If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"richardsfault" wrote in message
... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html -- Regards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"richardsfault" wrote in message
... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html -- Regards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"Matt Clara" wrote in message
... "richardsfault" wrote in message ... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html Another thing I might add is that Fuji Reala is pretty high contrast--you may wish to try a color portrait film like Kodak Portra 160 VC (saturated color portrait film) or NC (neutral color portrait film). -- Regards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"Matt Clara" wrote in message
... "richardsfault" wrote in message ... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html Another thing I might add is that Fuji Reala is pretty high contrast--you may wish to try a color portrait film like Kodak Portra 160 VC (saturated color portrait film) or NC (neutral color portrait film). -- Regards, Matt Clara www.mattclara.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Some people claim that there's a woman to blame, but I think it's all... Richard's fault! Visit the Sounds of the cul-de-sac at www.richardsfault.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"Matt Clara" wrote in message
... "richardsfault" wrote in message ... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. I like Portra 160NC for this, though if you want really eye poppin' colour it may not be to your taste. Low contrast and very accurate colour, and it's very easy to scan. I don't like Portra 160VC as much, but it is equally easy to scan if you want the more saturated colours (not that NC looks 'unsaturated', it's just subtler). Don't know about scanning, but Agfa Ultra 100 is quite a fun film for really strong colour, though I don't always like its blues. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html I second that: I find VueScan very effective, once you've got the hang of it. Peter |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
"Matt Clara" wrote in message
... "richardsfault" wrote in message ... I have been experimenting with Fuji Reala 100 negative film in my old Minolta XG-7 and scanning with an admittedly-cheaper HP-3970 flatbed scanner. This scanner has worked well with old and new Kodacolor negatives using the HP software's inversion. It has never "liked" Fuji as much, and seems to really "hate" Reala! The Reala negatives seem to run quite dark, as if they are slightly over-exposed when shot at ASA100. Is this a characteristic of the film or something to do with the older camera? Should I use a higher speed like 125? The color is strong to the point where it hides detail. The Fuji "orange mask" is somewhat different than Kodak's, for which the scanner is probably optimized. It causes scans to have a greenish cast. I have had the same problem with older Fuji as well. I would describe the Fuji mask as more of a "peach" color. The scanner is hindered by the denser image and brighter color in similar matter to difficulties presented by old Kodachrome 25 and 64 slides. Again, I am aware that my scanner will have limitations, and hope to rectify the situation soon. Here is a link to a page of digital images very similar to what I attempted with Reala: http://www.richardsfault.com/images/...n/gallery.html Is Reala the best choice for this type of work? Reala may or may not be the best choice for this type of work--I've found it quite excellent for it, though I prefer slide film for color work, I've also shot many many rolls of Reala. I'd say, though, if your scanner won't play nice with Reala, and you insist on using your scanner, you'd be better off with another film. I like Portra 160NC for this, though if you want really eye poppin' colour it may not be to your taste. Low contrast and very accurate colour, and it's very easy to scan. I don't like Portra 160VC as much, but it is equally easy to scan if you want the more saturated colours (not that NC looks 'unsaturated', it's just subtler). Don't know about scanning, but Agfa Ultra 100 is quite a fun film for really strong colour, though I don't always like its blues. You might try VueScan, too. Different scanner software, pretty good, though not intuitive. It may or may not help with your situation. I think it has a demo option, so you might as well give it a try. http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html I second that: I find VueScan very effective, once you've got the hang of it. Peter |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?
Is Reala the best choice for this type of work?
Why not just use digital? I find it quite handy for Macro, Abstract, Animals and such topics for which film is an overkill. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What camera in the $400-$500 range is a good choice? | [email protected] | Film & Labs | 0 | January 22nd 04 06:31 AM |
are Kodak 160VC and 400VC a good choice? | Carlo | Film & Labs | 5 | October 21st 03 04:55 AM |