Long, very long, lasting C-41 chemicals

[mtjade2007]

You are welcome Pentaxuser, It's a pleasure to be here again. I wondered about the same thing too because my search on the internet in the past seemed to result in a few CD-4 manufacturers in China but was not sure if the CD-4s they make are of the same grade used in Kodak C-41 chemicals. If not what are they made for? I am (was) not sure those manufacturers can be reached/contacted at all. I guess for half a pound at $50 from Artcraft isn't bad if it is a quality CD-4. I will give it a try in the near future.

I just read the earlier posts and realized our dear friend PE (Photo Engineer) had passed away. That's so sad. He was truly one most respected knowledgeable expert in C-41 process. We are not able to ask him if my part C CD-4 trick has any ill effect at all any more. Despite it works for me I am no expert to truly validate it. I hope somebody will throw in their chemistry expertise especially about C-41 chemical from theoretical or practical point of views about it.

By the way, it is necessary to mix the C-41 developer replenisher with starter. I tried it long time ago without mixing with a starter the colors came out ugly and full of color crossover. Don't even think about it. It's a waste of film, chemical and time.

 

[pentaxuser]

Despite it works for me I am no expert to truly validate it. I hope somebody will throw in their chemistry expertise especially about C-41 chemical from theoretical or practical point of views about it.

My guess is that if it has worked then this means it will always work. I cannot see what might occur with the negative that was OK say maybe 5-6 years ago when you used your solution that will not be OK later on. Whatever happens to C41 negs as they age is, I'd have thought, no more likely to happen to your negs than any other OK C41 negs developed by other means.

pentaxuser

 

[mtjade2007]

Here is a picture I took with my Pentax 67-ii and processed with the developer that 5 grams of CD-4 powder was used in place of the part C. I don't remember what film it was shot with. It was scanned with a Minolta Dimage MF medium format film scanner. It is an erlier version of the Dimage MF scanner not the later expensive one. I think the picture pretty much tells that the development was very good if not perfect. I don't see any loss of sharpness nor anything wrong about the colors. The file is large so I compressed it from the TIF format to jpeg but the size remains the largest so that you guys can take a closer look. I put it in Dropbox because the file is too large to upload to this forum. Please advise if you can see any problem in it. I can share more pictures if necessary. Here is the Dropbox link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/d2ps8nr6n9o5eh1/test2820-22.jpg?dl=0

 

[pentaxuser]

mtjade2007, Thanks for that. I examined your picture carefully at several magnifications and concluded that there was indeed a cast - it was the one of envy on my face that it wasn't me that discovered what has to be a major break-through in the perennial problem for those who want the economy of big kits with the key to longevity for developer

pentaxuser

 

[mtjade2007]

Thanks, Pentax. Well, I am not the first who discovered this trick. I discovered what was discovered before. I truly hope the cast is proven worth it. Anyone else discover anything else to be concerned?

By the way, shooting film will not be joyful without a final step to get the images on the film optically printed or scanned and inkjet printed. I invested in my Minolta Dimage Multi MF scanner when it just came out to the market. I spent nearly $2k on a new one. But within a few years the latest model came out and mine quickly had its value depreciated to almost nothing. However, it was and still is a great scanner but at a lower resolution. I even got a 2nd one as a spare. I have never regretted a bit for getting it. The latest Dimage Multi MF scanner will give a file size way too large which will quickly become a hazard to the computer to handle and keep. I think the Nikon 9000-ii is probably the most popular model ever since it was introduced. But the Minolta Dimage Multi is an extremely practical one to get. Not only quality wise it is great its price as a used one today is extremely affordable. I got my 2nd one for less than $200 off eBay. The file size of a typical 6x7 negative scan is only around 21.5 mega bytes. I can inkjet print it to 13"x19" any time like a dream. Opening and closing the file for Photoshop is fast and easy. If I were to deal with over 100 mega bytes of file size generated by a Nikon S9000-ii my PC will suffer from a severe illness for sure.

The Minolta Dimage Multi-i is a beast that will tell you if your negative suffers from color crossover error instantly. The colors will be extremely difficult if not impossible to correct even under Photoshop. But a perfectly developed negative will not need any color correction coming out of the scanner. Even if there is a cast it can be easily adjusted in seconds. If there is crossover error it will take forever to tweak and at the end it will still show some weird colors. Anyway, Just thought to share my experience with my Minolta MF film scanner. If you haven't got one grab one before they are all gone. The Dimage Multi-i can be upgraded to Multi-ii by just entering a serial number when you run the scanner software. The serial number is available on the internet. If you can't find it I can post it here. The Multi-Pro is the one that will cost over $2k still. I stayed away from it.

 

[bernard_L]

@Jeannine This is not Twitter. You aren't winning any friends by dropping sexist/racist/whatever bombs at the slightest disagreement.

@ David Lyga @ Bormental
I might just stand by and keep silent, yet...
So the very same words/expressions are gentlemanly when written by D.L., and become sexist when repeated (with emphasis) by Jeannine.
Nothing to do with a disagreement liters vs gallons, or whatever.

 

[Vaughn]

bernard, Bormental is correct, this is not Twitter. This forum is not a cross-section of society...instead heavily influenced by older white males. If sexist, ageist, or racist remarks are made and are then called out, the initial remarks are supported by several members and the thread is often closed. That is a pattern I often see. It is a matter of respect, and it is often lacking.

 

[Вormental_old]

I have never seen any sexist, racist or ageist remarks here. But Twitter is full of language-controlling social justice warriors who see racism, sexism everywhere because they make it their life's purpose to see it everywhere (and when they can't find it they say it's "in the air"). This is just a form of fascism and it is not a representation of society.

And Photrio is not Twitter (yet). Just search for "dear" and you'll see it's been used on Photrio numerous times (male to male) until a twitter character showed up and proclaimed it to be sexist. Make no mistake, being labeled a "sexist" is a career-ending event. It is indeed a nuclear bomb kind of a word, dropped in response to seeing "dear" in the middle of someone's attempt to help.

 

[Vaughn]

I have...perhaps they are difficult for some people to see. Many people believe such remarks are 'normal' because they are very use to a white-male viewpoint and have difficulty seeing any other viewpoints.

edit for mis-use of word ('as' for 'are')

 

[Sirius Glass]

The earlier sexist and racist remarks in this thread are inappropriate. Period.

 

[Helios 1984]

@ David Lyga @ Bormental
I might just stand by and keep silent, yet...
So the very same words/expressions are gentlemanly when written by D.L., and become sexist when repeated (with emphasis) by Jeannine.
Nothing to do with a disagreement liters vs gallons, or whatever.

I'm afraid David won't answer anytime soon as he quit Photrio for good. He said he felt unjustly treated.

 

[Mesabound]

Make no mistake, being labeled a "sexist" is a career-ending event.

This really is neither here nor there and as loathe as I am to jump into the fracas as a fledgling member, this statement is so patently false I cannot let it go unsaid. In such circumstances it is equally if not more likely that the person who will suffer the greatest is the accuser, in the form of workplace retaliation (indeed, such claims hit an all-time high in 2019 according to the EEOC). This while saying nothing of how baseless accusations are the exception and not the rule, nor making any comment upon what little effect the rampant documented sexism displayed near-daily has had on the careers of those who wield power across the US. But I guess reading the news means I'm probably just looking for this stuff all the time, and not that you are willfully ignoring the hard lived realities of people who don't look like you.

I don't believe David's initial response warranted all that's come after it, but the ensuing defensiveness and ridiculous claims such as the above have only served to strengthen Jeannine's point IMO. Feel free to respond but this is all I have to say on the matter.

 

[MattKing]

I'm afraid David won't answer anytime soon as he quit Photrio for good. He said he felt unjustly treated.

Yes and no.
I am heartened by the fact that there are signs that he is at least "peeking" at what we are still doing here.
I remain hopeful that he will re-appear, even as I think he should have accepted the fact that the criticism was not inappropriate, even if he didn't agree with the position taken.

 

[Truzi]

I didn't know David had left.

I'm tempted to ask him to stick around a bit and see if things can work out, but the last time I suggested that to an exiting member my post, and I believe the thread, was deleted.
The server logs should show if I said anything inappropriate in that post... aside from a critique of how things operate (and even that was appropriately worded).

 

[Vaughn]

Exiting posts are generally against the rules and are locked and/or deleted.

And I agree with Matt -- I wish David had seen how rude his behavior was (and typically male) and apologised, and we could have just moved on. I found David to be an interesting person.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Exiting posts are generally against the rules and are locked and/or deleted.

Since you mentioned rules, can you kindly point me to the page that documents all or most important rules of photrio? I tried searching and I couldn't find any such page.

[Edit: I found it finally, but on a different web-site: http://www.photrio.ltd/tos.html]

 

[Vaughn]

Excellent question -- I thought there was one that was easy to find, but could find none, either. Some info under System Announcements.

 

[MattKing]

Since you mentioned rules, can you kindly point me to the page that documents all or most important rules of photrio? I tried searching and I couldn't find any such page.

Here is the legalese - from the Terms and Rules link at the bottom of the page: http://www.photrio.ltd/tos.html

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Thank you to the few people who took the time to extend warm greetings. I special thank you to Pentax, for providing useful & insightful information. I appreciate you taking the time to share knowledge rather than looking for an opportunity to shame my question. Yes, the measurements of A,B & C are indeed helpful. They are also clearly labeled and easily measured. So forgive me if I took the answer coupled with, "do the math," as less than helpful. Not extending a basic salutation, ignoring my query and answering with basic measurements that anyone could obtain, is insulting. You made your archaic position towards women quite clear in your later posts. My mistake if I thought of this as a friendly community to share knowledge. Warm salutations are not a requirement but it certainly creates an environment conducive to sharing information. Now I realize this is yet another boys club of ego, hand holding where grown men think it is acceptable to regard a woman they have never meant as, "dear and sweetie." As a younger person I have not had the luxury of spending my entire life shooting film. It is intimidating enough to reach out to a group of professionals. I am shocked that David and his cronies think this is acceptable behavior. Amateurs be very careful of your wording or your question will be disregarded. Maybe I should change my screen name to Joe to avoid these sexist, waste of time replies in the future? Is it too much to ask that my gender not be judged when submitting replies? Or is it too hard to extend that basic respect?

I am no stranger to this sexist, shallow type of behaviour. It does disappoint me that in this day in age, on a forum I respected, I would be debased as an emotional woman and not treated as a fellow being interested in the craft of photography.

I can't help but wonder what the tone of your reply would have been if I was a male? If my inquiry was so beneath you, why even bother to respond? If you spent a fraction of the energy you did in your last message, we wouldn't be here.

David, it is 2020, it is extremely rude to call a grown woman dear, dame etc. I realize you know this and intended to be insulting. Honestly, you are only embarrassing yourself. If this is the type of sexist replies that I can expect, I will go to the many other forums available in the future. I'd much rather be in the darkroom than defending my gender.

I take extreme offense at being called dear and quite basically this entire message.

"Thank you for having the tenacity (and intellect) to see things rationally. I regularly scan these posts and when I see a query about some factual information that I might be able to disseminate, I quickly try to readily comply, Maybe this time I had failed to be sufficiently politically correct. Again, you got it right, not my detractors who wanted to see something nefarious.

But the real reason for my reply to you Bormental was to state that I gave information for 25 US Gallons, not liters, (which you stated). (Please re-read my post.) Again, the inquirer wanted factual, quantitative information and that is precisely what I did and with no nefarious intentions. The fact that I did not sugar coat it 'for the lady' is going to have to be something that you will have to deal with, It was not meant as rude, but, I will say that in all the years of posting, I have never been received by such forwardness as this dame.

That said, think what you wish, and if the mods wish to cater to this party because she is new and fem, so be it. I feel no guilt for this or for the fact that I have dared never to use a starter in the process. If this woman finds that foul please tell her that there is far more foul in her world in her neck of the woods. If that upsets this 'Jean', so be it, as there are worse things to get upset over.

Now, mods, do your catering ... as you are obligated to castigate me. - David Lyga" Quoted from David Lyga
In the future, David, kindly ignore a question you deem beneath your precious intellect. There are clearly many here who are just as capable of helping but also know what tact and respect are.
Kind Regards,

The Dear, new & fem, lady,

"Jean"

I'm not interested in stepping into the middle of whatever just happened (I haven't read the whole thread and am not likely to), and I do tend to be quite busy so don't usually respond to questions right away unless somebody direct messages me....

That being said, welcome to Photrio. As you've discovered, sometimes, some of the older guys forget that they they were once young and didn't know either. Sometimes they're less than helpful, and yes, sometimes they are less than politically correct. Chalk it up to old dogs not learning new tricks and being forgetful of what it was like when they were starting out. There are plenty of us floating around that are willing to help. Please don't let the value of the community on the whole hinge on a handful of members that you may not agree with or may not like. There's lots more good than bad here, and no matter where you go, there's always going to be someone you run across that you'll probably not like. Thats life. Dealing with it in a productive manner is a learned skill, and not everyone is at the same skill level.

Now to get to the meat and get back on track:

Just for a sanity check, which kit do you specifically have? The 5L LORR kit? I used that kit for quite a while before switching over to the standard 20L Flexicolor kit. This thread is specifically for doing something non-standard. I'm not sure that's necessarily the route you want to go, especially for a 5L kit. Once mixed up, the LORR chemistry tends to last quite a while if you store it so that its exposure to oxygen is low. What I did with the LORR kit was mix up the whole 5L of stock and store it in a wine bag in a box bladder made by Astropaq. Then when I need to process, I bled out what I needed from the stock to make working solution. It's a little money to get started, but once you fill it with your stock mix and bleed the air out, it literally lasts forever, and since it's in a box, it stores super easy. I've found that it's the simplest way to reliably keep chemistry without going going down more esoteric paths like what this thread has documented. It's pretty easy to get way more complicated than you need to. The LORR just mixed as stock solution stores quite a long time if you keep the exposure to air down to a minimum.

Now that I've switched over to the 20L kit, I just keep the parts separate and mix up however much I need when I go to do a processing run. To keep the parts from going bad between runs, I fill the empty part of the bottle with a quick squirt of gas that is heavier than air. Which gas you use depends on how easy it is to get in your area. If you can get protectan (from tetanal), that works, but other gasses can also work (like nitrogen, propane, etc). as long as it's heavier than air so it doesn't float out before you get the lid back on the bottle. Give it a healthy squirt to displace the oxygen and get the lid on. Don't be shy about using the chemistry. Trying to process using as little chemistry as possible tends to give less than desirable results, and believe me, film costs a lot more than the chemistry. I'd rather use the chemistry and have a little excess and get reliable results than try to save a little money on the chemistry. If you shoot any volume of film, you'll discover that the 5L kit goes a lot faster than you realize.

Hope that helps.

 

[mtjade2007]

I just developed some films and would like to share a few pics for the purpose of validation of the trick I played to the C-41 process. It's understandable there are questions or even doubts if the trick is a worthy one. So please examine these pics as if you had paid big bugs and you would want them perfect. You will of course find issues. I would like to hear about them which will sort of validating the C-41 trick. By the way I did the trick mainly for saving money from using large sized developer replenisher knowing part C will go bad. Yes if I buy 5L kit I most likely won't need to play the trick. There have been questions raised by experts that sharpness of the film and color cross over might exist which would invalidate the usefulness of the trick. I hope the pics I upload here give everyone a chance to evaluate. Your critics and comments will be appreciated.

The films I developed and scanned are a roll of Kodak 400UC and a roll of Konica VX-100 shot with my Pentax 67 ii about a year and a half ago. The films were expired about 20 years ago but have been cold stored all these years in my freezer. The developer LORR replenisher was also purchased 20 years ago. The part C is of course not used and 5 grams of CD-4 is used instead. The CD-4 was also bought 20 years or so ago.

These pics are raw scan files with minimum density, especially middle tone brightness, adjustment only. No color adjustment or enhancement was done. This is to see if the process does cause color cross over and if sharpness is compromised. Well, I should not have done it with such long expired films. So here comes the pics.

 

[mtjade2007]

The first two pics are from a 220 roll of Kodak 400UC. The other two are of Konica VX-100 120 roll. I really like the Konica Vx-100. It's very vibrant and contrasty and fine grain. It's long gone of course and probably nobody has it still. I still have a few rolls in my freezer.

 

[mtjade2007]

No sharpening was ever applied to any of the pics. The scanner is a Minolta Dimage Multi scanned at 1180 dpi.

 

[halfaman]

Densities look fine in general, even shadows of second photo are too raised on post.

One important thing and helpful about C-41 is that it always delivers something. You have to do some very, very catastrophic errors to end with something unsuable.

 

[koraks]

Scans don't tell anything useful about the presence of crossover or color balance. There's too much hocus-pocus going on in the scanner and its driver & software itself to be sure that what you get accurately represents the dye densities as they are present on the film.
Having said that, I see a lot of very nasty color casts, gross underexposure or underdevelopment in frame #2, what looks like a distinct color crossover issue in #3 and in #4 as well.
All considered I wouldn't be happy with these results if they were mine. However, as I said, scanning doesn't tell us much. Maybe the negatives print just fine onto RA4. I doubt it, but it's possible.

 

[eatfrog]

I just developed some films and would like to share a few pics for the purpose of validation of the trick I played to the C-41 process.

There is some serious color casts/cross overs going on in your attached pictures which I would not tolerate for my personal work. However, it is difficult to say if it is because of the expired film, your developing technique, your scanning technique or due to the developer. You usually get SOMETHING with C41 so I don't think this says all too much.