In response to those who wish to be apprised of my C-41 methodology

David Lyga said:

Best to contact me directly, as I post so much I don't have time to answer all unless contacted directly.

Yes, even 1 + 14 will work, but it is easier to use 1 + 9. Of course, time must increase for the extra (1 + 14) dilution, but, given the idiocy of perpetually trying to get yet more blood out of a stone, I think that we can establish 1 + 9 as a handy synergism of cost and ease and predictability. - David Lyga

Click to expand...

Yes, 1+14 is way past diminishing returns. Even at 1+9, the cost per roll drops only 50 cents from a dollar compared to the capacity of the Rollei kit. As you say, the difference is having always fresh developer and not having to adjust time per the factory.

I hope to dabble with this this week if the sun ever comes out again here in south central Texas, Austin area. Again, thanks for your research and sharing!

Hi Dave. If I remember correctly, at one time you were also heavily criticized for advocating developing C41 film in RA4 paper developer. Is this something you have since abandoned?

You CAN develop C-41 film in RA4 developer. I cannot specify the exact specifics right now, but take an inch of film, put it into your camera, then expose properly. Develop (8 minutes at 100 F) in MY dilution for RA4 for paper, which also is 1 + 9. See what you get. I cannot recollect specifics, but you will get something to build upon.

FOLKS: HEED THIS WELL: Simply ASKING me a question on the forum does not trigger me to look at that question. Often after I post, I will not look back for weeks or months. Either quote me (that notifies me) or PM me. - David Lyga

BOTTOM LINE: for paper or film, Kodak's 25 US Gallon sizes of both C-41 Flexicolor (KF 12-1532753) and RA4 Dev/Repl RT (KP 36-8477184) EACH make (for frugal ME) 250 US Gallons of working solution. (Maybe that's enough for me to take a bath in it and turn into a gay rainbow!) - David Lyga

NB: I am going to say something that I held off having to say because I kept making believe that it was not true. (Again, I am not a chemist but, instead, an astute observer.) Whether stored, filled to the rim, in PET plastic or glass, when mixed, the C-41 developer SLOWLY starts to lose potency over a period of several months. This means that you will have to start slowly increasing the amount you mix. At the beginning, 1 + 9 will provide robust negatives (maybe even a bit too contrasty) but maybe one month out, you will notice that you now have to start mixing maybe 1 + 8 or 1 + 7 to equal your initial results. My C-41 is now about 6 months old and I am having to use about 1 + 6 to 1 + 7, so this change is not drastic, but is frustratingly not the result of air coming into the bottle. Conceptually (for whatever that indicates) I 'feel' that this is because of the air already in the H2O (!!!) but maybe that 'reasoning' is a bit daffy. Given the extreme vulnerability to begin with concerning C-41 developer, I think that this is a small price to pay, but, again, when David Lyga speaks, and you decide to heed, always, always be prepared to do clip tests before you relegate important and expensive film to 'trust'.

On the other hand, I have RA4 from Kodak's long discontinued gallon size of paper developer, mixed back in 2003 (!!!) that works perfectly for color paper. And, caveat, caveat, caveat: I have stated this previously: PART C concentrate of RA4 developer must be stored either in its original container or in GLASS. Using PET will lead to disaster, as the HIGH pH of this chemical will corrode the walls of PET plastic.

Finally, the ONLY airtight needs are, again stated: C-41 Part C concentrate and RA4 Part B concentrate. The OTHER Parts need not be kept airtight.

David Lyga said:

You CAN develop C-41 film in RA4 developer.

Click to expand...

You do realize, that C-41 and RA-4 use different color developing agents. Not only is RA-4 liable to giving you off colors, the question about archival stability of what essentially amounts to cross processing has also never been answered with any sort of credibility.

OK archival is not something that I am entirely cognizant of so there might be jeopardy here; but I think that I am not far off when I say that I HAVE gotten excellent colors here. In fact, I did my brother's wedding in 1985 with RA4 negative development and, to my understanding, the prints still look fine. - David Lyga

A serious question, David. What in the world do you do with all the film you shoot and process? It sounds like hundreds of rolls a year. And, IIRC, you live in, shall we say, tight quarters. (Now a trend. Whoa......David Lyga, trend setter. Are you comfortable with that?)

Have you tried refrigerating or freezer the developer? I don't know if it was this thread or another, but just refrigeration should extend the life, or slow its decay by a factor of four. And freezing? Forever? If I don't foresee using a developer "for awhile," I move it from the fridge to the freezer. And I use inert gas to displace the air.

No, I am a person who is obsessed with not running out of things. The 25 gallon size of chemistry was about $140, total. When I decided to buy it, I had intended to do a LOT of experimenting. I knew that I would waste much and did not want to EVER be looking for more chemistry, especially because, at the time, it looked as if it might be soon discontinued. Luckily, it was not. I also did this stockpiling with 100W tungsten bulbs because, when they were being phased out, all I heard of as replacement was the CFL and I vowed never to have to use them. (If I had then known about the halogens, which are dimmable, I would not have bought the tungsten.) As a result, I bought and bought 100W bulbs and have about 200 in storage (!!!!). Prices were so pitifully low as they were being phased out that I could not resist. That is how my mind works: I sacrifice other things to afford maintaining a status quo. I never eat out, never go on vacation, never take cabs.

I probably, indeed certainly, will never use all the color chemistry, but I will say this: That chemistry will last past the day I die and anyone who disagrees is welcome to see proof. Everything is in either glass or PET and kept as the same concentrates, not yet mixed. I have the security of never having to worry about running out. Some go to Starbucks everyday and do not realize that in one damn month, they spend more on another liquid than I did and have little to show for it. So ... maybe I am nuts, but I am MY nuts. My resources allow endless experimentation. Likewise, many years ago Freestyle was selling 100 ft rolls of Fuji Super G + for $10 a roll. I bought 65 rolls. It is kept in the freezer and, though expired in 1999, is just as good with full speed. I am nuts, but MY nuts. (Please laugh, it will make my day.) All this is true, folks.

The 'tight quarters' just got tighter: my landlord terminated my lease in Oct to do renovations and rent for a higher price. Luckily, my 27 years of good tenancy paid off because he had another unit, a block away, for $625, which was about $80 more. It is not as 'large' as the previous one which was 12 X 12. This one is only 10 X 12. Needless to say, I have a couple of storage units that serve me well. Life is getting VERY expensive in this 6th borough of NYC. Curse the high rents.

As far as being a 'trend setter': How could someone so nuts set a trend? I am the LAST person who is to be deemed a 'trend setter'. Instead, I am an anomaly within the human race because I grew up (by necessity) all alone, without comforting peer support.

An 'official' David Lyga proclamation: Freezing developers does NOTHING to impede oxidation. Preventing air from entering the bottle is all that you need. If the bottle was half full, THEN, and ONLY THEN, would freezing matter. - David Lyga

David, I was referring to the trend of "tiny houses." Some are on wheels, some are not. I lived in a 420sf "Shack in the back" for a few years near Denver. Pretty small by American standards, but I had a yard and a fenced off area I could store things under tarps. And a storage garage elsewhere.

Is 120-144 sf even legally habitable? Most codes I'm aware of require a toilet, a shower or similar, a sink, and a stove at the least. It's common on boats to have a shower in the head. Double duty.

But you never got around to answering my question, "What do you do with all that film you process?"

I will disagree about freezing and oxidation. That's why freezing foods makes them last many years. Virtually all chemical reactions, uh, frozen. Couldn't resist that one.

Most of the film I process is simply tests and then thrown away after I get my answer. Since I do clip tests, 'all that film' does not amount to so many feet. You would be surprised what you can 'discover' with a few feet of film. Most people are very wasteful with tests, using an 8 x 10 sheet of paper or a full roll of film to discover one thing that could have been understood with one tenth that amount. Thus, 'all that film processed' does not amount to much in the way of real estate. My unused film and chemicals remain large. That is how I want it to be, Paul.

Thank you for offering me your basement, on a bus line to Austin, to live in for $50 per month, Paul. - David Lyga

David Lyga said:

That chemistry will last past the day I die and anyone who disagrees is welcome to see proof.

Click to expand...

David,
I don't want to see proof of that statement, because proof would require that you die first.
Wishing you long life,

David Lyga said:

Thank you for offering me your basement, on a bus line to Austin, to live in for $50 per month, Paul. - David Lyga

Click to expand...

Sorry, David, no basement. But I have a large upstairs room w/o plumbing......but you could pee out the window, I guess. Close to the bus.

Paul Verizzo said:

Sorry, David, no basement. But I have a large upstairs room w/o plumbing......but you could pee out the window, I guess. Close to the bus.

Click to expand...

Paul, you are in mortal danger of being characterized as incalculably funny. - David Lyga

Paul Verizzo said:

Sorry, David, no basement. But I have a large upstairs room w/o plumbing......but you could pee out the window, I guess.

Click to expand...

I think he'd have plenty of tiny PET bottles on hand for that.

I was assuming these dimensions...12x12 or 10x12... were regarding a darkroom.
Are you guys saying people in NYC are LIVING in 10x12 "Apartments".?

Wayne said:

I think he'd have plenty of tiny PET bottles on hand for that.

Click to expand...

I'm a polycarbonate and polyethylene kinda chem guy..........

Wayne said:

I think he'd have plenty of tiny PET bottles on hand for that.

Click to expand...

With the frequency needed. the PETs would not be so small.

CMoore said:

I was assuming these dimensions...12x12 or 10x12... were regarding a darkroom.
Are you guys saying people in NYC are LIVING in 10x12 "Apartments".?

Click to expand...

The ENTIRE efficiency is 10 X 12. That is in addition to a bathroom. The 'kitchen' is part of that 10 X 12. My 'darkroom' is in one corner of the layout. Philadelphia is becoming almost as expensive as 90 miles to the north. -David Lyga

David Lyga said:

With the frequency needed. the PETs would not be so small.

Click to expand...

I'm not there yet.

I have not been here for a very long time. Just found this very interesting thread from David. I had some similar experience in using Kodak C-41 developer from large volume kit before. I hope my 2 cents are worthy here.

First of all, the PET, HDPE or plastic bottles are bad for the part C of the developer. I read from some where that those plastic bottles actually allow oxygen to penetrate through. Partc C in plastic bottles unopened will not last nearly as long as in glass bottles. I (still) have many boxes of C-41 replenisher kits, each makes 4x10 liters if I remember correctly of replenisher. so there are 4 bottles each for part A, part B and part C chemicals. I foolishly opened a part C bottle for no reason and it went dark black in less than 2 months although cap tightened all the time.

I found it easiest for me to pre-mix part A and part B but leave out part C. This mix will last indefinitely after mixing. When I use it I just pour the amount of this mix (I don't remember exactly the volume but it can be calculated and I also needed to add a correct amount of starter too) needed to make a 1 liter working developer. So after all the mixing I then add 5 grams of CD-4 into this 1 liter of C-41 working solution (less the proper amount of part C).

I have done it this way numerous times and each time I got beautiful no crossover colors always. I use a Jobo ATL-2300 rotary processor so the process is very consistent. I have thrown all the pat C bottles from my remaining 4x10 liter kits. I can easily make a liter of the developer from this large kits without worrying about the exact ratio of each part of the chemicals. I achieved (much) lowered cost C-41 developer from the large kits and never had to worry about the precision ratio when mixing only a liter or two at a time.

I moved 4 years ago and stopped processing films. I have since settled down completely and plan to restart film photography again. I anticipate that my old (too old) 4x10 Liter replenisher kits are as good as new provided that I throw away part C bottles and use CD-4 power instead. This is not only proven to work by me. I learned this trick from someone much longer before. Hope this helps.

I understand from a message I once got from Photo Engineer that part C, which contains the CD4, is acidified with SO2 and stored under nitrogen. Opening the bottle will remove the nitrogen, and I think the SO2 solution at this concentration will not be stable and therefore change (bubbling out, and/or being bound to form bisulfite), affecting storage lifetime. This was in response to questions I asked when exploring the possibilities of DIY-ing two- or three-concentrate C41 developer concentrates from dry chemicals for convenient mixing. My conclusions are that (1) it's not feasible to make a viable C-concentrate based on CD4 for the same reasons why a once-opened commercial concentrate will go off within a fairly short period of time, and that the A and B concentrates are separate for good reasons (notably interactions between sulfite and hydroxylamine IIRC). Hence, pre-mixing A and B and storing them for extended periods of time will affect the nature of the developer, influencing overall activity and/or color balance.

If Nitrogen was the whole secret to concentrate longevity, then any inert gas would accomplish the same thing. This really shouldn't be a show stopper for self mixers.

The show-stopper is the saturated SO2 thing creating an acid environment for the CD4 which does not interfere with development chemistry after mixing. That's difficult to do in a home-lab setting and as far as I'm concerned is indeed a show-stopper.

Edit: an interesting thought experiment is to acidify the CD4 solution with e.g. acetic acid. If indeed the acidity is what preserves the CD4 (I really don't know, but it could play a role), then this could be a workaround. Upon mixing, the pH could be adjusted by adding KOH, converting the acetic acid into acetate, which may not interfere with development. Due to the pH in the vicinity of 10.0 the acetace would be way beyond its buffer region.

I know, that Kodak sold at least E6 CD part concentrate with CD-3 and a very small amount of Sodium Metabisulfite. This should work just as well with C-41 CD, so there is no need to handle Sulfur Dioxide directly.

It would be worth a try, although balancing would be key. Unless I'm mistaken, the bisulfite will convert to sulfite in the working solution and the sulfite level is fairly critical for correct dye formation. Since C41 formulas use only a small amount of sulfite, it would be a balancing act to get enough bisulfite into the CD4 concentrate so that it makes the correct amount of sulfite in the working solution.

I wonder, if Kodak indeed protected CD3 with bisulfite, why they'd choose the probably more complex solution of saturated SO2 for C41 concentrate.

I have used a method similar to mtjade2007 except I mix parts A and B separately and keep them separate until use. (I received a large amount of C-41 developer replenisher from the lab I worked at when they quit processing film years ago.) When mixing I add 5 grams of CD-4 (the original liquid went bad long ago) and the proper amount of starter, then just adjust the pH to about 10.1. This way I have used the lab chemistry over a period of years with no apparent degradation. Some of it was completely mixed years ago, stored in full glass bottles and still seems to work well after adjusting the pH.