E-4 processing

[2F/2F]

Hello,

I just acquired some E-4 film, unknowingly. Is there any way to process it as intended? Rocky Mountain lab does it as a color negative. Does this mean that they just run it through a C-41 process? If it is done in C-41, do you need to overexpose like with E-6 in C-41?

 

[Ian Grant]

You could make up your own E3 chemistry, E4 film needed E3 or E4 processing, most kits were actually E3. There's a lab in theUK who will process E4 and a variety of other obsolete processes such as the non standard Agfa colour chemistry. E3 kits were available for a long time after most E4 films disappeared as the IR film was still E4 based for many years more.

Most likely Rocky Mountain Lab would use C-22 chemistry.

Ian

 

[mts]

I recently did spring cleaning and found in the back of my freezer a 100' roll of 5241 (Ektachrome EF) E-4 process film (expiration 1973). I mixed a liter of chemistry using formulae from Pat Dignan's old photochemistry formulary. I shot tried a series of bracketed MacBeth chart images, all of which came out quite bad--useless, in fact.

The E-4 emulsions are not hardened as are modern films. They are quite soft and require a pre-hardener and processing at 85F. Even so, I got reticulation in this old soft emulsion. Just for fun I tried a strip at 75F and the result was better but still with poor color and a very high fog level. Doing these experiments makes one appreciate how really good E-6 films have become. One other item of note for E-4 is the great difficulty to bleach this film. I tried some E-6 bleach and found it to work but at triple the expected bleaching time. The E-4 bleach formula is a ferricyanide-based bleach as is used for black & white bleaching, but is is more concentrated owing to the difficulty to bleach this film. Once bleached however, it's a snap to fix.

I usually squeege excess stabilizer from my 35 mm E-6 films. Do that to an E-4 film and you will find parts of the soft emulsion peeling off onto your photo sponge, especially around the sprocket holes where the cut edges are exposed.

Overall I wasted a couple of days fooling with this film that is obsolete, and for good reason! As I said, I appreciate the quality of modern E-6 emulsions that are available! Working with E-4 reminded me how primitive color photography used to be, and also why Kodachrome has stood the test of time and continues to be the standard for quality.

 

[srs5694]

A little Googling turned up this Kodak PDF with E-4 formulas, so you can mix it yourself if you've got the ingredients. (I've only skimmed the ingredient list. Mostly it's common stuff if you mix your own, but there are some items I didn't immediately recognize.) That PDF lacks time and temperature information, but I'm sure you can find that information if you look hard enough.

FWIW, I (there was a url link here which no longer exists) about my own experience with some 20-year-old slide film, although mine was Soviet-made Svema. This is actually probably at least 10 years newer than the stuff you've got, since E-4 was phased out in 1976, except for Kodak's infrared slide film, according to Wikipedia. In any event, the results I got were better than I expected, but still not really usable as slides because of the somewhat light images and strong color casts. Scanning and correcting the color digitally produced something that could be useful in some situations, though.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

You could make up your own E3 chemistry, E4 film needed E3 or E4 processing, most kits were actually E3.

Ian

Ian, while you are an absolute wealth of information on most photo subjects, this information is wrong.

I started processing Ektachrome before E-4, with the E-2, E-3 kits. Ektachrome E-3 and E-2 could be processed the same, but E-4 was a departure, with higher processing temperatures and a pre-hardener bath, and chemical reversal. It will not process in E-3 chemistry. E-4 was a step on the way to E-6, an intermediate step and had a process and temperature higher than E-3 films could endure.

Kodak made E-4 kits in hobby-packs and 1 gallon kits, as well as larger sizes for commercial use.

 

[Photo Engineer]

E4 films used 4 equivalent couplers which did not fully form the dyes in the developer. They formed the final dyes using the oxidation power of the ferricyanide bleach to oxidize the leuco dye to the fully colored form. Therefore, use of an E6 bleach or blix will not give proper color. You must use a ferri bleach for E1 - E4 films.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, while you are an absolute wealth of information on most photo subjects, this information is wrong.

I started processing Ektachrome before E-4, .. . . . It will not process in E-3 chemistry. E-4 was a step on the way to E-6, an intermediate step and had a process and temperature higher than E-3 films could endure.

Kodak made E-4 kits in hobby-packs and 1 gallon kits, as well as larger sizes for commercial use.

I'm not wrong at all, I remember using the E3 process for E4 films and the film data-sheets used to say either process could be used. The final results were identical. E4 was simply improved chemistry for lab use.

What was often sold as E4 hobby packs was in fact E3 chemistry, although some Kodak kits were the true E4 chemistry others hybrid. The E4 process was toxic due to the reversing agent and so not recommended for home use.

I never used E3 films but it's quite possible these couldn't be used with E4 chemistry. Kodak only ceased production of E3 chemistry in the mid 70's a couple of years before the main phase out of E4 chemistry.

Where I was wrong is the IR film was an E3 film (not E4) and wasn't supposed to be processed in E4 chemistry.

Ian

 

[Photo Engineer]

E1, E2, E3 and E4 were kissing cousins in a small evolutionary process. E1 - E3 basically were run at 75 deg F and used a chrome alum hardener step in the process, whereas E4 used a prehardener and ran at 85 degrees F. The color developers and first developers were very much alike and the tail end was identical.

E6 removed benzyl alcohol from the CD and used a radically new first developer. The hardener was in the film.

E1 - E4 could be virtually interchanged with good results and some films would make it through E4 but no early E1 - E4 film is compatible with E6 and E6 is not compatible with any earlier process.

So, Ian is correct.

There is an E5 used for IR film and Aerial Ektachrome. It is basically a modified E4.

If you look at patent work, E6 was close to being used with CD6 instead of CD3.

PE

 

[2F/2F]

Thank you for the responses.

The film I have is Ektachrome Infrared Film 2236, expired 1987, and the included data sheet states that it is designed for the E-4 or EA-5 process.

Could anyone post the info for that lab in the UK, please? I will be in Edinburgh for three weeks this summer, and I can ship the film to the lab from there, or from London (if the lab is not in London).

I am also interested in hearing about possible cross processes or Frankenstein processes using commonly available chemistry. For instance, what would C-41 do to this film at 85F? What would E-6 at 85F do to this film? Obviously neither of these will work as intended, but what is likely to happen in these processes?

I only have three rolls, so I want to find out as much as I can without using a roll for tests alone.

 

[Ian Grant]

WE ARE ABLE TO HANDLE PRACTICALLY ANY FILM EVER MADE, AND ANY NEGATIVE OR SLIDE FORMA

Could anyone post the info for that lab in the UK, please? I will be in Edinburgh for three weeks this summer, and I can ship the film to the lab from there.

I didn't think Google would find it so quickly

This is the company I was referring to earlier in the thread.

Ian

 

[2F/2F]

I didn't think Google would find it so quickly

This is the company I was referring to earlier in the thread.

Ian

That is the place I found as well in my initial search. I had counted them out, since they are a long way from home. Now, after learning more, I feel that if they can process this film as intended, I may as well send it to them.

I will drop them an e-mail. If it turns out they do the stuff in C-22, I may as well just send it to Colorado, U.S.A. instead.

 

[Ian Grant]

The price list states they process colour reversal (as intended) but at £20 a roll ($30) it isn't cheap, the IR films are listed.

Any lab who can process C-22 properly should have the ability to make up the chemistry to process E3/4 as well as the Agfa type reversal process variants

Ian

 

[2F/2F]

Thanks, Mr. Grant.

It would also be interesting to see what people got when E-4 films were cross processed, and in what chemicals they did the cross process. C-22 seems likely, but I wonder if it worked, and held up over time.

It seems that b/w should be a somewhat "safe" option as well, and if I want to shoot some more color IR, I can track down one of the E-6 versions instead.

I am kicking myself for not buying this film when it was available over the counter at my local stores. I always saw it there, but never wanted to cough up double the price of a standard film.

 

[Photo Engineer]

HS Ektachrome was often cross processed in C-22 using an ISO of up to 400. The famous cover of Life magazine of Alan Sheppard leaving his Mercury capsule was 4x5 HS Ektacrhome that was cross processed at the Cape. Many rolls of HS Ektachrome were burned that day.

PE

 

[Anscojohn]

E4 films used 4 equivalent couplers which did not fully form the dyes in the developer. They formed the final dyes using the oxidation power of the ferricyanide bleach to oxidize the leuco dye to the fully colored form. Therefore, use of an E6 bleach or blix will not give proper color. You must use a ferri bleach for E1 - E4 films.

PE

******

BTW, P.E. what happened to E-5?????

 

[Photo Engineer]

E5 has been in use for years as the process for Aerial Ektachrome.

PE

 

[Terrence Brennan]

HS Ektachrome

HS Ektachrome was often cross processed in C-22 using an ISO of up to 400. The famous cover of Life magazine of Alan Sheppard leaving his Mercury capsule was 4x5 HS Ektacrhome that was cross processed at the Cape. Many rolls of HS Ektachrome were burned that day.

PE

A question of historical interest, albeit slightly off topic.

I have been photographing since 1968, and the first roll of transparency film I ever loaded into my Praktica Nova camera was High Speed Ektachrome, Daylight. I was under the impression that this particular emulsion, and its tungsten-balanced cousin, were available only in 35mm and 120 formats. It would appear from your post that it was also available in sheets, as well. Could you shed some light on this subject (pun intended)?

In the late 1970s, when the new generation of E-6 films became available, how we wished for the daylight-balanced 200 and the tungsten-balanced 160 films to be available in 4x5 and 8x10 sheets!

 

[Photo Engineer]

Terrence;

I may have erred in that. I was thinking it over after I posted it. So, consider it either a possible error (in format size) or an error in which Ektachrome film was used. Several could cross process quite well. At this remove, and since I was not directly involved, I may have gone astray.

This was a Nat. Geog. and NASA endeavor.

PE

 

[John Shriver]

NASA special-ordered lots of unusual films from Kodak for the space race. A lot of those Apollo Hasselblads with long-roll backs had High-Speed Ektachrome in them, on a extra-thin Estar base to get longer rolls. So if they wanted some 4x5 High-Speed Ektachrome, it was just a matter of pulling out the checkbook.

 

[Photo Engineer]

John, yes, but they were almost all coated on thin Estar to conserve weight.

The 4x5 was not an option due to weight in space. It used 7mil Estar.

PE

 

[scott probst]

A little Googling turned up this Kodak PDF with E-4 formulas, so you can mix it yourself if you've got the ingredients. (I've only skimmed the ingredient list. Mostly it's common stuff if you mix your own, but there are some items I didn't immediately recognize.) That PDF lacks time and temperature information, but I'm sure you can find that information if you look hard enough.

This link appears to be gone - I know it was a long time ago. Does anyone have this PDF by any chance?

Scott

 

[Ian Grant]

Scott, you need the E3 formulae, this was what Kodak themselves sold and published for home processing E4 films, it's fully compatible with E4 films. I do have it in a few books but not scanned.

Welcome BTW.

ian

 

[scott probst]

Scott, you need the E3 formulae, this was what Kodak themselves sold and published for home processing E4 films, it's fully compatible with E4 films. I do have it in a few books but not scanned.

Welcome BTW.

ian

Thanks for answering!

So....obviously I'm interested in the formula...any cxhance you'll scan or photograph it (with your phone)?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Here it is as the original PDF. It was found as a PDF on the "wayback" archive machine. Easy as pie.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

The issues with the E4 formulae are the extreme toxicity of some of the chemicals used, because of this E4 kits were not sold for home use, and Kodak continued selling E3 kits, The 3rd party E4 kits were in fact basically E3.

Ian