Emulsion side on color film

[Dusty Negative]

So, dumb noob question of the day:

On B&W film, the emulsion side is easy to identify. I've started developing color film, and I'm a bit perplexed that I cannot easily determine which side is the emulsion side. What gives?

 

[Adrian Bacon]

So, dumb noob question of the day:

On B&W film, the emulsion side is easy to identify. I've started developing color film, and I'm a bit perplexed that I cannot easily determine which side is the emulsion side. What gives?

this is pretty straightforward. If you can read the emulsion code, you’re looking at the non-emulsion side. If I the emulsion code is backwards, you’re looking at the emulsion side.

 

[Dusty Negative]

this is pretty straightforward. If you can read the emulsion code, you’re looking at the non-emulsion side. If I the emulsion code is backwards, you’re looking at the emulsion side.

Fair enough. But is there a practical difference between the two sides, say, for scanning? They look pretty identical to my untrained eye.

 

[cmacd123]

should look slightly different by REFECTION when looking at an angle. it is very subtle. OR just use the markings and treat it the same as B&W, and accept that the the emusion side is where you expect it to be.

 

[Dusty Negative]

should look slightly different by REFECTION when looking at an angle. it is very subtle. OR just use the markings and treat it the same as B&W, and accept that the the emusion side is where you expect it to be.

Interesting. Will do. Clearly different technology at work here. I’ll need to read up on this. Presumably this phenomenon is because the silver has been replaced (mostly? Completely) with dye?

 

[Dusty Negative]

Thanks all for the answers.

 

[cmacd123]

the silver has been replaced (mostly? Completely) with dye?

yes, Ideally all the silver has been removed.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Fair enough. But is there a practical difference between the two sides, say, for scanning? They look pretty identical to my untrained eye.

If you're flatbed scanning and putting the negative directly against the platen glass, it does make some difference in terms of newton rings (c-41 is more newton ring prone than bw), if you're using a negative carrier, it *can* make a difference if the emulsion is facing the scanner sensor, however, in practice, most flatbeds don't resolve enough detail to be able to see that difference.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Epson suggest the emulsion side is up away from the platen glass. So the code descriptor should be backwards facing up.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Fascinating. Thank you for that info.

 

[cmacd123]

Fair enough. But is there a practical difference between the two sides, say, for scanning? They look pretty identical to my untrained eye.

Biggest difference is that the negative will have the image in the correct orientation when the looking at a negative with the emulsion away from you. using a scanner, the scanner will have a preferred orientation and the image will be flipped as needed. You should have the emulsion side in the same orientation with colour Film as you would with B&W film.

 

[koraks]

I never noticed much difference in scanning between the different orientations of the film. For a typical ccd strip scanner the depth of field is fairly large and in any case larger than the thickness of film. I was unable to consistently spot the difference at the max resolution of my aging epson 4990.

The emulsion of a c41 generally is nore shiny due to the different nature of the emulsion layers itself, and most likely the topcoat in particular. It is indeed generally more shiny than with b&w. In 120 roll film an additional complicating factor is that the non-image side usually also has a gelatin layer to counter film curl, making both sides hard to tell apart based on surface characteristics. Of course as pointed out the edge markings can be used to easily tell which side is which.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Having a flat negative that isn't curled that's laying properly in the holder is more important than which side you scan. Also, what are the procedures your follow to scan?

 

[Dusty Negative]

Having a flat negative that isn't curled that's laying properly in the holder is more important than which side you scan. Also, what are the procedures your follow to scan?

I use my camera, with the neg lying on a light table. Very basic. What’s funny to me is that I have been ‘scanning’ BW with the emulsion side down — presumably the wrong side. I need to go back and do a side-side comparison, but I presume I’ll see a difference, at least with BW. Goodness.

 

[Dusty Negative]

I never noticed much difference in scanning between the different orientations of the film. For a typical ccd strip scanner the depth of field is fairly large and in any case larger than the thickness of film. I was unable to consistently spot the difference at the max resolution of my aging epson 4990.

The emulsion of a c41 generally is nore shiny due to the different nature of the emulsion layers itself, and most likely the topcoat in particular. It is indeed generally more shiny than with b&w. In 120 roll film an additional complicating factor is that the non-image side usually also has a gelatin layer to counter film curl, making both sides hard to tell apart based on surface characteristics. Of course as pointed out the edge markings can be used to easily tell which side is which.

Thanks. Coming from digital, I remain amazed at this technology.

 

[Agulliver]

My Epson flatbed certainly comes with instructions to load the film emulsion side up in the carrier. However the software also includes the ability to flip the image if you load it emulsion down. On occasions I've got it "wrong" and used the flip function....and honestly I notice no difference even at high resolutions.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I use my camera, with the neg lying on a light table. Very basic. What’s funny to me is that I have been ‘scanning’ BW with the emulsion side down — presumably the wrong side. I need to go back and do a side-side comparison, but I presume I’ll see a difference, at least with BW. Goodness.

Two years ago at 73 I learned a new way to tie my shoes. I've been doing it wrong all my life.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Two years ago at 73 I learned a new way to tie my shoes. I've been doing it wrong all my life.

But how did you manage to walk all those years???

 

[koraks]

Two years ago at 73 I learned a new way to tie my shoes. I've been doing it wrong all my life.

You got that knot now where both loops end up neatly perpendicular to the shoe and in line with each other?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You got that knot now where both loops end up neatly perpendicular to the shoe and in line with each other?

Yes. Who knew? Instead of the second loop looped around one way, you loop it around the other way. It took about a month to discard the old habit. As an old dog, I'm proud to say I learned a new trick.

 

[koraks]

I know *exactly* how you feel

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Funny thing is when I was a kid, my friend told me I'm tying my shoes wrong. I laughed at him as it seem my shoes were in fact tied. So, I ignored his advice for 65 years. He was right! How embarrassing!

 

[Dusty Negative]

My Epson flatbed certainly comes with instructions to load the film emulsion side up in the carrier. However the software also includes the ability to flip the image if you load it emulsion down. On occasions I've got it "wrong" and used the flip function....and honestly I notice no difference even at high resolutions.

OK, so my eyes are not deceiving me. Very good to know. Cheers!

 

[mohmad khatab]

Two years ago at 73 I learned a new way to tie my shoes. I've been doing it wrong all my life.

These are very deep words.
Great and useful words.
God bless you.