it is reversed, as you are essentially making the print during development, and so as where you would normally put emphasis on getting the shadow detail in a negative, you must instead focus on the highlight detail for a positive. I believe he also dedicated a book to slide and instant film photography. Personally, when spot metering for Velvia 100F I try to put the sky/highlights about +1 stops and keep the darkest foreground to about -2. Incident metering - point at the light source.

Best thing about scanning slide vs. negative - the dust comes out black instead of white. :)

Just my 2 cents,
 
Knowing that slide films have limited DR, bracketing your exposure will helps to find the look that you'd be happy with in certain light conditions.

3027735519_fce1dcd30f_z.jpg

Fuji Provia RDP III
 
large.jpg

Oregon Coast, Mamiya 6, 75mm, Provia 100F


large.jpg

Fall Color in Oregon, M3, Nikkor 50 1.4, Provia 100F

original.jpg

Cannons at Castillo de San Marcos National Monument, St. Augustine, FL,
Mamiya 6, 50mm, Velvia 50
 
I miss slide film! I used Velvia 50 all the time in the 80s and 90s but not much these days. This thread has really whetted my appetite again. The colours are just lovely.

Below is one of the few I have on my Flickr. I must scan more of my old stuff.

8377629780_d841739c5c_b.jpg

Concert photographer | Flickr
Leica II Summitar Provia 400X
 
Just noticed this thread.
It will be a terribly sad day if they stop making slide film.

Here's one of my somewhat recent shots on Velvia, taken with my Pentax 67.

10340161493_42bb4a2ce4_c.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom