C-41 two rolls same tank. One has color cast?!

[ericdan]

Hi,

developed my first two rolls of color negs using Rollei Digibase Ready Mix Kit.
The temperature of the developer and bath stayed stable as far as I could read it off from my analog thermometer. I had the temperature just before 37.8 degrees and kept on pouring hot water when I saw it move. From what I could tell it didn't change at all during the dev stage.
I developed in a Paterson two reel tank. One roll of Portra 400 and a roll of Fuji Natura 1600.
The Natura roll came out good but the Portra roll had a color cast.

How is that even possible?!!

The water bath I kept the tank in covered half of the tank. Could that have been the problem? Meaning that the bottom was a little warmer than the top roll? I would've assumed that the agitation every 30 sec makes that negligible.

Fujifilm Natura 1600:

Portra 400:

 

[snapguy]

steak

I order steak and my pal orders lobster and the steak is tough but the lobster is not. In other words, two different films and you expect them to come out exactly alike? If it was the same type of film from the same batch, always stored in the same manner, then I think you have a problem. But apples and oranges?

 

[ericdan]

I don't expect them to come out exactly alike. But one has an obvious cast and the C-41 process should be the same for all color negative films.

 

[pentaxuser]

It is easily explained. Rollei has never liked Kodak so always sabotages its film

On a more serious note I do not see how the same chemicals impart a cast to one and not the other but actually I am unsure which if any has a cast and whether the Fuji comes out any worse.

The key to this is RA4 prints from both films. Only then can anyone decide if there is a problem.

Can you be sure that your scanner is accurately set for either or both films?

Had you posted each scan in a gallery and not mentioned which was good and which had a cast I am not sure I'd have spotted any cast and if I had I might have said that the first Natura scan looked slightly magenta-ish on the wall.

Based on the large sky area in the second Portra scan I'd say that there is a cyanish look there but that may be simply the scanner's colour setting

pentaxuser

 

[RPC]

The water bath I kept the tank in covered half of the tank. Could that have been the problem? Meaning that the bottom was a little warmer than the top roll? I would've assumed that the agitation every 30 sec makes that negligible.

If you are saying one roll was above the waterbath level and one was below, that could cause problems. Temperature is critical in the C-41 process and each roll would certainly not be at the same temperature. Underdevelopment and crossover could result in the top roll. My tank is nearly completely submerged, inversion agitation every 10 seconds throughout the process with no problems.

 

[Photo Engineer]

One Fuji and one Portra image have color casts. One each does not. I would not make a judgement based on this evidence.

PE

 

[adelorenzo]

It probably has more to do with your scanning workflow than your chemicals. Although, FWIW, when I develop Portra at home it always seems really green.

 

[ericdan]

I scan a lot of Portra and never had results like this. Don't think it's the scanning, but to be sure I should RA4 print.

 

[ericdan]

What could've created the cyan cast? Short development time? Could bleach and fix timing have produced casts?

 

[Prof_Pixel]

What could've created the cyan cast? Short development time? Could bleach and fix timing have produced casts?

No... it looks like a simple gray point misadjustment in scanning. Properly scanning color negs can be every bit as challenging as optical color printing. What scanning software are you using? (I use ViewScab.)

 

[ericdan]

I use a pAkon f-135 for my 'digital contact sheet' then an opticfilm 8200i with silverfast and always use 'generic' in NegFix.
I have never gotten results like this before from either of the scanners. The only thing I changed in my workflow is that I self developed.

 

[StoneNYC]

Put a few strips of both in the contact sheet and make an RA-4 print to be sure.

 

[ericdan]

One Fuji and one Portra image have color casts. One each does not. I would not make a judgement based on this evidence.

PE

You wouldn't say that the portra has a distincitve cyan cast when compared to the fuji?

 

[StoneNYC]

You wouldn't say that the portra has a distincitve cyan cast when compared to the fuji?

To me fuji was always a little more green or red in cast compared to Portra which was more consistent in different light. Though fuji has a more "film" look, Portra is ultimately available in more formats that I shoot than fuji so if I did switch from E-6 to C-41, I would stick with Portra for photos with people.

 

[ericdan]

I mean in my results posted above.

 

[DanielStone]

You wouldn't say that the portra has a distincitve cyan cast when compared to the fuji?

On my macbook pro's screen, the portra has a cyanish/bluish cast to it.

allow me, if I may, to simply do a simple color adjustment on it(file uploaded below)

I simply did a slight curves adjustment to the supplied file, to provide a pleasing(to my eye at least) color balance, compared to the very heavy cast on the original file.

-Dan

 

[DanielStone]

also, it looks as if you shot this under clear, blue sky conditions? If so, then you're working against "pleasing" light color-wise. You'll want to use a skylight/1a filter to help balance out. It has a slight pink cast to it, which helps to counteract the blue hue imparted to anything bathed in blue light conditions.

 

[ericdan]

Thanks Daniel. I was actually using a UV filter.
Anyways, it seems that with some adjustments I can save this roll. I'm still wondering why it behaved so differently from the rest of portra I shoot.

 

[DanielStone]

a UV filter alone WILL NOT cut out the bluish cast from the open sky. You'll need to warm it up slightly, to help correct the light back to a more "normal" color temperature.
I've found that at higher elevations(like in the mtns) a warmer filter, such as an 81B is needed to help balance things correctly. What our eyes see isn't always how the film sees things.

 

[pentaxuser]

On my macbook pro's screen, the portra has a cyanish/bluish cast to it.

allow me, if I may, to simply do a simple color adjustment on it(file uploaded below)

I simply did a slight curves adjustment to the supplied file, to provide a pleasing(to my eye at least) color balance, compared to the very heavy cast on the original file.

-Dan

Isn't this the same kind of colour balance that is possible with a dicroic head or are you changing what is now inherent in the negative and might not be possible with a YMC colour head?

The OP seems to remain convinced that it is the Portra film that has behaved badly whereas I cannot think of any reason why the negative per se will exhibit a cyan cast or in fact the reverse a magenta cast to produce a cyan print.

pentaxuser.

 

[StoneNYC]

On my macbook pro's screen, the portra has a cyanish/bluish cast to it.

allow me, if I may, to simply do a simple color adjustment on it(file uploaded below)

I simply did a slight curves adjustment to the supplied file, to provide a pleasing(to my eye at least) color balance, compared to the very heavy cast on the original file.

-Dan

This doesn't help if he's printing in the darkroom.

 

[MattKing]

This doesn't help if he's printing in the darkroom.

It does help if the cyan cast is introduced by the scanning process/software.

The development may have varied from the standard C41 in a way that leaves you with eminently printable negatives, but results that are different than the pre-sets built into the scanning software.

 

[pentaxuser]

This doesn't help if he's printing in the darkroom.

To date he isn't but has agreed that a print will help establish what if anything is wrong with the one Potra negative as far as I can see. I'd say that his first Fuji neg has a slight magenta/pink cast but he thinks not and we could go round in circles on this

So sticking to the cyan Portra scan, Daniel Stone has already corrected the cyan cast on his scanner so it is correctable. If this had been a RA4 print of that negative in question I don't think any of us would have suggested a film processing problem would we, especially if with the same processing there was a second print from a different film that exhibited a slight magenta cast? In the case of the first print problem( Portra) we'd all have said that it needs to be corrected by subtracting Y and M on a colour head.

Unless we see a print done in a decent mini-lab I don't see how we decide what has happened.

pentaxuser

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'll repeat! One Fuji and one Portra are fine and one each have color casts.

And, you can color correct in the darkroom if it is a filtration adjustment. This appears to be what has been done above.

Remember that Fuji films have an extra layer to "correct" for fluorescent lighting and this can do strange things to images which can be corrected in printing or scanning. If you correct for this, you can mess up Portra.

PE

 

[ericdan]

Haven't had a chance to print the portra yet, but ran another roll of portra 400 through the same developer. This time I did a two minute pre-soak and increased the agitation from every 30 seconds to every 15 seconds.
Same scanner, same default/auto settings and I get something that looks a little better to my eyes. I will still have to print both in the dark room to see if that really made the difference.