Accidentally super lowered ISO of a slide film, very sad, can it be pushed ?

[Chan Tran]

And you're speaking from how much experience with professionally printing underexposed C-41 negatives and on what kind of equipment ?
M.

In fact I have run accross negative with about 3 stops underexposure but I never attempt to print them as I can't see much on the film.

 

[Stephen Frizza]

in case this was missed :

Has the film been processed yet? If not I'm happy to suggest something that will give you an extremely good result by modifying the E-6 process chemically, feel free to private message me.

-Steve @ The Lighthouse Lab.

 

[Mark Feldstein]

In fact I have run accross negative with about 3 stops underexposure but I never attempt to print them as I can't see much on the film.

Not to be (too) argumentative, but maybe it'd be worthwhile investing in some paper, making some test strips, experimenting and seeing what you actually CAN get out of a severely underexposed (or overexposed) negative on C-41 film.
M.

 

[sage]

in case this was missed :

Has the film been processed yet? If not I'm happy to suggest something that will give you an extremely good result by modifying the E-6 process chemically, feel free to private message me.

-Steve @ The Lighthouse Lab.

So what do you change to help this out?

 

[Stephen Frizza]

P.M sent Sage

 

[vpwphoto]

What I meant by bracketing is just that. Did you calculate exposure, then make a couple exposures opened up a stop or two. I didn't have the luxury of doing that, but when I used to make art photos on E-6 sometimes a shot opened up a stop was worth the effort in my travels.

It was typical for people to make three exposures of things over under and spot on when I worked in labs, I'd see it all the time, thought you might have to, and in this case pushing the film a stop along with the "one over" exposures would have perhaps saved your lunch.

 

[lxdude]

The OP said it was bright, "eye-burning bright". That could mean that the underexposure could be a bit less than thought. I suggest that if possible you take exposure readings on a similar day to figure as accurately as possible how much the film is underexposed. Maybe a 2 and 1/2 stop push would be adequate. If it was bright enough, maybe even less. Every bit helps.

 

[gone]

I absolve you of all forgiveness. Or whatever.

If I were a betting man, and I am, I'd bet the film is toast because it is slide film. I love to shoot B&W film, especially Tri-X, because it is very forgiving (there's that word again) and can tolerate a 3 stop error if you know how to develop it. Won't be perfect, but it won't be a write off either. My experience w/ slide film has clearly not been the same. Color negative film has a wide exposure latitude too.

Hey, it just gives you a good reason to somehow go back and reshoot the images. At the least it was a hard won lesson, and those are the ones that you remember. Mistakes are part of the deal. The only way anyone gets experience is by doing what you're not supposed to do. That's what the word experience really means.

 

[lxdude]

I'd also suggest as Wolfeye has doing it yourself. You will get color shifts by not processing it by directions at the very least, and it'll be unknown what you get for an image. I've developed plenty of E6 and it's not hard.

But people who process it professionally and are experienced, know what to do to optimize results. Some processors even push/pulled Kodachrome, something they didn't get help from Kodak on, and salvaged a lot of mis-exposed film.

 

[lxdude]

I absolve you of all forgiveness. Or whatever.

If I were a betting man, and I am, I'd bet the film is toast because it is slide film.

Once at Big Sur, I underexposed most of a roll of K25 because I thought I had K64 in the camera. That's a stop and a third. Normally processed, it came out gorgeous. Deeply saturated, dark shadows, but for the subject matter, it was beautiful.
There is definitely something on the film, and push-processing should be able to salvage enough to make it worth doing, if the images are important. Reshooting would be best, if it is a viable option; if not, and the OP cares about the images enough, then it is worth doing. What Stephen Frizza has said is very interesting; he's not just some guy talking- he knows his stuff.

 

[Stephen Frizza]

What I find sad is standing back and reading all thee threads about trying to push it 3 stops or the notion that doing this will not yield a good result.
Hearing people think that because its a slide film its "Toast"...... I can tell you all now with the right chemistry and right processing method all these cherished images can be saved with wonderful results.

 

[clayne]

Yep. I think there's a huge amount of ignorance about the slide process itself and people believing there's some kind of magic going on that doesn't apply to negative films.

 

[lxdude]

What I find sad is standing back and reading all thee threads about trying to push it 3 stops or the notion that doing this will not yield a good result.
Hearing people think that because its a slide film its "Toast"...... I can tell you all now with the right chemistry and right processing method all these cherished images can be saved with wonderful results.

The slide shooter's version of "fix it in post."

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I'd love to know what eventually happened.

 

[wildbill]

What I find sad is standing back and reading all thee threads about trying to push it 3 stops or the notion that doing this will not yield a good result.
Hearing people think that because its a slide film its "Toast"...... I can tell you all now with the right chemistry and right processing method all these cherished images can be saved with wonderful results.

I'd like to hear more about it.

 

[Mark Feldstein]

What I find sad is standing back and reading all thee threads about trying to push it 3 stops or the notion that doing this will not yield a good result.
Hearing people think that because its a slide film its "Toast"...... I can tell you all now with the right chemistry and right processing method all these cherished images can be saved with wonderful results.

I think you're exactly right. I've been pretty much trying to convey that same thought, I think if people really understood film and the chemistry(ies), they'd get it much better, perhaps.
M.

 

[wildbill]

Well, some of us have seen what slide film that's been this underexposed looks like in person. Now what's this magic e6 treatment that fixes this?

 

[MartinCrabtree]

And some of us just listen.............

 

[Stephen Frizza]

Well, some of us have seen what slide film that's been this underexposed looks like in person. Now what's this magic e6 treatment that fixes this?

Sent Private Message.

 

[Abutate]

i know this is way too old thread, what happened at the end?

 

[pentaxuser]

i know this is way too old thread, what happened at the end?

Good question. I am curious myself. The OP took a lot of trouble to try and reply to each respondent but then seems to have disappeared

Scans of what the OP got back would be enlightening for those of us who haven't any experience of appreciable slide underexposure but I doubt this or even a response will happen as the OP hasn't been seen since Aug 2014

pentaxuser

 

[Abutate]

Sadly its very common here that at the end op never shows up and no one can tell what happened. i have seen many other film related threads where op are lost

 

[Sirius Glass]

That is a lot off for slide film. Develop one roll and tell them what happened. If the results are decent the develop the rest of them.

 

[removed account4]

if it was me ...
i would have used it as black/white film.
processed it in dektol 1:7 for 4.5 mins ( adj 1 min, then 5sec/30sec)
then caffenol c with a shot of dektol for 5 mins (agitate continuously )

and then buy another roll of slide film, and make sure i sunny 11 instead of fiddling with the meter.

 

[BetterSense]

Underexposed slides can be rescued by copying. Possibly by scanning, but the density will be too much for most scanners. I have rescued severely underexposed slides by making internegatives. You can easily print through the density, and the interneg boosts contrast. There is a lot of detail in underexposed slides even if they are too dark to display. It's analogous to underexposed digital raw files (see what I did there?)

I would suggest the OP ask the lab for a 1 stop push, then try to rescue any good frames by copying.