Has anyone tried this yet? BelliniFoto Monopart C41 Kit

[MattKing]

self professed experts on the internet

Photo Engineer (Ron Mowrey) isn't a "self professed" expert.
He is a chemical engineer with a high level of expertise in the real world (outside the internet) and decades of experience with designing and refining C41 films and C41 processes.
And while he is retired from Kodak, he maintains regular contact with people within Kodak who still do that type of work.
Most likely, when used in a washless procedure, the Bellini chemicals give results similar to the results from other washless products - including the ones offered by Kodak. Those products and processes are what the realities of the minilab market requires.
That doesn't mean those results are optimum.
I note that the Bellini website has separate product categories for Professional labs, minilabs and amateur products. If you compare the products listed thereon, you will note that the "minilab" products list refers to a "stabilizer and chemical wash" whereas the "professional" products list refers to a different product - a "stabilizer".

 

[Photo Engineer]

Thanks Matt.

Tony, I am not "self professed" as Matt has noted. I am current with the work as far as it has gone. Both Kodak and Fuji ceased essential research in about 2005 - 2007 and all the rest has been refinement on what already existed.

Kodak and Bellini both have done what is required for washed and unwashed processes. I have had my say, and you have made your choice. Now, you have to live with your choice.

PE

 

[Berri]

After fixing, you need to wash.That is what Bellini technicians told me. Here is the email. (in italian)
Buonasera,

nel trattamento C41 non sono previsti lavaggi tra i vari bagni,

se non al termine del trattamento per lavare il fissaggio dalla pellicola.

In allegato la scheda di trattamento.

L'unico prodotto che si deteriora con il tempo per l'ossidazione è lo sviluppo, comunque il concentrato residuo, opportunamente richiuso ed eliminata l'aria dalla bottiglia ha durata di alcuni mesi.

Le soluzioni di lavoro diluite hanno lunghissima durata per quanto riguarda la sbianca ed il fissaggio. Lo sviluppo diluito va posto in un contenitore scuro, opportunamente chiuso e in assenza di aria, altrimenti si

deteriora in pochi giorni.

Lo sviluppo una volta deteriorato compromette il risultato, durante un eventuale secondo utilizzo, chiaramente in maniera irreversibile.

Mentre se ho problemi con la sbianca o con il fissaggio posso ripetere i bagni

una seconda volta con prodotto fresco, riparando un eventuale malfunzionamento degli stessi per errata conservazione.

E' quindi molto importante cercare di utilizzare sempre sviluppo fresco!

Avere i bagni di sbianca e fissaggio divisi è essenziale per un buon risultato nello sviluppo pellicola, alcune case hanno deciso di unirli per risparmiare tempo,

le pellicole però non sono tutte uguali e alcune possono presentare diversi problemi con la sbianca-fissaggio, avere i due bagni separati è la scelta corretta e qualitativamente migliore.

Il nostro prodotto permette di terminare il trattamento in 5'30" totali, abbiamo usato il trattamento RA (Rapid Access Kodak) 3'15" di sviluppo (da notare che il nostro sviluppo è monoparte, facilissimo da usare e

diluire rispetto al 3 parti classico)

la sbianca ha una durata di 45"

il fissaggio di 1'30"

segue il lavaggio di durata minima consigliata ma assolutamente variabile e prolungabile a piacere.

Spero di essere stato chiaro ed esaustivo.

Cordiali saluti

 

[Photo Engineer]

So there!

 

[MattKing]

The only Italian I can speak relates to my Fiat.
Could I impose upon you for a translation of the applicable section - Google Translate gives a response that is at best confusing.

 

[MattKing]

And to TonyB65:
This might seem like we are being unfair.
99% of the time what you are suggesting is exactly right - the best thing to do is to follow the manufacturer's recommendations.
I can't begin to count how many times I've seen or heard of problems that people encountered because they didn't do just that.
Sometimes though the factors that went into preparing those instructions need to be understood. Things like products which are designed to be simpler to use, because there is a perception that if people are required to do things in an optimum way, they won't use that sort of product at all. The film developing kits that give instructions for use at lower, non-standard temperatures are an example of that.
I also think that there may be a bit of a language translation problem with the Bellini instructions.

 

[TonyB65]

So there!

From here https://ntphotoworks.com/shop/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/KIT-C-41-english_NT.pdf

"The procedure shows no washes, is that correct? A. Yes! This kit requires no water washes at all, in fact a water wash may have a deterimental affect."

 

[trendland]

It's not unwashed, the wash and stab are combined, maybe you should take it up with Bellini whose business is Photographic chemicals for video and stills production, I'm pretty sure they'll have professional chemists working for them.

TonyB65 - no one here stated you did it not right. No one stated Bellini is a unproffessional company without experienced chemists.
I personaly stated : marketing issues might be responcible for the "no washing" phrase in Bellinis instruction.
As we both noticed (I've read the instruction serveral times after find the link ....and wonder) the recomanded Bellini method of "no washing step required" is in reality a washing step.
So you are right - there is a washing with
stabilizer bath?
But if you might use this method ( and just this is the point someone stated here) it might be - there is no must - but it might be long live issues may be effected.
Nobody can say today "how much" that will happen. Or if it will happen.
But it might be.
Therefore a real good final wash- you might use the Bellini stabilizer bath for this - is not the worst idea of the year - isn't it ?
The issue here is the better need of more than 4 Liters for FINAL WASH.
In form of real water or in form of "Bellini Water" (Stabilizer bath)

Hope the case is real clear now.

with regards

 

[TonyB65]

TonyB65 - no one here stated you did it not right. No one stated Bellini is a unproffessional company without experienced chemists.
I personaly stated : marketing issues might be responcible for the "no washing" phrase in Bellinis instruction.
As we both noticed (I've read the instruction serveral times after find the link ....and wonder) the recomanded Bellini method of "no washing step required" is in reality a washing step.
So you are right - there is a washing with
stabilizer bath?
But if you might use this method ( and just this is the point someone stated here) it might be - there is no must - but it might be long live issues may be effected.
Nobody can say today "how much" that will happen. Or if it will happen.
But it might be.
Therefore a real good final wash- you might use the Bellini stabilizer bath for this - is not the worst idea of the year - isn't it ?
The issue here is the better need of more than 4 Liters for FINAL WASH.
In form of real water or in form of "Bellini Water" (Stabilizer bath)

Hope the case is real clear now.

with regards

I've never said otherwise, so I'm not sure where you're coming from? I've simply said a water wash is not advised after the stab wash, which is the final wash, so what's your point?

 

[trendland]

I've nothing to answer more - the case is close now.

with confusions

 

[trendland]

So there!

+ 1

 

[MattKing]

I've simply said a water wash is not advised after the stab wash, which is the final wash, so what's your point?

With this we are sort of in agreement.
What we are advocating is a full water wash before the use of the stabilizer.

 

[pentaxuser]

A translation of the e-mail received from Bellini by Berri would be helpful. Currently it would seem that the technicians state that washing is necessary based on Berri's conclusions drawn from the reply in Italian but others (I wonder who they are but whomsoever they are they clearly outrank the technicians in deciding what the correct instructions are), state that not only is washing unnecessary but detrimental.

So, is it sloppiness at best by Bellini when two elements of the company disagree on the process or cavalier marketing speak by those who represent the face of Bellini to users.

I wonder what we'd think of Ilford if it has acted in this way?

Of course it may be an error in translating the instructions into English but I assume that Berri who wrote to Bellini pointed out that the English translation clearly states that there is no washing and actually states it will be detrimental. Does the Bellini reply cover this contradiction?

It could be that what was meant by that apparent contradiction, is that it will be detrimental to use the stabiliser then wash which makes sense but I'd have to say that the way this is expressed in the English translation is misleading to say the least

Maybe we can clear this up if Berri as well as translating the reply he has into English, gives us the direct translation of the kit's instructions in Italian

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[TonyB65]

I've nothing to answer more - the case is close now.

with confusions

Yes, I've established you couldn't answer a simple question, I'm happy to leave it there.

 

[trendland]

PE stated before you have made your choise.

Me too - the case is close - with or without water to final wash...... !

 

[RPC]

From here https://ntphotoworks.com/shop/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/KIT-C-41-english_NT.pdf

"The procedure shows no washes, is that correct? A. Yes! This kit requires no water washes at all, in fact a water wash may have a deterimental affect."

If they are saying a wash is detrimental, used in any way, then this is in direct contradiction to everything I have seen in the past 30+ years in the photographic literature. It means Bellini has apparently discovered something heretofore unknown about C-41 film, something not even Kodak or Fuji knows. Does anyone believe that? I don't. If Berri's letter says otherwise, that is what is to be believed.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The OP states "no washing". There should be washes throughout the process, but none after the stabilzier/final rinse.

The contention that the OP referred to a wash after the final stabilizer is incorrect.

PE

 

[trendland]

The OP states "no washing". There should be washes throughout the process, but none after the stabilzier/final rinse.

The contention that the OP referred to a wash after the final stabilizer is incorrect.

PE

Even if this would happen from missunderstanding instruction (a final wash after stabilizer) it probably would have less worst effect as no final wash at all in comparison.
Because of : The stabilizers would gone via chemical reaction with couplers into the film (you mentioned it in your sticky thread ) - so if a wash after stabilizer bath wouldn't be soo very long it might be not able to wash out 100% of diffussed stabilizers.
But no way - who would wash after stabilizing ? - and as you mentioned PE :
the contention that the OP referred to a wash after final stabilizer is INCORRECT.

with regards

 

[TonyB65]

The OP states "no washing". There should be washes throughout the process, but none after the stabilzier/final rinse.

The contention that the OP referred to a wash after the final stabilizer is incorrect.

PE

I've been consistent in what I've said, which is following the manufacturers advice, if you misunderstood that's your problem, not mine.

 

[TonyB65]

Even if this would happen from missunderstanding instruction (a final wash after stabilizer) it probably would have less worst effect as no final wash at all in comparison.
Because of : The stabilizers would gone via chemical reaction with couplers into the film (you mentioned it in your sticky thread ) - so if a wash after stabilizer bath wouldn't be soo very long it might be not able to wash out 100% of diffussed stabilizers.
But no way - who would wash after stabilizing ? - and as you mentioned PE :
the contention that the OP referred to a wash after final stabilizer is INCORRECT.

with regards

I have been quite clear in what I have said, which is following the manufacturers instructions, which means the wash and stab are one and the same, feel free to check.

 

[TonyB65]

If they are saying a wash is detrimental, used in any way, then this is in direct contradiction to everything I have seen in the past 30+ years in the photographic literature. It means Bellini has apparently discovered something heretofore unknown about C-41 film, something not even Kodak or Fuji knows. Does anyone believe that? I don't. If Berri's letter says otherwise, that is what is to be believed.

The stab and wash are one and the same, which is what I have contended all along, feel free to check.

 

[trendland]

TonyB65 : The case is close if you would follow Bellinis instruction (whatever Bellinis secretary mixed from translating)

And the OP should have a realy expended final wash with water BEFORE final stabilizer. Isn't it - (closed/solved) ?

with regards

 

[TonyB65]

TonyB65 : The case is close if you would follow Bellinis instruction (whatever Bellinis secretary mixed from translating)

And the OP should have a realy expended final wash with water BEFORE final stabilizer. Isn't it - (closed/solved) ?

with regards

I have followed the instructions, to the letter, which is the stab is the final wash, and the film is washed several times using the stab solution, the misunderstanding was never mine, I've been consistent all the way through.

 

[bvy]

I've nothing to answer more - the case is close now.

with confusions

There's no confusion. Follow the instructions and you'll get processed negatives. Bellini makes no claim that the negatives will be archival. Tony seems to think they will be but can offer no evidence why. I'm not confused at all.

 

[TonyB65]

There's no confusion. Follow the instructions and you'll get processed negatives. Bellini makes no claim that the negatives will be archival. Tony seems to think they will be but can offer no evidence why. I'm not confused at all.

I've never seen any archival claims from Ilford either, I presume that manufacturers generally avoid making claims on many things, for fear of law-suits, absence of any claim proves nothing, except in your world apparently. I assume that an established manufacturer with one business is not going to make products that don't stand the test of time, it obviously isn't a good business model. They wouldn't have survived 30 years if their products weren't decent quality, but then again I do use my common sense about these things.