Superia X-tra 400 4th layer good or bad?

ampguy

ampguy

Veteran
Local time
12:30 AM
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
6,946
I've seen both types, sometimes even at the same store, Fuji 400 Superia X-tra with and without the "4th Color Layer" which the 800 X-Tra and 1600 have on the back charts in 4/5 packs?

Does anyone know the characteristics between the two?

FWIW, Costco and others mainly sell the non 4th Color Layer and where stores have both on the shelves, the newer dated films (~ 2010) are generally non 4th Color Layer, while the 4th Color Layer versions of these are generally expiring in 2008/2009.
 
No, I don't know the specs on this film. But someone on this forum, stated that the fourth layer is no marketing gimick. And I believe him/her:

5572082-lg.jpg
 
About all the Superia 400 I've ever used came in boxes exalting that "4tth layer", and since that layer is supposed to have something to do wirh working in mixed-lighting conditions, I'd have to agree that it's not hype. (I also believe this fourth layer is de rigeur for the Fuji Pro series films of any speed, but I could be mistaken.) Fuji has always been decent in daylight (although I give the Yellow Box folks an advantage here, still), but Fuji truly delivers the goods when the light gets low and funky.

Here's an example of Fuji Pro 800, shown here before (Jeslyn in mid-air...sorry, guys, but I love her):

attachment.php


Fuji 400 pretty much works out the same way, just not in such low light.


- Barrett
 
ampguy said:
I've seen both types, sometimes even at the same store, Fuji 400 Superia X-tra with and without the "4th Color Layer" which the 800 X-Tra and 1600 have on the back charts in 4/5 packs?

Does anyone know the characteristics between the two?

FWIW, Costco and others mainly sell the non 4th Color Layer and where stores have both on the shelves, the newer dated films (~ 2010) are generally non 4th Color Layer, while the 4th Color Layer versions of these are generally expiring in 2008/2009.
Click to expand...

Fuji originally introduced the 4th color layer in the original version of Reala way back in the early 90's. Since then they've added to thier pro films then their amatuer films. I didn't know they even made any film anymore that didn't have it (Print films...the slide films never had it)

It does improve color under flourescent lights so I would get the 4th layer version.

Off topic, but that cat on your avatar pic is really cute. I love tiger stripe (tabby) cats. They look so wild. My grandpa has a little grey tabby who is the meanest little cruel, bloodthirsty, murderer. She's killed more than 6000 small animals in her 17 years and is still working hard. She's killed two ratttlesnakes and she tried to kill grandpa's german shepherd mix dog, but he was too big for her. I like her though...she's nice to me, and that's all that really matters.
 
Hi Chris

Hi Chris

Thanks for the info. I am not sure why the newer Fuji 400 Superia does not have the 4th layer, but where possible I will seek out the older boxes when still current as I like the Realia colors indoors better than Fuji 200/400 which sometimes give a yellow/green tint.

Our cat is amazing, it sleeps 12-16 hrs/day, but while not sleeping, he is an inherent fighter, toe biter, acrobat, and toy mouse killer. It's amazing how much in common it has with the lions and tiger cat families. I don't think it's ever seen a real mouse, but it instictively knows how to attack and catch the play mice.

He's also smart, and can open doors, literally jumping up, turning the knob, and walking outside.

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Fuji originally introduced the 4th color layer in the original version of Reala way back in the early 90's. Since then they've added to thier pro films then their amatuer films. I didn't know they even made any film anymore that didn't have it (Print films...the slide films never had it)

It does improve color under flourescent lights so I would get the 4th layer version.

Off topic, but that cat on your avatar pic is really cute. I love tiger stripe (tabby) cats. They look so wild. My grandpa has a little grey tabby who is the meanest little cruel, bloodthirsty, murderer. She's killed more than 6000 small animals in her 17 years and is still working hard. She's killed two ratttlesnakes and she tried to kill grandpa's german shepherd mix dog, but he was too big for her. I like her though...she's nice to me, and that's all that really matters.
Click to expand...
 
ampguy: Your (rather hefty) Tabby also knows how to get your attention: by keeping you from reaching the keyboard. Smart cat. ;)

About the "new" Superia: I'm not at all sure that the new stuff is any different from the "old" Superia, save for the packaging; the "4th-layer" stuff is hardly new now, so thay might have decided to drop the on-carton hype to that effect. It might be a good idea to check Fuji's site to confirm this, or shoot an e-mail to them.


- Barrett
 
I think most cats are smart, especially compared to dogs. My grandpa's cat is so smart that people think she works for the Devil. When grandpa got his dog, it was already fullgrown. So it was and is a BIG dog. He kept it in a cage at night so it wouldn't trash the house, until it got used to being there. One night i was over at his house, and I heard unusual sounds coming from the room where the cage was. I caught Molly standing on top of the cage, reaching in to try to claw the dog's face!

When i yelled her name, she looked at me with a look that said: "Oh s--t, i got caught!". she ran and hid. She KNEW she was doing something wrong. Not that she had any remorse. When the dog was free, she was nice to him. When he was locked up, she attacked through the bars. Finally she tore him up so bad he had to have stitches, and grandpa got rid of the cage. The dog was dumb, and didn't seek revenge when he was out of the cage.

This old cat is 17 years old, and still evil. I have her 14 yr old nephew, Simba, and he is fat (22lb) and lazy. He won't do anything but complain for food, and he wouldn't kill a mouse if it sat on his back and mocked him. He's smart though. At christmas dinner at my parent's house, he was stealing meat from thier dog's food bowl before the dog came in the house and ran him off. The cat wasn't hungry, i had given him tons of meat while we ate...he's just greedy.
 
They tell me (the ubiquitous "they") that the 4th layer is what's responsible for the Fuji films being more tolerant to available-light and mixed-light which includes incandescent.

I'll post a few examples if I can find them quickly, but the difference between the Walgreens/Agfa and the Fuji with the 4th layer is like night and day.
 
Examples

Examples

Here are some examples ...

This is the same scene, same angle, but with different film (and camera and lens, actually, but similar) and at more or less the same time of day and lighting conditions. LOL, if you've been on RFF you're probably tired of looking at this scene, since I think it's particularly challenging to get right!

First, the gross one using Walgreens/Agfa 400.

This was with the GIII, 40mm f1.7 almost wide open and does show quite a bit of astigmatism. It also has that "swoosh" which bugs me, which looks like internal lens stuff from the street light on the pole with the One-Way sign.

Notice that the blue channel is extremely weak.

w400demo2.jpg


This second one is with Fuji 800. Although blue is still weak, it's not nearly as awful as above. You can actually see the blue cast from the out-of-frame mercury (I assume?) street light above compared to the orangish cast of the sodium (I think?) lights down the block.

This was with the Mamiya SD, 48mm f1.7, but stopped down to about 2.8 or so.

8bgey6e.jpg


I have several more examples that show similar differences, but this one is the same scene.
 
Hi Barrett

Hi Barrett

Yes, the cat eats a lot and sleeps a lot and is getting heavy.

I also thought the 4th layer might just be a marketing change, but on the backs of both films they show other consumer films with it, and the new non-4th layer film boxes still show the other 800 and 1600 as having the 4th layer with the same logo and text.

I'll read some answers below. Thanks.

amateriat said:
ampguy: Your (rather hefty) Tabby also knows how to get your attention: by keeping you from reaching the keyboard. Smart cat. ;)

About the "new" Superia: I'm not at all sure that the new stuff is any different from the "old" Superia, save for the packaging; the "4th-layer" stuff is hardly new now, so thay might have decided to drop the on-carton hype to that effect. It might be a good idea to check Fuji's site to confirm this, or shoot an e-mail to them.


- Barrett
Click to expand...
 
interesting story!

interesting story!

Sounds like the tv show desp. housewives! I'll bet the cat communicated to the dog that he had better not get revenge in the daytime, or he would get it worse the next night!

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I think most cats are smart, especially compared to dogs. My grandpa's cat is so smart that people think she works for the Devil. When grandpa got his dog, it was already fullgrown. So it was and is a BIG dog. He kept it in a cage at night so it wouldn't trash the house, until it got used to being there. One night i was over at his house, and I heard unusual sounds coming from the room where the cage was. I caught Molly standing on top of the cage, reaching in to try to claw the dog's face!

When i yelled her name, she looked at me with a look that said: "Oh s--t, i got caught!". she ran and hid. She KNEW she was doing something wrong. Not that she had any remorse. When the dog was free, she was nice to him. When he was locked up, she attacked through the bars. Finally she tore him up so bad he had to have stitches, and grandpa got rid of the cage. The dog was dumb, and didn't seek revenge when he was out of the cage.

This old cat is 17 years old, and still evil. I have her 14 yr old nephew, Simba, and he is fat (22lb) and lazy. He won't do anything but complain for food, and he wouldn't kill a mouse if it sat on his back and mocked him. He's smart though. At christmas dinner at my parent's house, he was stealing meat from thier dog's food bowl before the dog came in the house and ran him off. The cat wasn't hungry, i had given him tons of meat while we ate...he's just greedy.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the examples

Thanks for the examples

Yes, that swoosh is odd, it's not straight, so it's some kind of developing issue or lens reflection.

I like Fuji 800, but always have to de-saturate in picasa, and enlarging even at 8x10 (walgreens or costco) shows a lot of grain, but I'm using the drugstore Fuji 800, and drugstore processing.

dmr said:
Here are some examples ...

This is the same scene, same angle, but with different film (and camera and lens, actually, but similar) and at more or less the same time of day and lighting conditions. LOL, if you've been on RFF you're probably tired of looking at this scene, since I think it's particularly challenging to get right!

First, the gross one using Walgreens/Agfa 400.

This was with the GIII, 40mm f1.7 almost wide open and does show quite a bit of astigmatism. It also has that "swoosh" which bugs me, which looks like internal lens stuff from the street light on the pole with the One-Way sign.

Notice that the blue channel is extremely weak.

w400demo2.jpg


This second one is with Fuji 800. Although blue is still weak, it's not nearly as awful as above. You can actually see the blue cast from the out-of-frame mercury (I assume?) street light above compared to the orangish cast of the sodium (I think?) lights down the block.

This was with the Mamiya SD, 48mm f1.7, but stopped down to about 2.8 or so.

8bgey6e.jpg


I have several more examples that show similar differences, but this one is the same scene.
Click to expand...
 
The grain, also what you see in the above examples, is under-exposure, Ted.
Give it half to a full stop more than the specs asks for and you will have a
hard time seeing grain on an 8x10 (for Superia 400 and 800).

The 4th layer doesn't make much color difference in my experience, but
it makes scanning much easier if you scan yourself.

Different for NPS or Press, of course.

Best,

Roland.
 
ampguy said:
Yes, that swoosh is odd, it's not straight, so it's some kind of developing issue or lens reflection.
Click to expand...

That swoosh almost appears to emanate downward and to the left from the bright light between the second and third buildings. It really had me stumped for a while, until I realized that there was a bright light out of frame to the top left at what would be the center of a circle (arc) made up of that swoosh.

With that camera/lens, it's actually similar to a more severe example that occured on one of my first test rolls once I got the camera working. I hope this image works, it's from a thread posted quite a while ago.

attachment.php


Looks like it did. :) This one has the light in the center in the visible portion of the shot.

ObFuji: I think this was also shot with one of the 4-color-layer films. :)

As far as grain goes, all Fuji films, even the 1600, have tolerable grain, at least to me.
 
Thanks Roland

Thanks Roland

With both Realia 100 and Fuji 200/400, I've been setting the meter on the M6 to one notch below rated, but I think with 800, may even go more. Note the grain in this Fuji 800 photo I took last Oct. with the 35/2 V4:

http://bp3.blogger.com/_3JNB9ik85M8/RwEboN5Y9RI/AAAAAAAACVk/gk756ym18js/s1600-h/FH000011.jpg

I had it processed at Walgreens and had them make a quick 8x10, and saw so much grain that I had them do another one from the negative instead of the original low res scan (~2MB) they made, and from the neg, it didn't come out any better (but different).

Assuming the negative is good, I might re-scan it (V500 or whatever is probably something to get this year...)

Does the photo above look underexposed to you?

Thanks Roland, hope you are having a great holiday season, look forward to getting together with you south bay folks after the holidays.

Ted

ferider said:
The grain, also what you see in the above examples, is under-exposure, Ted.
Give it half to a full stop more than the specs asks for and you will have a
hard time seeing grain on an 8x10 (for Superia 400 and 800).

The 4th layer doesn't make much color difference in my experience, but
it makes scanning much easier if you scan yourself.

Different for NPS or Press, of course.

Best,

Roland.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
that's really weird

that's really weird

is it possible there was water or some temporary liquid on your lens when you took these?

dmr said:
That swoosh almost appears to emanate downward and to the left from the bright light between the second and third buildings. It really had me stumped for a while, until I realized that there was a bright light out of frame to the top left at what would be the center of a circle (arc) made up of that swoosh.

With that camera/lens, it's actually similar to a more severe example that occured on one of my first test rolls once I got the camera working. I hope this image works, it's from a thread posted quite a while ago.

attachment.php


Looks like it did. :) This one has the light in the center in the visible portion of the shot.

ObFuji: I think this was also shot with one of the 4-color-layer films. :)

As far as grain goes, all Fuji films, even the 1600, have tolerable grain, at least to me.
Click to expand...
 
ampguy said:
Does the photo above look underexposed to you?

Thanks Roland, hope you are having a great holiday season, look forward to getting together with you south bay folks after the holidays.

Ted
Click to expand...


It looks like it was underexposed and then digitally lightened up, Ted. This
is exactly the type of Superia grain you get with an underexposed negative and/or
cheap scanner and digital post processing. If you check the negative,
I bet it will have no visible grain.

All the best for the new year to you, too ! Hope we can have a beer soon.

Roland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom