Any tips on developing 4x5 E6?

[removed account4]

Send it to a lab…

+1

not sure about in your neck of the woods trondsi but there are still some labs around that will professionally process your 4x5 e6.
I've been processing film since about IDK 1980 and LF since 1988 and aside from the very little temperature +/- permitted there is the disposal of the chemcials that are affiliated with color processing. I have probably 200 sheets of Velvia and Portra I will be shooting soon, but I'll be developing them as B/W film ( crossed processed ) in a combination of Dektol and Caffenol C.

another lab that will process sheet film is run by someone that is here on Photrio
https://www.northeastphotographic.com

Good luck with your processing!
John

 

[mshchem]

All you really need is a water bath and hot water.

 

[removed account4]

All you really need is a water bath and hot water.

for me its more than the water bath.. i don't want to deal with disposal or the nasty chemistry connected with color processing. I'll leave it to the professionals . let them deal with that stuff ..

 

[Sirius Glass]

All you really need is a water bath and hot water.

I have done it that way and with a Jobo processor. Both will do the job, but the first is less consistent.

 

[trondsi]

Regarding labs that process E-6, check these guys out. E-6 is all that they do.

https://www.agximaging.com/

thanks! I’ll check them out unless I become a master of color processing

 

[trondsi]

Third time using the same mix of chemicals. Results were better this time, but now I think I see the effect of using the chemicals for several days: the result looks underexposed and a bit yellow. Is it primarily the first developer that needs to be used longer you think?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Aren't most E6 first developers intended to be used one-shot? Color dev likely can be reused several times, but blix (vs. separate bleach and fixer) also has a relatively short life (should still be weeks, rather than days, though).

 

[trondsi]

The user instructions recommends developing a large batch once, but states that it can potentially be used a few times.

I’m curious, what does the blix do? Is this the reversal part of the process?

 

[Photomultiplier]

Tetenal for example, states that you can reuse the working solutions 3 times with increased times. On the other hand they state that if you want highest quality and consistency, you should use the chemistry one-shot.
Please note that they issued a completely revised version of the Colortec E-6 manual a few months ago where they clarified some issues that were not explained very well in the old manuals.

For all working solution volumes (250/330/500/660/750/1000ml) they give the times for 3 consecutive runs.
At 250ml, which is the volume i use for rotation in my Jobo 2520 tank, they additionally give the time for 2 films at once, which uses the times of the second run. Probably to take the gradual chemistry exhaustion into account that happens during
processing and which is higher when processing 2 films at once.
However, this special case (250ml and 2 films at once) is obviously intended to be one-shot as they don't mention any further runs.

They also explicitly mention the possibility of using a 2min prewet (with 38°C water) to bring the film, spiral and tank to temperature and to avoid uneven development. Development times do NOT have to be increased when using prewet according to
the manual and my personal experience. I use two 1min prewets because at the first fill, the water gives off its temperature to the tank and spiral and then it is some tenths below process temperature.


As i said earlier, i switched completely to one-shot development and try to develop 2 films at once if possible. For some time, i used longer FD times for Velvia 50 but now i rate it at 40 or 32ISO and use the same 6:15min as for the other films so that i
can mix Velvia 50 with other types of Film.

When i did 2 or even 3 runs, i experienced problems like films that where too dark or had color shifts. Especially with run number 3 but also with the second. I think that problem is further amplified by the fact that i use only 250ml of solution. Maybe some
reaction side-products accumulate and influence the process more when the working solution volume is lower, i dont't know. I just had results in the second run that where not as good as i expected them to be.
Another possibility could be the additional FD dilution from the residual water left in the tank due to the pre-wet.

A telltale sign for me was the tint and density of the film marking/frame numbering. With that i could tell at an instant that there was something off in the second or third run while the first one was always spot on.

Anyhow: split concentrates, inert gas, 250ml working solution, one-shot with either 1 or 2 films and then dispose, that's what i do and it works flawlessly for me. I have not damaged any roll of film since i do it that way.

But i would be happy if Tetenal would offer the FD concentrate separately because it is usually the component that goes off, if such things happen. As i do not reuse chemistry anymore, i go through the whole pack in a reasonable time and i seldom have
any "duds" among my small bottles. And if there is a discoloration, i toss it because i do not hike the mountains and walk the fields for days only to ruin my films because i wanted to save a few bucks

 

[Donald Qualls]

I’m curious, what does the blix do? Is this the reversal part of the process?

Blix is a combination of BLeach and fIXer -- it converts developed image silver back to a fixable compound, and then fixes that away, leaving only the dye image in the film. The reversal occurs when halide in the three color layers that was undeveloped by the first developer is fogged (either by light, or chemically) and developed with color developer, producing both image silver (which, because of the first dev, now completely blackens the film) and a dye image.

First dev => develops a multi-layer B&W negative.
Reversal => fogs the undeveloped halide (sometimes combined with the next step)
Color developer => develops the halide fogged by the reversal, producing the dye image
Bleach => converts developed silver (plus the silver filter layer) back to a form that can be fixed away (often combined with fixer as BLIX)
Fixer => removes silver halides and some other silver compounds -- either undeveloped, in negative film, or bleached in color negative and reversal films.

 

[abruzzi]

the vaious 3 bath consumer E6 chemicals recommend an increased development time for the first developer of 4 percent over the previous tank. I have successfully extended a batch of chemicals for around 10 tanks using that. Its not perfect, but my color sensitivity is very weak compared to most people I've met, so for me its fine. (and the color shifts are pretty subtle.)

 

[destroya]

for a few years i used the 3 bath kits. then after a once in a lifetime trip i splurged and went the fuji 6 bath route. I got more consistent results and found by going the replenishment route, which is what the 6 bath chems were designed for, gave repeatable results and wound up costing less $ as the cost per roll dropped with replenishing. I know that the 5 liter kit is hard to come by and I hope that it becomes available at freestyle again. when it does become available again give it a try.

john

 

[trondsi]

Thanks for all the info folks! I have to say it’s pretty amazing how this stuff works. I love the look of slide film on my light table.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Third time using the same mix of chemicals. Results were better this time, but now I think I see the effect of using the chemicals for several days: the result looks underexposed and a bit yellow. Is it primarily the first developer that needs to be used longer you think?

For E-6 and C-41 I develop all the film as fast as I can, usually finishing in less than 48 hours to avoid problems such as color shifts.

 

[trondsi]

Is it normal to find fuzzy residue in the stabilizer immediately after developing E6? I was a bit shocked and thought the photo was ruined but it looks ok. Only difference from when the pros do it for me is…..perhaps…I think the image looks more “etched” as in Kodachrome. Very weird. Not sure if I can take a good photo of it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is it normal to find fuzzy residue in the stabilizer immediately after developing E6? I was a bit shocked and thought the photo was ruined but it looks ok. Only difference from when the pros do it for me is…..perhaps…I think the image looks more “etched” as in Kodachrome. Very weird. Not sure if I can take a good photo of it.

I vaguely remember it with C41.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I vaguely remember it with C41.

Modern C-41 needs no stabilizer (for film made after about 2000). E-6 stabilizer may still contain a small percentage of formaldehyde (or other aldehydes such as acetaldehyde) to ensure full conversion of the dyes. If diluted with tap water, this may react with something in the water to form flocks. As long as the film sheeted clean, I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[trondsi]

Modern C-41 needs no stabilizer (for film made after about 2000). E-6 stabilizer may still contain a small percentage of formaldehyde (or other aldehydes such as acetaldehyde) to ensure full conversion of the dyes. If diluted with tap water, this may react with something in the water to form flocks. As long as the film sheeted clean, I wouldn't worry about it.

the weird thing was that this was the only part of the process where I used purified water, although maybe distilled water is better.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There shouldn't be any practical difference between resin column deionized water and distilled, but other kinds of "purified" may or may not have critical impurities removed.

Assuming you did a proper wash after blix or fixer and before the stabilizer, there shouldn't be carry over from one of the active baths to consider, but if you washed in tap water, a small amount of flocking could come from that water, carried over into the stabilizer (shouldn't be enough to notice, though; it'd be a few ml of that water). Was it visible only after soaking the film? If so, it might be some byproduct of the reaction between the dyes and the stabilizer. I've only used C-41 since 2005, and last time I did color slides was E-4 around 1974; I don't recall seeing that then, but my entire photography class had our film processed together to get full use from an E-4 kit of the day, and I was much more interested in seeing the 6x6 transparencies from my Reflex II than in what the stabilizer looked like after everything was done...

 

[trondsi]

As an update, I thought I should share that I am developing slide film quite successfully now.

I am also getting more economical: Over the last three days, I used half the fluid in the small Tetanal E6 pack (the one that makes 1L working fluid), and developed 8 sheets of 4x5 and one roll of 120 film. Never having developed roll film, and after having used the fluid twice already I was skeptical about how the 120 roll would turn out, but I think it's fine apart from the last image being creased in my spiral. The SP-445 tank was used for the large format sheets. They way I did the one 120 roll was by filling my Paterson tank half way with the same fluid. Here's a sample:

 

[trondsi]

Hmm, something went wrong here, as the sky is looking weirdly cloudy. Too little stirring of the tank?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Too little stirring of the tank?

I'd accept that, most likely in first developer.

 

[koraks]

Too little stirring of the tank?

Probably. I understand the Stearman is kind of prone to agitation issues as it is. Also, I wouldn't hold much trust in manual agitation for color processes. Not saying it can't work, but it's flirting with the kind of problems shown here. Your 120 format frame also seems to suffer from it although it's less apparent due to the subject matter.

 

[trondsi]

Ok thanks! Yes, the Stearman has relatively little room for moving fluid. I moved it less this time because of some leaks and a sheet apparently shifting previously. I will change how I handle it.

 

[trondsi]

Did another 4 sheets. I used slightly less fluid (to create more room inside the tank) and more rigorous agitation (last time I could barely hear the fluids moving in the tank, this time I could). It worked well this time, so thanks for the feedback folks!