Fujifilm Astia 100F vs. Provia 100F
Occasionally I get into the mood of wanting to try new films—maybe to explore what alternative colour reproduction might bring to my images, or, perhaps, to indulge in a bit if visual freshness, or, possibly, to simply reconfirm my previous, long–lasting choices. I have been interested in Fujifilm Astia 100F colour slide film for a long time—it is said to have "subdued colour reproduction" and, at least in theory, might be a possible substitution for the Fujifilm Provia 100F, the emulsion that has been my standard choice for when I need neutral, realistic colours. So one sunny Sunday afternoon a few weeks ago (I might add in passing that Sunday afternoons have been a rarity in Shanghai for quite a while—or so it seems) I mounted the CFE 4/40 IF lens onto my Hasselblad 503CW camera, grabbed a couple of film backs and went out for a walk.
I shot twelve harmless (as in without any aesthetic merit) scenes with both Provia and Astia and, looking at the slides side by side for the first time, was very surprised how pronounced the differences between their colour reproduction were—see the examples below. On a technical note, the four slides were scanned and then judiciously adjusted in Photoshop as one shot; I cropped, resized and sharpened them for Web presentation only after all adjustments were done. Thus, the examples below at the very least preserve relative colour rendition of the two films; on my freshly calibrated Apple Cinema Display they look very close, if not identical, to what I see when looking at the original slides on my light table.
![]() |
![]() |
|||
Fujifilm Provia 100F |
Fujifilm Astia 100F |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
Fujifilm Provia 100F |
Fujifilm Astia 100F |
The first thing that I notice is that Astia boasts much warmer colour reproduction; compared with it, Provia has a very noticeable green–and–blue tint. I like how Astia renders yellows and reds—they have a lush look to them; greens, on the other hand, look somewhat muddy. Thinking back of the actual scenes, I would say that what Provia shows is much closer to reality (having said that, photography has never been about reality, so this consideration is mostly irrelevant). As far as dynamic range is concerned, I do not see any meaningful differences and would say that Provia is on a par with Astia (for some reason I expected Astia to have a wider dynamic range). Both films also boast superfine grain: Astia and Provia have RMS of 7 and 8 respectively; I seriously doubt that the difference will be noticeable in real–life photographs of even very large size. So far so good—both films, although quite different, seem to be very competent performers. Before I continue, however, I need to digress a little and talk about the importance of... the sky.
They say there are three things one can stare at endlessly: flowing water, open fire and someone counting money. As to me, I can endlessly stare into the blue sky, preferably with some humble, distant feather clouds. I can do so because, well, it is endless, both literally and allegorically. And the amazement of the allegoric part is that something seemingly so plain and ubiquitous as the blue sky can be a perfect visual match for various types of music, which in turn represent endlessly various states of mind. One day—or moment—it is "Speak to me / Breathe", the next it is "Flamenco Sketches", then it is "Speak Low", and so on—all visually united by the same good old blue sky (with subtle feather clouds, thank you). No matter what disposition I am in, I look at the blue sky and always see a reflection of that disposition, hear an echo embodied in the music of the moment coming back at me.
Probably trying to reverse–engineer this connection and incorporate music into my photographic work, I venture to include a sky—any reasonably meaningful sky—in every photograph, if possible. To me, inclusion of a sky also allows for much more room for interpretation and serves as an objective counterbalance to subjective emphasis. Here, however, I seem to disagree with many photographers with whom I have discussed this topic. Many of them prefer to be more focused and exclude the sky unless it is a crucial component of a composition. To me, however, inclusion of the sky and its quality remain imperative.
With the importance of the sky now properly disclosed, I have to say that I simply dislike what Astia does to it. Just look at the colour of the sky in the photographs above—can you even call that a sky? Sorry, nice try, Astia, but... thanks but no, thanks. Now, I am sure that there are applications where Astia shines—portraiture is said to be one—and that there are situations where its colour rendition is the perfect choice. However, the way it renders the blue sky precludes it from becoming my general–purpose, use–anytime film. If Provia 100F is to be dethroned, it will have to be done by some other film.