Help diagnosing C41 development issues

Stick and Stone

H
Stick and Stone

  • 2
  • 0
  • 14
Leaf

D
Leaf

  • 5
  • 1
  • 65

Forum statistics

Threads
200,596
Messages
2,810,731
Members
100,311
Latest member
Skalpho
Recent bookmarks
0

avose55

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2025
Messages
4
Location
Boston, Massachusetts
Format
35mm
Hi everyone! I'm a new user, newbie home developer, and first time poster. I have just began developing color negative film at home over the past month, and have had less than ideal results across my first four rolls using the ADOX C-TEC 41 Developing Kit (Mixed in 500ml batches) and a Paterson universal developing tank.


My first roll turned out decent with some very slight color shifts and uneven development, but overall passable and better than expected for my first attempt.

For this roll, I followed the directions for 38°C exactly as written in the ADOX dev kit datasheet. I maintained a water temperature of 38°C using a sous vide and measured the temperature of the chemicals to make sure they had reached the desired temp before beginning development. The tank was be agitated for the first 30 seconds continuously inside the water bath, and then inverted once every 15 seconds. The tank went back into the temperature controlled water bath after each agitation.

1762910287990.png


My second roll came out with heavy magenta casts, even though I followed the same procedure as the first roll and stored the chemicals in accordion containers will all of the air removed.

Below is an example of the difference in the negative base color in a roll developed by a lab and my roll developed at home, as well as a scan showing the magenta cast. What would cause the drastic difference in base color and magenta color cast? I am scanning with a Nikon Coolscan 5000 and can get accurate colors when scanning lab developed negatives.

thumbnail_IMG_3530.jpg
GetAttachmentThumbnail.jpg

I originally thought that it was due to poor temperature control and temperature fluctuations during agitation and pouring the solutions in and out of the Paterson tank. Before I developed my next roll of film I ran through the developing process using water in place of active chemicals and logged temperature measurements at different points. I found that from between removing the bottle from the water bath and pouring the solutions into the tank, I was losing ~0.5°C. Then after agitating via inversion once every 15 seconds, and the completion of the 3:15 dev time, I was losing almost 1°C. To remedy this, I increased the temperature of the water bath to 40°C and only started developing once the chemicals had reached 39°C so that dev would start and finish at 38°C ± 0.5°C.

This also did not help so I went on to mixing up a new batch of chemicals. Surprise, surprise, I still have heavy color casts and different colored film base when comparing to the same film stock that had been developed at a local lab.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
25,315
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Welcome aboard @avose55 !

The tank was be agitated for the first 30 seconds continuously inside the water bath, and then inverted once every 15 seconds.
In principle, the frequency of agitation is fine, but "inverting once" might be a bit gentle. The essence of agitation is that it's, well, agitated. So it shouldn't be too gentle. If your single inversion is rather brisk, that's fine. If it's more akin to handling a two-day old kitten, it may be too subtle.

The photo of the two negative strips is too small to make out much, sorry. If you could post a larger version, that would help. The only thing I can say is that the top strip looks all wrong; it looks like over-developed ECN2 film. The bottom strip looks more like normally processed C41 film. What kind of film are we looking at here? And how was the top strip labeled 'Lab' actually processed?

The inverted color image (that does look very magenta indeed) shows odd density variations that could have several explanations. They might be simply be fogging to light or the result of uneven agitation and/or fill/drain rate problems (taking too long to fill/drain).

I think the ADOX instructions do not instruct you to use a stop bath, but I would recommend using one in a manual process anyway. You can make a perfectly fine stop bath for this purpose by diluting unscented cleaning vinegar by about 1+10 with tap water (use one shot; discard after use).

For more sensible comments, please post a larger picture of some of the affected negative strips.
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
2,130
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
The inversion I do is to turn the tank from vertical to its side and back at a medium speed. If you hear that bubbly sound that rushing water makes when it goes very fast and mixes with air, that's too fast. You want to avoid surge marks. For C-41 I like to do 4 inversions every 30 seconds.

I have never divided the one liter kits. I always store them in liter bottles. Is it possible the solutions were not completely homogenous when they were divided?

Maybe a stupid question, but is it the exact same film with the same expiration date that you are comparing between lab and home? And which film is it?
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
25,315
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
If you hear that bubbly sound that rushing water makes when it goes very fast and mixes with air, that's too fast. You want to avoid surge marks.

I'd like to nuance this a bit. The point of agitation is to create a turbulent flow. This can create some sound by definition. That's perfectly OK. The risk of surge marks is not necessarily related to over-agitation; it's the effect of a mixed turbulent & laminar flow patterns that varies across the film surface. Overly gentle agitation carries a bigger risk in this sense than overly brisk agitation. One of the main determinants of surge marks are film type (120 and sheet film are more readily affected also because the image extends to close to the edges where any surge marks are more likely to emerge) and tank & reel/holder geometry (the 'claws' of the MOD54 are infamous).
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
2,130
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
You could be right. But in my trials of semi-stand development, 30 seconds initial agitation plus one very gentle inversion at the midpoint of a 10 minute development was enough to get rid of all the negative side-effects of a full-stand development, so I struggle to reconcile that.
 
OP
OP
avose55

avose55

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2025
Messages
4
Location
Boston, Massachusetts
Format
35mm
In principle, the frequency of agitation is fine, but "inverting once" might be a bit gentle. The essence of agitation is that it's, well, agitated. So it shouldn't be too gentle. If your single inversion is rather brisk, that's fine. If it's more akin to handling a two-day old kitten, it may be too subtle.
I invert the tank fairly quickly with a half turn which takes about a second to complete. Maybe it is too gentle? But I do hear the solution moving through the film reels.

Here are better photos of the two batches of negatives I’m comparing. They’re both Portra 400 which were exposed and developed normaly. Neither rolls were out of expiration and they sat for maybe 2-4 weeks between being exposed and being processed.

Lab developed negatives:
1762953069140.jpeg


Home developed negatives:
1762953098393.jpeg


Side by side:
1762953124334.jpeg
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
25,315
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
semi-stand development

I'd be hesitant to draw parallels between agitation schemes with 10+ minutes between cycles and a scheme that approximates continuous agitation. It's correct that you can usually dramatically improve the problems in a fully stand development scheme by introducing one or two agitation cycles somewhere in-between the process. But this issue is different from the question how vigorous agitation should be in something like a C41 process.

Lab developed negatives:
The color of the base and overall color of the negatives is far more red than how Portra is supposed to look. Either the white balance of the digital photo of the negatives is extremely far off course, or there's a serious problem with how that film was processed. I suspect it's the latter. Is this a small 'boutique' lab or a large commercial outfit? Do you know how they process their film?

Home developed negatives:
These look more normal, but there is an odd shift towards blue. I do see some signs of light leak problems, potentially in the camera:
1762953887561.png
1762954223087.png

I'm not sure if this explains the overall blue/yellow shift entirely.
The odd blob in the second snippet above seems to be of the same general shape and in the same spot as the one you showed earlier:
1762954353914.png
1762954386060.png

My first guess is that this is a camera-related light leak. What kind of camera did you use for this film?

In your C41 process, do you use a stop bath? I would recommend this when developing manually with tanks.
I would also recommend running one strip of your film through the blix again (room temperature, 10 minutes would be OK) to see if this makes a difference. Although the 'blob' above seems more of a camera defect (since it's located in the same spot on two different frames), there's a chance that we're looking at retained silver, which will throw the color balance out of whack.
 
OP
OP
avose55

avose55

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2025
Messages
4
Location
Boston, Massachusetts
Format
35mm
The color of the base and overall color of the negatives is far more red than how Portra is supposed to look. Either the white balance of the digital photo of the negatives is extremely far off course, or there's a serious problem with how that film was processed. I suspect it's the latter. Is this a small 'boutique' lab or a large commercial outfit? Do you know how they process their film?
I snapped these with my phone this morning before heading out to work, so it’s safe to assume the white balance is causing the lab developed Portra to look far more red than normal. All of my Portra negatives are a slightly deeper color than Kodak Gold 200 for example, which is a lighter orange. It’s a small local lab which I believe uses a noritsu with the standard c41 process.

My first guess is that this is a camera-related light leak. What kind of camera did you use for this film?
I’m shooting with an Olympus OM-2n which I’ve never had any signs of light leaks from since replacing the seals about a year ago.
In your C41 process, do you use a stop bath?
I haven’t looked into it yet. I just started out so figured it was best to stick to the kit instructions but after reading through a bunch of threads here, I’m going to add one.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
25,315
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
All of my Portra negatives are a slightly deeper color than Kodak Gold 200 for example, which is a lighter orange.
Are you referring to lab-developed Portra and Gold? Can you show them side by side, please?
Again, the lab-processed strips look way, way too red. The only time I've ever seen something like that is when I mistakenly over-developed ECN2 film by a massive degree. It's far outside the normal bandwidth as far as I can tell now.

The light leaks along the sprocket holes can also be the result of the felt light trap failing somewhere in the process; in itself this is not a major concern. The yellow spots on the film along the roll are more problematic. I'm not sure yet what causes them.

See if the stop bath will make a difference for future rolls, and whether the re-blixing helps for this particular film. The rest of your processing sounds OK. Also, a temperature deviation of e.g. 1 degree will generally not produce very dramatic problems. No, the negatives will not be perfectly on spec, but most people won't even notice, especially not when film is scanned and then post-processed digitally.
 
OP
OP
avose55

avose55

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2025
Messages
4
Location
Boston, Massachusetts
Format
35mm
Are you referring to lab-developed Portra and Gold? Can you show them side by side, please?
Yes the Porta 400 has a deeper base color than Gold 200 developed by the same lab. Both scan perfectly so I have a hard time believing that they were processed incorrectly, it must be something with the iPhone photo processing. I’ll scan a couple examples as positives and post later on.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
25,315
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
1762958369385.png

Perhaps this illustrates my concern. Both strips are the exact same film. Left was overdeveloped due to a gross mixing error in the chemistry. Right is normally processed.
Healthy Portra looks closer to the sample on the right.

To be sure: the film on the left scans just fine.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom