Fuji Reala

S

sherm

Well-known
Local time
11:22 AM
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
429
I've heard that photog's rate this film differently to get more "pop" out of it. Has anyone got experience with this?

How does it perform at it's regular ISO of 100 ?

Thanks,

Scott
 
Typically slight underexposure with color negative films seems to increase apparent saturation in my experience. Unforunately I don't have any information on this film in particular.

You could try Superia with is supposed to have higher saturation as part of its model (or obviously their lovely e6 films).
 
Underexposure? I've always found color negative films to work best slightly overexposed, and they can handle 2 stops of overexposure with no problems whatsoever. Underexposure of color negative film by more than 1 stop makes things muddy and grainy.

Reala works fine at ISO 100. But you could certainly rate it at 50 if you wish.
 
Reala is not one of the films that needs extra "pop" by EI tricks. iso100 works perfectly. If you overexpose by a full stop, you still can get the same quality image by carefully adjusting at printing or scanning (except of course if there are very vritical highlights in the image).
 
I have used and continue to use Reala. Love it! I have experimented with overexposing and I can't tell a differenece. Unless you have a lab that will work with you, the Fuji processors read the negatives and print it according to the reading. Somehow I think it evens out. I've used it at weddings and outdoor events and find it great.
 
ive used it a lot at 100 and find it to be a great film when super high saturation and contrast are not wanted, its also very sharp. I recently printed several shots from my old mamiya 6 at 50x50 inches with no problems at all.
 
I just shot a roll of Reala and forgot to change film speed to 100. the roll was shot at 400 except for the last 8 shots (when I changed it to 100). I'm dropping it off today, what should I expect. BTW I do my own scans of the negs with Vuescan.
 
Depends what have you shot with it, Akiva. I think it will be useable. But maybe more dense so more difficult to scan, a bit.

EDIT: sorry i'm stupid. You actually UNDERexposed it by two stops. Well dunno what will happen but be prepared for the worst (big grains in the shadows, with greenish cast), and try to tell the lab to push it. And tell us the results please.
 
Last edited:
Pherdinand said:
Depends what have you shot with it, Akiva. I think it will be useable. But maybe more dense so more difficult to scan, a bit.
.
Click to expand...
I mostly shot outdoors very sunny. BUt I did shoot when it was 400 ISO really cute baby on a couch in the daytime.
i guess I'll see.
 
Almost all of my photos are with Reala rated at 100.
It has plenty of pop and color separation, and I find it to be perfect for older Leica lenses that have slightly lower contrast.
Its also cheap at B & H.
 
KoNickon said:
Underexposure? I've always found color negative films to work best slightly overexposed, and they can handle 2 stops of overexposure with no problems whatsoever. Underexposure of color negative film by more than 1 stop makes things muddy and grainy.
Click to expand...

I agree that severe underexposure (two stops or so) causes issues - but I usually rate my portra 160NC and VC at 200 for most shooting situations. Just going by what I've experienced with the recent crop of films.
 
I also have shot Reala at 100 and at 80 and the results are pretty much the same. What I did notice is that Reala may not be a really saturated film but it opened up shadows so well on a street shot for me that the entire picture was luminous, just a wonderful example of a great film.
Trius... those are all stunning shots you linked us to. Thanks much.
 
Last edited:
It's funny, I started shooting film with reala (4 years ago), then switched to Agfa (alas!), went to kodak ultra (not bad), but recently I shot two rolls of Realla again (for lens/camera tests) and it has really impressed me, not saturated but very fine grained and excellent with light and shadows. As new products emerge, I guess that we take some established fims for granted.
 
I far prefer Reala over any other color neg film and I'm especially happy that it's available in 120 roll film as well as 35mm. I always shoot it at box and love the results. It's almost like a saturated film on plants/landscapes yet handles skin tones and mixed lighting well. I just wish it were available in 4x5... ;)

William
 
I am not a big fan of Reala. It has always been blah for me where ever I rate it. I didn't find it scanned well either.

I know others love it, but it hasn't won me over.
 
So then, as most agree that Realla is not very saturated, which fuji film is very saturated? My favorite saturated film was Agfa Ultra, anyone know of a similar product (Kodak ultra is not very similar).
 
Tony: Thank you very much for the compliment. I enjoyed that day, and will go back this year for "variations on a theme".
 
have a question.
if i overexpose the film and sent the film in (prepaid mailers) for processing..
will the labs do the push pull thingy for me?

edit: i am talking about the fuji labs in arizona (or did they move? cant remember)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom