Is Fuji Reala 100 a good choice for floral macros?

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by richardsfault, Jul 22, 2004.

  1. 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

    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

    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:

    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
    richardsfault, Jul 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. richardsfault

    D.R. Guest

    I scan Reala with my HP PhotoSmart S20 neg scanner. Seems to scan as well as any
    other I've tried. The film itself is very dark though anyways, as in prints from
    the lab seem to show little detail in the dark colours. Does you scanner allow
    you to adjust exposure, etc, before the final scan?

    D.R., Jul 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. richardsfault

    Stan Guest


    Have you used/tried to scan Kodachrome? If so, is the darkness you
    describe similar to what you get from Kodachrome?

    I find this problem with my Kodachrome slides, though not with
    Ektachrome, or the newer Elite Chrome. I'm assuming that it is due to a
    thicker emulsion. I get improved results by scanning for
    "underexposure", but I'm still not completely happy with the results.

    * * * To reply, remove numbers from address.

    Stan, Jul 22, 2004
  4. richardsfault

    D.R. Guest

    I have scanned some really old Kodachrome's of my parents. Most came out nice.
    Some came out dark. If the slides were underexposed, my scanner couldn't do it
    very well, it only scans single pass as 2400dpi.
    D.R., Jul 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.