Adox Color Mission 200 Shot at 25 ISO

[braxus]

I put a roll of Color Mission into my Canon Sureshot 180U point and shoot, and later noticed the roll doesnt have DX coding. Im told my camera will shoot a non DX film at the default 25 ISO setting. So for Color Mission, that is 3 stops over exposed. Now I heard Adox Color Mission likes some overexposure (some suggested 160 ISO), but how will it handle 3 stops over? Granted the light meter in the P&S may not be so accurate for a camera compared to late model SLRs (like my Elan 7), so I may have some fudge room in how it was exposed. It was a contrasty light day as well. So do you think I'll be okay here with what I shot?

 

[koraks]

Develop it and find out; it's not like there's anything you can change about now, is there?
I'm sure you'll get an image alright. Since this particular film is kind of 'out there' anyway, I think it only adds to its 'character' that it's not being handled as originally intended

 

[braxus]

I'm waiting to get it done, as my budget just isn't there for that at the moment. I have close to a dozen rolls to get done and it's almost 30 bucks each roll for everything. So I'm holding off.

I'm seeing if others have overexposed this film and what kind of results you got doing that.

 

[koraks]

Oh, that's serious money alright. Never considered DIY-ing? Some chemistry and a second hand scanner will set you back about as much as the dozen rolls you're about to get done. Well, maybe not quite, but it's awfully close alright.

 

[braxus]

I have a scanner here already, but it min 4 hours per 36 roll. I don't have that kind of time to waste. And I prefer the colors from Noritsu scanners vs what I get at home. I don't want to get into C41 developing at home, due to the need for controlled temperature. My house varies a lot in Temps during the year. Lately it's around 28 degrees C inside. I do have Patterson tanks, but again I dont want to get into doing color. It's less forgiving than B&W.

 

[koraks]

I dont want to get into doing color

That's the only thing that matters. The rest is just...well, excuses. Sorry for putting it that bluntly, but none of the reasons you mentioned are deal breakers and all can easily be worked around. So in case your mind ever changes and you decide you might actually want to try, be sure to know that it'll be within arm's reach.

 

[Agulliver]

Why 30 bucks per film? If you're concerned about the over-exposure, there is absolutely no way on earth you can't find somewhere cheaper with a great reputation to process those films.

 

[MattKing]

Kerrisdale Cameras is probably the least expensive practical option for braxus - $22 + mail costs + taxes per roll: https://www.dropbox.com/s/avaaz1rcbc0obt9/KCL_FilmProcessingPrices.pdf?dl=1
No promises about how well the scanning will go with an over-exposed, unusual emulsion .

 

[brbo]

There is nothing unusual about Adox CM 200. Alrhough latitude is not as good as Portra, there will be usefull pictures on a roll exposed at ISO 25.

I need to finish my roll of Adox CM. I will make a couple of side-by-side exposures of identical scenes at iso 200 and 25, so if you can wait a couple of days I can give you a preview of what you can expect…

 

[brbo]

Adox Color Mission 200 at ISO 200 vs 25:



Last row is with the correction to the ISO 25 shot. There is still obvious change in hues and saturation, but it might be passable for some shots...

 

[albireo]

I have a scanner here already, but it min 4 hours per 36 roll.

That sounds off. Which scanner is that and what do you use to drive it? My old Minolta film scanner driven by Vuescan or its own Minolta sw has a 'preview' function whereby you can do a quick low res scan of the 6 images on the negative strip. Each preview takes 5 seconds. From the preview I can then choose the 'keepers', those frames I want to scan at full resolution (usually 0-2 per strip), which is 3200dpi in my case. That takes 30 seconds per scan. An old Plustek 7500i I had took only slightly longer than that, though I had to manually advance to the next frame (not motorized).

 

[koraks]

Those Minolta's were pretty quick. If you scan with eg an old 4990 at high resolution and ICE turned on, things can take a long time. Turn ICE off and scan at a more sensible dpi of 2400 or so and things aren't half as bad anymore.

 

[braxus]

My 35mm scanner is the Primefilm XAs. It doesn't sense between the frames, so it guesses. I do a full 36 roll in 3 to 4 hours for B&W. I preview every shot when I advance to the next frame to make sure it's lined up right. And I scan at 5000 dpi. The bulk scan option is useless on my scanner, and their driver is buggy for Windows 11.

 

[koraks]

Ok, that's a seriously slow scanner alright, especially if bulk scanning somehow doesn't work. Sucks!

 

[albireo]

And I scan at 5000 dpi.

Do you scan at 5000dpi the entire roll?

 

[braxus]

Do you scan at 5000dpi the entire roll?

Yes because I'm archiving the entire roll. I don't want to have to come back and rescan missed shots later. When I shoot pictures, I tend to want to keep all of what I took, so that is why I don't scan only some of the images. There isn't much of a speed difference doing say 2500 dpi and 5000, so do them all at high rez. I just have a really slow scanner. I tend not to do color on this scanner either.