Reala, unimpressive colors?

RattyMouse · Aug 18, 2012

I just got back from the lab my first roll of Reala. I was less than impressed with the results and I'm wondering if it is a lab issue or I just am not meant for Reala.

Would you expect better?

coigach · Aug 18, 2012

Looks good to me, natural and lifelike.

By 'better' do you mean more saturated? If so, there are plenty of less natural, more saturated films on the market...

timparkin · Aug 18, 2012

RattyMouse said:
I just got back from the lab my first roll of Reala. I was less than impressed with the results and I'm wondering if it is a lab issue or I just am not meant for Reala.

Would you expect better?

It looks fine to me but does have a bit of a cyan/green cast.. Here's a colour balanced shot how I would expect to see that scene

http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/scans/7806865644_0cbc76cf21_b-ref.jpg

The scan or print isn't particularly great - highlights are blown. Here's a frame from a colleague that I scanned recently - 135mm taken on a £20 Minolta SLR

http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/don2.jpg

It's a progressive jpg so it'll gradually get better resolution in three iterations. (i.e. it will look awful quickly, slowly OK, finally it'll look pretty good)

Tim

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Aug 18, 2012

I saw many highly successful Reala shots when I was researching toy panaromic cameras. This is highly desaturated , low contrast and looks foggy image. Film processing completely died here , whatever camera , whichever film you use , you got terrible negatives. I am working with them with % 90 loss expectation.
If they continue to process your films like it , dont bother , buy a good digital camera . Or switch to bw but China is colorful and you dont want to lose it.

RattyMouse · Aug 18, 2012

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
I saw many highly successful Reala shots when I was researching toy panaromic cameras. This is highly desaturated , low contrast and looks foggy image. Film processing completely died here , whatever camera , whichever film you use , you got terrible negatives. I am working with them with % 90 loss expectation.
If they continue to process your films like it , dont bother , buy a good digital camera . Or switch to bw but China is colorful and you dont want to lose it.

Thank you. I am going to try a different lab.

markbarendt · Aug 18, 2012

I normally view the first print as a proof rather than a final print especially if it comes from a lab I haven't used regularly.

Specific to this photo, I think it is probably just a color balance issue. It could be operator error or just the automated software.

Talk to the lab, tell them what disappointed you and have a new print made. Once they know what you want (and you have a good sample) they can probably get your prints much closer to what you want next time.

jp498 · Aug 18, 2012

You will almost never get prints from a mass production lab the way you want them. As said, they are just proofs. Back pre-digital, people who were fed up with the labs inability to get things right on color negative film would shoot slide film. No room for the labs to screw that up because they didn't print it.

Now, your options are to scan your negatives yourself, have a color darkroom, or work with a someone of skill at a lab to get the colors right.

TareqPhoto · Aug 18, 2012

To my eyes, this is not a great successful processed Reala, i can say this is just good or so so, i have shoot Reala and it is my top favorite color neg, so i am sure this shot or even the roll went wrong somewhere, try another lab and shoot another roll and give it a look.

Good luck!

Steve Smith · Aug 18, 2012

My father (and many others) used to use Reala for weddings due to its ability to render skin tones correctly whilst keeping wedding dresses white.

I think it's more of a case of Reala being the wrong film for your purpose rather than a problem with it or the processing.

Steve.

Roger Cole · Aug 18, 2012

Steve Smith said:
My father (and many others) used to use Reala for weddings due to its ability to render skin tones correctly whilst keeping wedding dresses white.

I think it's more of a case of Reala being the wrong film for your purpose rather than a problem with it or the processing.

Steve.

Generally agree, but also agree with the folks who say this print isn't that great. The automated machines tend to not correct density as much as I would when printing, so an overexposed color negative, which can easily make a great print, will come out desaturated and too light. I bet this can be printed much better.

If you want a lot more saturation for flowers, grass etc. try Ektar 100.

Tom Kershaw · Aug 18, 2012

For reference Reala prints very well onto Fuji Crystal Archive; probably due to well matched dye sets.

Tom

madgardener · Aug 19, 2012

Please forgive my ignorance here, but is Reala still being manufactured? I was under the impression it was discontinued years ago??

Mainecoonmaniac · Aug 19, 2012

I haven't shot Reala in years, but isn't a portrait film that supresses facial blemishes?

polyglot · Aug 19, 2012

If this is a lab print, it's a scan and digital print. Blame the scan operator and try an optical print directly to RA4. However, it's a very overcast scene and Reala (unsurprisingly for its name) has fairly accurate saturation so the photo is kind of flat. If you want more punch, try Ektar. But really, the fault here is your choice of lighting not the film's.

Reala can look pretty good IMHO and is quite available at least in 120.

BrendanCarlson · Aug 20, 2012

I like Reala for portraits, it's really nice and it's pretty smooth, it's not super contrasty and has very nice, natural color.
Here's a few shot's on Reala http://www.bcarlsonmedia.com/2012/06/07/fuji-reala-100/

kanzlr · Aug 20, 2012

I just bought two rolls or Reala in 120 size. And I love it

http://flic.kr/s/aHsjBgaags

perkeleellinen · Aug 20, 2012

madgardener said:
Please forgive my ignorance here, but is Reala still being manufactured? I was under the impression it was discontinued years ago??

120 only now.

benjiboy · Aug 20, 2012

Change your lab, I've used Reala for years, and it's not only colourful but also very sharp, this says it all Dead Link Removed

Les Sarile · Aug 20, 2012

Looks like a reasonable result from a scan. Based on the assessment of the scene, it looks realistic. As others have said, maybe you need to use a more saturated or contrasty film.

wblynch · Aug 20, 2012

It ma depend on where you live.

I find Reala not to my liking in Southern California and Nevada light. It comes out dull and lifeless.

Diapositivo · Aug 20, 2012

My personal attempt somewhere attached to this message.

I would be very wary in judging a film when there are so many variables involved:
- developing;
- filtering;
- scanning;
- monitor calibration differences;

I also see a greenish cast in the picture as posted by the original poster. A little bit of this greenish cast on the parapet is probably due to the greenish reflection of the pond, so I did not eliminate it completely so as to avoid a magentaish cast emerging.

The sRGB colour space is in any case inadequate to render the amplitude of the palette of a colour film.

The scanning sacrifices highlights and shadows, burning the former, blocking the latter. It should be very easy for a scanner to capture the entire dynamic range of a negative colour shot. The contrast is then recreated by applying gamma curves while keeping the extremes safe. This looks like the scan of a slide (and that can be improved as well).

The colours seem to be fine although, not being there, I cannot judge on the rendition of the correct hue of the flowers. I don't see any colour problem besides the difficulty in filtering which is somehow intrinsic in the use of negative colour film unless a proper colour-managed workflow is adopted.

Les Sarile · Aug 20, 2012

wblynch said:
It ma depend on where you live.

I find Reala not to my liking in Southern California and Nevada light. It comes out dull and lifeless.

To your point you may not like Reala but it seems we had a similar discussion about poor results from Kodak Ektar and the reason came down to the lowest common denominator - poor scanning and/or post.

Here is a common flower found everywhere in So Cal. This one I took outside LAX.

wblynch · Aug 21, 2012

I don't recall saying anything against Ektar. I love that film.

I have said that Portra strikes me as too pastel. I do like Portra much more than Reala. That is just my opinion. Only presented to show that not everyone loves Reala.

Les Sarile · Aug 21, 2012

How are you evaluating your results - from optical made prints or scans?

wblynch · Aug 21, 2012

There is no such thing as optical color prints anymore.

Reala, unimpressive colors?

RattyMouse

Attachments

coigach

timparkin

Mustafa Umut Sarac

RattyMouse

markbarendt

jp498

TareqPhoto

Steve Smith

Roger Cole

Tom Kershaw

madgardener

Mainecoonmaniac

polyglot

BrendanCarlson

kanzlr

perkeleellinen

benjiboy

Les Sarile

wblynch

Diapositivo

Attachments

Les Sarile

wblynch

Les Sarile

wblynch

Reala, unimpressive colors?

Attachments

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency