B&W Reversal Processing - WOW

Jordan · Jan 8, 2006

Reversal processing B&W is fun, isn't it? I would do it all the time if I had a permanent space to do my processing (it's a lot of set-up and clean-up for a kitchen counter). I'm also surprised that D76 1:1 worked as a first developer -- usually you need something far more active (more like paper developer) with an added strong silver halide complexing agent (usually a thiocyanate or thiosulfate). For example Ilford recommends their PQ Universal developer (at a fairly strong dilution) plus about 12 g/L of sodium thiosulfate. I've also used HC-110 with added sodium carbonate and sodium thiosulfate for the same purpose.

But if it works, it works. Looking forward to seeing some sample scans.

htmlguru4242 · Jan 8, 2006

PE, I can't tell if your being serious or not there ... )

Is there a more efficient, proper way to do this?

htmlguru4242 · Jan 8, 2006

Ok, last night I did some reversal processing of Tri-X 320 (120 format) using the tray cleaner that I was sent by a member here (thanks!).

First, I must say that 6x6 cm black and white slides are quite a thing to behold, just looking at the slide. I'm sure that they'd be even more impressive if projected onto a screen.

The slides were slightly dark, though this was due mostly to the fact that they were exposed in NYC in the evening with my Holga (about 1/100 s & f/8), which was a slight underexposure for some shots. None are too dark to be useful, though.

The procedure I used was paritally from info. I found on the 'net and partially from my own ideas:

1.) Pre - soak for 1:00 in 70ºF water.
2.) First Develop; 8:00 in D-76 1:1.; 7:00 wasa typo ... oops
3.) Wash: fill & dump tank three times with clear water.
4.) Acid Stop
5.) Wash off acid stop: fill & dump than three times with clear water.
6.) Bleach: Kodak Tray Cleaner (about 1:100) for 3:00
7.) Wash: About 30 fill & dump of tank with water, until orange color is gone
8.) Clear: Clearing agent for 3:00
9.) Wash: Dump & Fill tank three times
10.) Re-Rexpose: Open tank, place under tungesten light for 1:30
11.) Re-develop: pour in dev. (D-76 regular) with tank open / lights on for 6:00
12.) Wash: Normal stop-wash
13.) Fix: 5:00 in Kodafix
14.) Final Wash: Normal film wash in water

I encountered no problems with this, though I should have adjusted the first dev. to compensate for underexposure. Also, I think that there's probably a better first dev. than D76 anda better film than Tri-X. It was also odd that the Hypo Clear came out a brilliant green ... perhaps insufficient bleach wash?

I'll post the pictures when I get my scanner back up (Windows REFUSES to load my USB drivers, so the scanner will not work [re-install time]).

Hopefully the next time I try this, it'll be with 4x5 film exposed through a color mask in my borrowed Sinar camera...

Any suggestions / ideas for improving this process would be appreciated. Thanks!

glbeas · Jan 8, 2006

Way to go! Next you'll be doing dupe negs under the enlarger!

Matt5791 · Jan 8, 2006

That sounds excellent and not dissimilar to monochrome movie film processing I was always planning to do but never got round to - I have a kit of chemicals for this still sitting around and a russian spirial tank capable of taking 50ft of film.

Notwithstanding the obviously good results you have had here, I wonder if the available processing kit for motion picture film (such as Kodak reversal films like PlusX 100 and TriX 200) would be useful for processing still emulsions?

Matt

htmlguru4242 · Jan 8, 2006

The movie processing kit would work on still films as well, though movie films may come out better in it than still ones. The concept of reversal processing is the same for all B&W film: Develop, bleach, re-expose, re-develop. Tri-X & Plus-X movie film as designed for reversal, rather than their still film counterparts, which are designed for negative development. The kit'll work, though it's probably quite expensive ...

It would be cool to process movies yourself, though I'm not sure I'd do it on a 50 foot reel; loading that sounds like "fun" - probably more so than loading 120 ont a plastic reel, lol.
The one home processed B&W movie that I saw (quite recently) was literally processed in a bucket (the film was unloaded into a mass & swirled around, no reel). It actually came out quite well.

waynecrider · Jan 8, 2006

Thanks for your report as I am interested in this as well. I wonder if there is any way to cut the wash cycle down after the bleach?

htmlguru4242 · Jan 8, 2006

I HOPE that the was cycle can be reduced. I mean, even after all of that washing, the output was STILL yellow; perhaps cutting hte bleach time down a little, or using some type of a wash aid in the wash water?

Photo Engineer · Jan 8, 2006

The clearing bath is intended to scavenge any remaining bleach, so the wash after the bleach only has to be good enough to remove most of the bleach. The wash after the clear must be the better of the two.

I think that you could use about 1/10th the wash after the bleach and then use about 2x the wash after the clear. Just an OTOMH guess based on previous experiences with this type of thing.

The goal is to not carry any sulfite or bleach into the second developer. If you do, that will decrease the activity of the developer drastically or change its solvent properties in unpredictable ways.

PE

Matt5791 · Jan 8, 2006

I did try to load the spiral once in daylight as a test run - pretty tricky and definitely "fun". It winds from the inside out and the is about 12" diameter.

I probably will have another go at it soon becuase I shot some standard 8mm on a friends olf Bolex while Sking and it was superb, but the processing took ages at the lab becuase it is not really a priority for them. Much quicker to DIY once the loading mastered.

Interesting how you have processed the "negative" emulsions as reversal though. I have heard of people processing the reversal emulsions as negative too!

Matt

Alicouscous · Jan 8, 2006

I'm very surprised you can obtain some good results with D-76 ............
And you time for first developer is very very very short .

htmlguru4242 · Jan 9, 2006

I was surprised by the good results as well. The images are good, though they can certainly be much better. First of all, that was a typo: it was 8:00 in the 1:1 D-76, which is probably the reason for the darkness. I think that a slightly softer, less active developer for the first dev.'ll be better next time.

And to Matt, I have heard of processing reversal emulsions as negs. as well, though I've heard that the results are increased grain and speed loss. I've never tried this though, actually.

And when you say "standard 8mm", are you talking about the 16mm double 8mm that's flipped halfway through & slit in processing, or the actual 8mm wide on a daylight spool stuff?? What film was it, by the way?

From what I've head about home processing 8mm or 16mm is to do it in either a bucket or using a rewind tank, though the reel apparently gives great results.

Helen B · Jan 9, 2006

htmlguru4242 said:
...
And when you say "standard 8mm", are you talking about the 16mm double 8mm that's flipped halfway through & slit in processing, or the actual 8mm wide on a daylight spool stuff?? What film was it, by the way?
...

What was it? The cheek! It is either Super 8 or Single 8. Super 8 is a Kodak format, has side-by-side feed and take-up reels, and an acetate base. Single 8 has exactly the same width, frame spacing and perforations, but is a Fuji thing with reels separated vertically and a polyester base - noticeably thinner than Super 8 and only capable of being spliced with tape.

Super 8 is also available 16 mm wide: Double Super 8. Apart from being used in camera, this was/is also the main format for printing commercial Super 8 movies (interneg made by blowing-down from 16 mm prints).

Standard 8 is also known as Regular 8 or Double 8. Same perfs as 16 mm, just more of them. It can be made by reperforating 16 mm film.

More than you wanted to know? Sorry you asked?

Best,
Helen

htmlguru4242 · Jan 9, 2006

LOL. I knew about those formats, I was just wondering which one matt5791 has used. I'm not so familiar with all the terminology.

Is there a way to manyally reperforate 16mm for the double 8mm cameras, because, if so, it would be a WHOLE LOT cheaper to shoot on film ...

Photo Engineer · Jan 9, 2006

To reperf, we used a metal comb and a hammer.

Just wham away at the film and eventually you have enough perfs. Sometimes you even get them on the edges.

LoL.

PE

Helen B · Jan 9, 2006

"Is there a way to manyally reperforate 16mm for the double 8mm cameras, because, if so, it would be a WHOLE LOT cheaper to shoot on film ...'

There must be some old machines around. I used to get my supply of reperforated film via a friend, Mr X, who knew Larry Pearce (?) in Rayner's Lane(? my memory is not reliable here), London. You gave Larry double-perf film on 100 ft daylight spools and he gave it back to you with extra holes in just the right places. He had a few reperforators. They came from East Germany, if I recall correctly. X almost bought one off him, but was too nomadic to seriously contemplate such impedimenta and unable to persuade the LFMC (London Filmmaker's Co-op, then in Camden) to find space for it. If you are serious about this, I'll dig up some old contacts and ask. Have you tried a web search? Maybe the guys at the Widescreen Centre in London could help.

You know that gate weave and registration can be a bit of an issue if the film reperforator isn't perfectly set up or the die is worn. This might not bother some people, but it bothers me.

If you wanted a project, you could probably make one from a pin-registered advance mechanism from an old NPR or something similarly bomb-proof.

Good luck,
Helen

htmlguru4242 · Jan 9, 2006

Ah - hah, thanks for the offer, though contacts in London may not be super useful here in the US. Anyway, since making the last post, I have found online some better sources of already made double 8mm film. Since I don't need it in volume, I'll probably just go with what I have.

Anyway, back to the subject of reversal processing, I'm going to try this again (with sheet film) and my additive color mask screen. Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to make a good starch mask, so I'm running from something created on a color laser printer.

I'll post results when I get them.

Does anyone have suggestions as to how to determine exposure compensation for my color filter?

glbeas · Jan 9, 2006

Grab your 35mm slr or handheld meter, etc. Take it out to where you can see some clear sky. Meter the sky with and without the filter in front. Apply the difference as a starting correction and see how it works.

Shinnya · Jan 9, 2006

It sounds interesting. How one can mix Kodak Tray Cleaner? Does anyone know? Thanks.

Warmly,
Tsuyoshi

glbeas · Jan 9, 2006

This is old stuff, I don't think Kodak carries it anymore but other makers do. It's a liquid, just measure and dilute. If you want to make some just follow any formula for dichromate bleach, sodium or potassium.

Dracotype · Jan 9, 2006

glbeas said:
This is old stuff, I don't think Kodak carries it anymore but other makers do. It's a liquid, just measure and dilute. If you want to make some just follow any formula for dichromate bleach, sodium or potassium.

Does that mean you could use Farmer's reducer? I only ask out of curiousity becuase you mentioned potassium.

Another small question. It sounds like any developer will work, so long as you over do it the first development (by what percentage?). So is that true?

Drew

glbeas · Jan 9, 2006

Dracotype said:
Does that mean you could use Farmer's reducer? I only ask out of curiousity becuase you mentioned potassium.

Another small question. It sounds like any developer will work, so long as you over do it the first development (by what percentage?). So is that true?

Drew

I think Farmers is thiosulfate and dichromate, right? This bleach is sulfuric acid and dichromate. Bisulfate is used sometimes used instead of sulfuric.
As far as I know any developer can be used.

Jordan · Jan 10, 2006

Actually, I'm pretty sure Farmer's reducer is potassium ferricyanide and sodium thiosulfate (maybe some potassium bromide in there too).

I've been thinking about easy ways to get at reversal bleaches for a while now, and I think that the tray cleaner idea is a good one. You most certainly do NOT want Farmer's reducer as a reversal bleach. In addition to bleaching away the metallic silver, it will also dissolve the silver halide you need for your positive image.

Jordan · Jan 10, 2006

P.S. -- I have no idea why one of my earlier posts is now appearing at the top of this thread. I posted it after there were already eight or nine replies to the OP!

htmlguru4242 · Jan 10, 2006

Farmer's Reducer will not work for hte bleach; it contains thiosulfate (fixer) which will remove the halides from the film. Ths, regardless of what you do afterwards, will leave you with blank film.

As to developer choices, anything'll work, though some work significantly better than others. I've seen reccomentations to use 1:1 diluted Dektol for 6 minutes for first. dev.

The bleach is Sodium Dichromate and an acid (sulfuric, I believe). Potassium dicromate can be used as well if you're mixing it for yourself.

B&W Reversal Processing - WOW

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency