Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Colour negative film
From: "Michael Gardner" <mikeg@neca.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:02:13 -0400

The best results by far that I have had with color negative film in my
Leicas is Fuji Reala.
Very sharp, accurate color.  The only filter you might want to use with
c-neg is the polarizer.
Great for subduing glare on water or taking the shine off leaves or other
annoying reflections.
The secret to getting good results with c-neg film is to find a lab which
develops properly, pays attention to the color balance in your proof prints
and has a sharp, properly focussed lens in their printing machine.  The
differences between various labs can be astounding.
If you expose correctly and don't shake the camera, Reala with your Leica
lenses will yield spectacular results.  If you are doing your job and the
prints don't yield great results then try another lab.  A friend who is a
full time landscape photographer hand prints his Reala negs up to 24" and
the results are excellent.  And I'm very critical and picky about technical
excellence. :-)

Mike Gardner

>
> OK, I'm now officially confused.  I've read about the Portra films on
> Kodak's site and about other manufacturer's colour negative film on their
> sites.  It seems that the Portra films come in two versions, VC and NC for
> more or less colour saturation.  There is also a lot of talk about how
> neutral greys are neutral, and how skin tone is natural.
>
> But this is negative film, right?  I thought that the colour could be
> corrected (or screwed up) at the printing stage.  So, what's the
difference?
>
> Also, is there *any* point in using colour correction filters with colour
> negative film?
>
> Hmm, does anyone know of a good source of information for how to use
> professional colour negative film?  It seems that I have a lot to learn.
>
> (Why am I considering negative film and not trannies?  Well, it's cheaper,
> has greater exposure lattitude, is easier to make prints from, and
> presumably scans at least as well as chromes do.  BTW -- is it E6 or C-41
> that's a female dog to do in the home darkroom?)
>
> M.
>
> --
> Martin Howard                     |
> Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU       |  All wiyht. Rho sritched mg
> email: howard.390@osu.edu         |  kegtops awound?
> www: http://mvhoward.i.am/        +---------------------------------------
>
>