Radost
Allowing Ads
Please try at 80F/27C +-1 C like Kodak recommends. I really think that is the magic. They would not put extreme temp limitation for no reason.
I use the pre-bath at about 30 degrees Celsius, but I don't temperature control it - it always works. The chemistry itself does not pollute - I return it relatively free of impurities. During the water flush, I strongly agitate the tank, the first water comes out completely black, the next two - with decreasing. After the third water bath, there are only pink dyes, no Remjet particles.
The one time I skipped the pre-bath, the developer had turned almost black, heavily saturated with Remjet particles. Worse, for some reason the Remjet stuck to the tank's spirals - extremely unpleasant. If I use a preliminary bath, the contamination of the spirals is many times less and they are easy to clean. I have no explanation why.
I use the pre-bath at about 30 degrees Celsius,
My "about 30 degrees" is pretty close to the recommended 27+/-1. I've tried really different temperature ranges, including the recommended ones. There is no difference in the removal quality of the Remjet. But I have doubts that very high temperature can damage the dyes. I will find out with tests...
How many dirty water changes do you have? I only have one and the second one is 100% carbon free.
After the third change, there are no more particles... but quite a bit of pink dye comes off.
After the third change, there are no more particles... but quite a bit of pink dye comes off.
Here is what comes after.
Can You explain why 3:45 on a jobo compared to kodak recommended 3:00 cinema machine process?
I just did 3:45 and I think my negatives look a lot better.
I think the pink die is protective gel coat layer.
Thanks for the info.Yeah, that's what it looked like in my case when using a remjet removal prebath as well.
When not using the bath, the developer looks dirty as it catches much of the remjet, and stop, bleach, fix and wash water are all clean. Makes sense since everything from the stop bath is acidic or at least not alkaline, and this keeps the remaining remjet in place. It only tends to wash off in alkaline environments.
The gamma of ECN2 film developed in ECN2 developer is lower than for C41 film in C41 developer. Extending development time increases gamma. Look at the sensitometry plot in the datasheet:
View attachment 363721
The black plot is Vision3 250D. The cyan plot overlayed on top of it is Kodak Gold 200. Note how much steeper the Gold plot is (but otherwise very similar). Extending development time steepens the curve so it looks more like C41.
No, it's sensitizing dyes mostly and maybe some acutance dyes. The protective top coat gelatin layer does not wash off. It protects the very thin image layers underneath.
I have not scanned yet but I feel for scanning the less contrasty image will give more room for adjustment.
I'd expect the opposite. Scanners are designed to work with transparency/slide film as well, which has far more dynamic range (on the film, not capture dynamic range!) than negative film. This means that if you scan negative film, you're only using a tiny bit of the dynamic range the sensor and ADC system is capable of. Hence, the s/n ratio will be higher for this smaller signal, so the more you boost the contrast in the negative, the cleaner a digital signal you'll have to work with.
However, in my experience the difference is negligible. This is because scanners are also designed to work well enough with color film, so the penalty of dropping contrast in the source image a little further isn't too obvious.
I think you're confusing scanning with camera capture. They're totally different ballgames. One of the main challenges with camera capture is the inherent nature of reality, which involves massive scene brightness ranges. "Reduced contrast" in this case is the ability of a system to not have any of its channels blow out under those conditions (i.e. SBR doesn't exceed sensor channel latitude). A scanner is a different proposition with a known & limited maximum brightness range (negative/slide + light source) to which the latitude of the sensor can be tuned.
Apples & oranges.
I have access to a cinema film scanner.
Just need to find a cheap film splicer so I can splice bunch of films together.
I don't know your arrangement regarding the cine scanner but assuming that it is in production use I would expect that they also have splicers available.
I don't recall exactly how the tape splicers work but they have to hold the sprockets of both films in alignment when cutting the film ends square. Then butt the film ends together for taping (automatic for production work). If the film is gonna have auto-advance controlled by sprockets the tape is not allowed to interfere so probably needs to also be perforated. (In the outfit where I worked film was spliced to go through cine PROCESSORS, not scanners so no need for the perfs to continue through a splice.)
FWIW I would anticipate issues with the scanner jumping across rolls. Presumably it's gonna reference individual frames by "counting" sprockets; if your next roll doesn't match up exactly it's a problem. How does that get handled? I dunno. I would expect that a modern scanner ought to be able to detect a problem and figure it out, but maybe not? I'd be asking the people who oversee the scanner. Might be worth a couple of limited trials to verify what works.
FWIW I used the term "production work" to mean something like significant commercial work being done, as opposed to experimental or hobbyist things. In other words the money making part of the business.It’s not a production
Can You explain why 3:45 on a jobo compared to kodak recommended 3:00 cinema machine process?
I just did 3:45 and I think my negatives look a lot better.
I approach film differently than most. I want the colors to be as close to reality as possible.
I for one am happy as well.I'm happy you're happy!!
I for one am happy as well.
And by the way, I think you greatly underestimate the percentage of people who want realistic colour!!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?