how to use reala?

[jano]

I'm confused here. I've read about the fine grain in fuji's reala, so I've tried it out twice now. Shot two rolls several months ago on my contax G2. Midday stuff came out with nice colors, real with some punch to them (not a saturated punch, but a punch nonetheless). Sunset shots (hey, I *like* to take postcard sunset shots! 😛) and those in the "sweet" light of the evening were a total mixed bag, however. Tons of "grain" in the haze and cloud portions of the sky.

Just finishing up scanning my second try with reala (last night, wanted to see the ZI with 35ZM in color), and again, mixed bag of results -- I'm seeing this grain trend along the horizon again. Perhaps a charecteristic of reala, or is this maybe the scanner/software?

Jano

PS: can make some samples available if interested

PS2: reala was purchased from B&H this summer, and I've stored it in the freezer since, and take it out the night before using it to "thaw."

PS3: equipment: nikonscan with nikon cs V

 

[ALVWONG]

Did you use enough exposure for the sunset pictures? Any negative film will become "grainy" with underexposure. Reala is no exception.

I'm confused here. I've read about the fine grain in fuji's reala, so I've tried it out twice now. Shot two rolls several months ago on my contax G2. Midday stuff came out with nice colors, real with some punch to them (not a saturated punch, but a punch nonetheless). Sunset shots (hey, I *like* to take postcard sunset shots! 😛) and those in the "sweet" light of the evening were a total mixed bag, however. Tons of "grain" in the haze and cloud portions of the sky.

Just finishing up scanning my second try with reala (last night, wanted to see the ZI with 35ZM in color), and again, mixed bag of results -- I'm seeing this grain trend along the horizon again. Perhaps a charecteristic of reala, or is this maybe the scanner/software?

Jano

PS: can make some samples available if interested

PS2: reala was purchased from B&H this summer, and I've stored it in the freezer since, and take it out the night before using it to "thaw."

PS3: equipment: nikonscan with nikon cs V

 

[sockeyed]

I rate my Reala at 80 and get great, smooth results.

 

[jano]

Al, thanks: in a sunset picture, there will be parts that are underexposed.

sockyed: I will try that (and I guess this may address underexposure by Al). Do I tell the lab anything, or just give them the roll?

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Don't tell the lab, Jano. The whole idea of overexposing Reala is, precisely, to kill off a bit the excessive saturation in that film.

About the grain... it could also be a developing problem. See to take your film to a lab that uses Fuji machines.

The thing that drove me away from Reala is that, when used with faces, the skin tones come up a bit too reddish for my taste, and when used for macro, you lose detail because of the saturated color.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

The problem you're experiencing with grain may be due to a whole range of issues.

Perhaps you had the roll sit in a really hot place for a while, or perhaps it went through big, sudden temperature changes. You may also have an inappropriate film profile when you're scanning. Perhaps you underexposed a lot (probably not your fault --some camera's light meters are easily "fooled" by different types of scenes). Maybe the lab's chemicals the day you had them developed weren't properly replenished...

🙁 It sucks, I know. I've experienced it all.

Yet, can't tell unless we'd see differences; one with a scan from a "good" negative, and one from your "bad" negative.

 

[dostacos]

Al, thanks: in a sunset picture, there will be parts that are underexposed.

sockyed: I will try that (and I guess this may address underexposure by Al). Do I tell the lab anything, or just give them the roll?

what lab do you use?

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Jano,
when I use reala it's for the lack of punchy-velvia-like color, I agree with the rate it at 80 though for better results.

Todd

 

[wlewisiii]

Hmm. Interesting thread on a lot of levels. I have used Reala CS in 120 alot and love it. OTOH, I just shot my first roll of it in 135. I'm planning on dropping it off for a dunk only and scan at my local walgreens where they have a Frontier setup. Is that going to do ok by this film? Or should I take it to the lab I do my 120 at (where the same dev only and scan to cd is $2 - 3 more expensive? Minimal for one roll, but... )?

Thanks,

William

 

[pvdhaar]

Although it's been quite a while since I used Reala, there's one thing about it that I distinctly remember, and that is it's limited exposure latitude compared to other colour print films. More than a full stop less than Superia. You really have to pay attention to the exposure..

 

[ALVWONG]

As a follow-up to my original post:

You might want to think about using slide film for sunset pictures (or even sunrises). Because of its narrow exposure latitude compared to color negative film, color slide film goes black (rather than grainy) in underexposed areas. For this reason alone, I think slide film is more beautiful when used for sunsets.

Personally, I think slide film is quite usable for nearly all types of photography, provided that you expose carefully.

 

[jano]

Okie dokie, thanks all! 🙂

 

[einolu]

I recently have been using a lot of fuji NPS 160 and it seems to be very similar to reala, I rate it at 125 and I get good results in all kinds of lighting.

 

[jano]

Okay, so what are times one would consider using reala as opposed to something like superia? Al mentions using slide film for sunsets, Todd states reala for situation which you don't want all that much saturation. I've got half a dozen rolls left here, and wish to make the most of them!