fuji film question

[dan_k2]

Ok, before I go and do tests, I figured I'd ask. My main subjects are

wildlife and nature, and I was wondering which fuji film gives the most

accurate colors, good smoothness, fine grain, etc. I'm trying to get some

input between 100 superia reala, pro 160c, and pro 160s. (I know, c for color,

s for skin) but how do they stack up in terms of latitude (ie: snowy egret in

swamp comes to mind.) I can deal with less "oomph" in color if it means that I

get better detail in tricky light.

 

 

 

Thanks

 

Dan

[lsaavedra]

Reala is really good stuff but low contrast film. Be sure to shoot it at sunny conditions because otherwise you'll get pretty flat images. I do really like that film. As for the other have no many experience on them. I just tried some rolls of 160NC but it was an expired batch yet kept in the fridge though. Not good enough for extracting definitive conclusions. Overall I think I prefer Reala

[timcorridan]

keep in mind, you can always ADD a touch contrast if you get the images scanned. i use all those films, i'd pick the reala also.

[Ed_Ingold]

Negative films have a much wider dynamic range than reversal film, which may tend to give low-contrast results. Reala has a range of 8 stops and 160C a range of nearly 10 stops, compared to 3.5 stops for Velvia (per the characteristic curves published by Fuji). It is relatively simple to adjust the white and black points, and gamma curves in Photoshop to give as much contrast as you want.

 

This means you can get detail in highlights and shadows if you exercise reasonable care setting the exposure. In a tough situation, meter the dark areas in which you need detail, then close down two stops (more or less) from the reading and let the highlights take care of themselves. It's OK to let deep shadows go black, although there might be recoverable detail there too. You need to compress the dynamic range enough to fit in the range of a print (3-4 stops).

 

Color accuracy is difficult to achieve with negative film, since the color balance depends a lot on the printing or scanning operations. All films distort, even reversal film, but it's a lot easier to adjust negative film. If you need high accuracy, you can use a Color Checker chart in one shot and create a custom profile for that situation. Most of the time, a reasonably good scan can be subjectively adjusted for "good" color.

[bill_tuthill]

Dan, for wildlife I'd recommend a faster film such as Kodak 400UC,

or if you prefer Fuji, Pro 400H. This helps at long focal lengths.

 

Edward, how did you determine that Pro 160C has more latitude than

Reala? In my tests it was the other way around.

[j.a.]

Hello Dan,

 

 

Fujifilm still offers profesionnal grade slides like Provia 400F & 400X, at least if you had already located a good Fujifilm service (like Frontier)in your area.

The most easier is to shoot negative film like Fuji ProH 400 or Kodak Portra NC 400 Iso - both are working well with long focal telezooms and a spot mesure of light.

 

Best regards,

 

J.A.

[noahfactor]

I have found that the pro 160s gives the most natural, realistic colors. The pro 160c's colors look distorted, not quite real. Ive been getting really great color from the 160s (enlarger prints, not scans).