Cinestill's response
Right!! They completely glossed over obvious visual differences and offered no actual data to go off except a test roll lol. I wish they would be more transparent with their testing or at least admit they're too lazy to actual dedicate the time to properly test rather than making bold claims and focusing more on labs to distract us. Maybe I'll reach out and see what I can squeeze out of em' for more clarity rather than "trust me bro".Which, in all honesty, is a little iffy. They don't actually perform measurements of retained silver. There are visible differences especially in gamma but also saturation and color balance between their Cs 'daylight' chemistry and 6-bath lab processing, which may or may not be indicative of retained silver (but can also be caused by FD and CD differences).
Which, in all honesty, is a little iffy. They don't actually perform measurements of retained silver. There are visible differences especially in gamma but also saturation and color balance between their Cs 'daylight' chemistry and 6-bath lab processing, which may or may not be indicative of retained silver (but can also be caused by FD and CD differences).
Furthermore, what they say about replenishment being the rationale for 6-bath use in labs is contentious. If that were the case, how do they explain the widespread use of 2-bath processing at RA4 labs? They use blix alright, and the blix is replenished and reconditioned in larger labs infinitely, including silver recovery. There's no reason this couldn't work with an E6 blix. There must have been other reasons why the industry never transitioned to a simpler and shorter process flow.
this argument of 2 bath C41 and 3 bath E6 not being used in labs because of the process not being suitable for replenishing is from marketing materials published by Tetenal in 1980´s
I doubt Tetenal ever had the clout to stop labs run by e.g. FujiFilm from adopting a replenished blix-based workflow. In fact, I'm quite sure they didn't. See the RA4 example, and note that Fuji has always had a processing chemistry branch (two, in fact). Tetenal may have chimed in somewhere, but no major lab would have ever based their workflow decisions on the performance of amateur-oriented chemistry from a 3rd party supplier.
It looks better in person, but it is definitely overexposed (I remember it being a very bright day!). The magenta you see in the top right shadow is just a magenta bush, but the highlights are definitely blown out and possibly a color shift, the highlights on the tree look color accurate (at least in person), heres a raw from the camera thats a bit more accurate to what I see (still a bit off, there isnt as much as a cyan color cast on the whole image it looks more yellow in person, idk why my camera or darktable is processing it like that). But it does seem a bit off regardless and that just might be the claimed "wanted effect" from cinestill D9 at 1 to 2 dil which claims to give it an extended highlight latitude, which also may affect provia differently especially direct sunlight vs tungsten/mixed lighting. The third picture of the keycaps, seems to be color accurate, but is diffused sunlight through a window rather than direct. This is 4x5 and I definitely will be doing some identical exposure tests! I'll most likely send one to The Darkroom to see what they come out with and will also be comparing these to a bellini kit down the road.I never shot Provia, but that outdoor scene does not look like it was shot on slide film. The contrast and saturation are too low and there seems to be some color cast (cyan in highlights and magenta in shadows?). What format are you shooting? Assuming it is sheet film can you make two identical exposures and have one slide developed by a good lab to use as a reference?
Unrelated to the subject of the thread but how did you manage to have the tree on the right in focus and the one on the left out of focus? Swing?
Glad you pointed that out! the edge is more orange in person and noticed darktable was trying to auto adjust temp, so I fixed it to be 5600k(sunray iii box). I changed the portraits and you can see what it actually looks like more accurately(still has that magenta/red), the fuji logo is a darker orange going towards red rather than yellow, so I wonder what the D9 is doing (what extended highlights actually means). This is the 1 to 2 dilution so I'm curious to see what 1 to 1 gets me.There's something very odd (not in a good way) with the color balance. Your portraits are entirely magenta/red, much more magenta than you'd expect with 3200K light on a daylight film. The outdoor scene looks very very flat and with a very strong cyan cast. The product shot looks desaturated. I'd say there are some major processing problems going on here.
I'd suggest getting some proper E6 chemistry; ADOX just launched their E6 kit. Might be worth a try.
Did Fuji really change the edge printing from yellow to red?
View attachment 379823
First time I'm seeing this but I haven't shot any E6 in a looong time.
the fuji logo is a darker orange going towards red rather than yellow
what extended highlights actually means
This is the 1 to 2 dilution so I'm curious to see what 1 to 1 gets me.
Judging by examples in this thread I agree with @koraks .I don't think this Cinestill approach to E6 is very successful.
That looks much better. So you used custom curves to tweak the gamma of each channel. I checked the characteristic curves of Provia 100F and the three channels are nearly identical up to the density of 2.5D. To me this looks like a problem with processing. From what I read the first developer is the most critical part of the process so I would start troubleshooting there.It's hard to tell where the crossover is coming from
wow ya that looks exactly to what I see in person! Thanks for fixing it, I'll have to remember setting dark/light points when needed.I did not play with the curves - I just defined a dark and light point, there is no minute. A quick way to see the linearity of color channels...
Yeah it seems the 1+1 for D9 is the much better choice for the ratio. For the Velvia it definitely had more going on shooting wise (obviously that light leak), those were the first couple shots of the session so the sun was close to be at its highest vs. the e100 equivalent which actually were the last shots I took so the sun was starting to go down, and the lens directed at the window ofc.They look nice!
With regard to the last few images: it's a little odd to see an Ektachrome slide that's more saturated than a Velvia slide of the same scene. But in the case of the Velvia shot, there seems to be a large amount of lens flare, which degrades contrast (and saturation), so it does make sense - it just made me look twice!
Anyway, not bad at all, especially the Ektachrome. On the Velvia slides there's a lot happening and I can't tell whether it's related to film/processing or shooting conditions.
the processing looks nice for the indoor portraits
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?