Films are just too good nowadays.

2F/2F · May 24, 2009

Hello,

I am having some serious trouble getting lots of grain when cross processing. The best I can get IS grainy, but not as much as I am looking for. I am taking Provia 400X and overexposing it up to four stops in 35mm format (rate at 100, and then often give it even more exposure manually). I am still not getting enough grain in 16x20 RA prints. What I want is basically a color version of the grain I can get from battered HP5 or Delta 1000. The color of Provia abused this way is amazing! The contrast is exactly what I am looking for. Sensia 400 does not respond the same way color wise. It is more saturated, and it does not have the same beautiful and subtle effect on color as Provia, and it is not all that much grainier.

My inclination is to go the other way with a fast press film like Superia 800 and 1600. The problem is that I really need to be able to make RA prints for what I want to do. This means scanning and a film recorder, I guess...a lot more processing than I would like to do, added expense, and the turnaround time would nix it for lots of things, like school projects.

Is there a way to cross C-41 to E-6 without reversing the film?? That might be perfect...though I have no idea if I will get the same great muted pastels and browns that I get from Provia 400X.

Any chemical processes that could jack up the grain in a C-41 process without significantly changing color or contrast?

A grain screen made from a Delta 1000 neg?? I've never tried it. Does anyone have an example of such a technique that they could show me? This may be just the ticket if I like the way it looks.

Thank you in advance.

P.S. Provia 400X is a truly awesome film, as were its predecessors that I used.

Ratboy · May 25, 2009

I think they just discontinued Provia 400x 120. I would stock up on 35mm.

perkeleellinen · May 25, 2009

Ratboy said:
I think they just discontinued Provia 400x 120. I would stock up on 35mm.

Where did you hear this?

Ratboy · May 25, 2009

I'm looking for the link, I had JUST seen it right before I replied to your thread...

Ratboy · May 25, 2009

Found the link. Wikipedia has been known to be wrong though. I hope the editor is wrong. It says both 35 and 120 films are discontinued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_discontinued_photographic_films#Provia_400F

Tim Gray · May 25, 2009

That link says 400F is discontinued. I think that happened when 400X came out...

David A. Goldfarb · May 25, 2009

Yes, 400F was discontinued when 400X was introduced. Please be careful about such statements.

Ratboy · May 25, 2009

That's a relief. I was going to go out and drop a few hundred on film tomorrow.

2F/2F · May 26, 2009

Can't this nonsense about discontinuation be deleted? Not only is the information dead wrong, but the link he pasted says "400F" right in it! Even a baboon would have noticed the error. Finally, talking about 400X being gone in 120 has nothing at all to do with the OP.

AgX · May 26, 2009

2F/2F

This is `your´ thread and you are right on that off topic thing. But can't you stop being rude?
I know it is a character of many of your posts. But I think it is not apt for Apug.

2F/2F · May 26, 2009

Have you ever considered that rudeness is something that one might apply or not apply depending on the situation; that it is calculated communication, and not an honest and literal emotional reaction? It is certainly a helpful communication technique, especially when we need to try to be very clear in meaning (often "exaggeratory") here on the Internet. I am rude sometimes because it is useful - as well as deserved...as is the opposite in just as many, if not more, cases. Read every one of my posts, do an analysis, study the results, and then report on my rudeness, please. Like with all things, it is easy to see the bad while ignoring the good. In this case, I think a that some rudeness is the very least of what is deserved. It would be one thing if the link and the Wikipedia article had not said "400F". The Wikipedia article also says "Replaced by Provia 400X". If you are going to post something to make a point, at least read it first. Forgive me for being sensitive about Internet film discontinuation rumors and other Internet CRAP.

Additionally, I did not say what I said because I view this as "my" post. I said it because Internet crap should be either eliminated or clearly (meaning harshly, with no pussyfooting) labeled as such IMO.

This [currently manufactured - nobody panic!] film is holding up to whatever horrible things I do to it. Let us talk about options that might help folks get something a bit more gnarly........

Ratboy · May 26, 2009

2F/2F said:
Can't this nonsense about discontinuation be deleted? Not only is the information dead wrong, but the link he pasted says "400F" right in it! Even a baboon would have noticed the error. Finally, talking about 400X being gone in 120 has nothing at all to do with the OP.

I take exception to the baboon reference. I've recently picked up this hobby, and I'm still learning. Rudeness useful on a message board? I hope you're joking.

Back to the OP, I am also interested in knowing the answer to your cross processing question.

fiducio · May 27, 2009

Unmarked fujichromes underexposed 1 stop, processed normally. Brilliant blues yellows, and greens. Exceptionally grainy. I have about ten in the fridge. Doesn't say astia or provia or anything like that. Just fujichrome. And RD 135. Mine expired in 1995, so just look for really old stuff.

apconan · May 27, 2009

Ratboy said:
I take exception to the baboon reference. I've recently picked up this hobby, and I'm still learning. Rudeness useful on a message board? I hope you're joking.

Back to the OP, I am also interested in knowing the answer to your cross processing question.

I agree with 2F. Rudeness is needed sometimes. And saying that you "recently picked up this hobby" has absolutely nothing to do with the mistake you made, unless by "hobby" you mean reading clearly...

apkujeong · May 27, 2009

I started to read this thread thinking I might learn something, or find something interesting. I now feel I've wasted my time.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 27, 2009

2F/2F said:
Have you ever considered that rudeness is something that one might apply or not apply depending on the situation; that it is calculated communication, and not an honest and literal emotional reaction? ... ... Forgive me for being sensitive about Internet film discontinuation rumors and other Internet CRAP.

The root of this problem is all of the unsubstantiated claims that are made on the internet. It is a HUGE problem, because all of this information is being stored, and it's searchable. And a large portion (including too many of the teenagers at my son's school) of coming generations believe anything they read on the internet.
Mark these words: There is a VERY REAL PROBLEM with the QUALITY of the DATA stored on the internet. As said, eloquently, by 2F/2F above, there's a lot of CRAP information out there. How do you filter through it? What is true, what is not? Check your damned references.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 27, 2009

2F/2F - I'd be mighty interested to see some of your prints. Is there a chance you can attach them to posts made here? I'd like very much to see how they look.
The whole idea of cross processing E6 film is intriguing.

Have you tried any of the Kodak films for grain? I was thinking about the E200 emulsion, which pushes well. Don't know how it handles over-exposure and what that does to the grain, but it's hardly fine grained.

- Thomas

keithwms · May 27, 2009

This 'grain screen' idea is interesting. So you would take a shot of a featureless middle grey, develop it for grain, and then superimpose it on your too-smooth slide? Is that the idea? I guess the main issue is that the b&w film won't necessarily have neutral density across the colour spectrum. But I suppose a bit of filtering can fix that if it should prove to be an issue.

Incidentally, the *maskless* c41 film from Rollei ('digibase CN') is quite grainy and I guess it could be x-processed in E6, if you are open to going the other way. Or you could develop it straight in c41 and let it be. It is 200 speed but I am finding that I need to shoot it a half stop slower or so.

P.S. 400x rules.

fiducio · May 27, 2009

That's the stuff I was talking about. It is relentlessly grainy. I made some prints from it, but the prints are too large to scan in.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 27, 2009

Makes me think of the 1000 ASA Agfa chrome that was out there a while back. I used to see those pop up on Flea-bay all the time. Don't know if there's more. Just a thought.

fiducio said:
That's the stuff I was talking about. It is relentlessly grainy. I made some prints from it, but the prints are too large to scan in.

Photo Engineer · May 27, 2009

Try underexposure and overdevelopment of the 400 speed film. Go for 800 or 1600 exposure and 3:45 or 4' development in C-41 or even more.

PE

apconan · May 27, 2009

apkujeong said:
I started to read this thread thinking I might learn something, or find something interesting. I now feel I've wasted my time.

If your time is so precious to you, then why did you waste even more of it complaining about how your time was wasted? A bit contradictory isn't it...

removed account4 · May 27, 2009

2F

if you can come across fuji800
it might give you what you are looking for.

john

Jim Noel · May 27, 2009

"I am having some serious trouble getting lots of grain when cross processing. The best I can get IS grainy, but not as much as I am looking for. I am taking Provia 400X and overexposing it up to four stops in 35mm format (rate at 100, and then often give it even more exposure manually)."
not being a color worker I'm not sure how this will affect your results, but you are only over-exposing by two stops not four. To over expose by four stops, you would have to rate the film at 25.

Q.G. · May 27, 2009

Jim Noel said:
[...] you are only over-exposing by two stops not four. To over expose by four stops, you would have to rate the film at 25.

I'm guessing that that would be covered by the "then often give it even more exposure manually".

Films are just too good nowadays.

2F/2F

Ratboy

perkeleellinen

Ratboy

Ratboy

Tim Gray

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Ratboy

2F/2F

AgX

2F/2F

Ratboy

fiducio

apconan

apkujeong

Thomas Bertilsson

Thomas Bertilsson

keithwms

fiducio

Attachments

Thomas Bertilsson

Photo Engineer

apconan

removed account4

Jim Noel

Q.G.

Films are just too good nowadays.

Moderator

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency