Developing C-41

[Atlo]

i'm about to order the tetenal kit for developing and i was wondering if there would be a way to increase saturation in the negative during developement. maybe by extending developing a tiny bit?
also any tips you might have would be a big help

 

[DanielStone]

controlling saturation is generally in the exposure(in camera) step. Overexposing color neg films generally 1/3 to-1 full stop can increase saturation, in MOST(not all) cases.

where as the reverse generally happens with E-6 films, underexposing increases "saturation".

-Dan

 

[ZorkiKat]

If you extend the developing time, you may find that some dye layers can develop to a greater degree than needed. The greater dye densities and uneven rates of development can cause colour shifts which may not be correctible.

 

[phaedrus]

You're better off choosing the film for it's saturation. Doesn't Kodak make VC (very contrasty?) and NC (natural contrast) versions of some C41 films?

 

[MikeSeb]

Development control is out the window for C-41. You have no such control, for the most part.

Choose a more saturated film (eg VC line of portra films, Ektar 100) and/or shoot at an EI lower than box speed, as was suggested.

 

[steelneck]

A paper with more contrast can also be _perceived_ as being more saturated. But as others said, chose a film with more contrast and a slight overexpose in camera and then corrected back at copying can also add a bit saturation.

 

[markbarendt]

I asked the same question way back when.

You actually have three controls that MAY help, they do require practice: You can 1-expose the film differently; 2-push or pull the film some; and my favorite, 3-expose the paper differently, i.e. burn & dodge or change total exposure.

 

[kompressor]

Dont order the Tetenal kit. Order Rollei digibase C41-kit 1: you can chose in many kit-sizes. 2: it is the best chem ever for developing C41. 3: Its a seperated bleach/fix process, so you dont have to destroy the quality with that nasty blix. It can also be used in room temperature. The instruction folder coming with the kit is big and VERY educational. Freestyle is having it in US and in Europe Macodirect.de sells it. I have been using it since early this year and tested how long 1 litre of work solution can be used at 3:15 dev, 4:20 bleach, 4:20 fix. I have developed so far 35 120 rollfilms in a time span of two months. The work solution is stored at 20 degree celsius between the developing sessions.

The picture added was devloped 3 days ago. Its shot on Kodak Portra 160 NC at box speed. I am now also testing the Rollei Digibase RA4-kit. Will write morea about that testing later.

 

[Athiril]

Can someone actually post results of the overexpose for more saturation rule?

Everytime I have done it, and from what I've seen in the Ektar thread, overexposing has given lower contrast, and hence lower saturation, or lower perceived saturation and a flatter image, while underexposure shows stronger colours.

So I'm seriously doubting that 'rule'.

 

[JLP]

Kompressor, Can you post a link to the Rollei kit on Freestyles web page? i can't find it.

 

[kompressor]

I think you better call them, the have newly got it in stock.

 

[JLP]

Will do thanks. I have used Tetenal's C41 kit and been happy with the results but it can't hurt to try the Rollei kit.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

I'm another Tetenal user and it is just fine, so don't feel you have to use something different.

 

[kompressor]

Do a test and compare. Split the film in half. Just do it and see for you self

 

[Tim Gray]

Everytime I have done it, and from what I've seen in the Ektar thread, overexposing has given lower contrast, and hence lower saturation, or lower perceived saturation and a flatter image, while underexposure shows stronger colours.

I've found the same. Maybe 1/2 stop would give a little boost, but once I start getting into +1 territory and above, it starts to wash out a bit. Even more overexposure (+2-3) washes it out more. This is with scanning so maybe it's different with optical printed images.

 

[ZorkiKat]

I've found the same. Maybe 1/2 stop would give a little boost, but once I start getting into +1 territory and above, it starts to wash out a bit. Even more overexposure (+2-3) washes it out more. This is with scanning so maybe it's different with optical printed images.

Scanners don't really like dense images- it all looks "white" to them. Hence the lower apparent saturation, with what could look like washed-out colours. However with optical printing (through enlargers), the denser dyes in the negative will require slightly longer printing times which in turn causes more densities to form in the print. Longer exposure times from normally exposed negatives only darker prints. This is where the overexposure part in the negative comes in.

 

[Athiril]

That makes some sense.

But a scan still indicates that it is a lower-contrast image, so I would think thats still would reflect in the print, unless a longer print exposure gets a higher contrast from reciprocity or whatever to compensate?

Either way I think it's inapplicable for most people's uses when I see these recommendations, as more people go to a lab to develop then do it at home, which probably means they wont do RA-4 at home either, which means a scan or a lightjet print (scanned at lab or home).

I need to get some paper and enlarger to try this out though.

 

[ZorkiKat]

But whenever a scan is involved, as they would be those done in commercial labs, some software intervention comes into the question.

One recent case I observed supports this argument. A local lab which still processes negative film ran its machines with a weak or dying bleach. The negative which came out of the machine retained a lot of silver, particularly in the cyan/red bottom layer. The prints, which originated from scans from the negative never showed the dulling effects of retained silver. The reds appeared bright and brilliant, instead of rusty dull as these would when printed optically. The scanner software corrected the flaw.

When these same negatives were scanned at home the resulting photos looked dull and had bluish highlights. Postprocess work corrected this and 'restored' the pictures somewhat. Full correction was only achieved when the negatives were bleached and then, fixed again, to clear the silver. The succeeding scans looked significantly improved.