Lowering PH in homebrew ECN2

[Mogsby]

I just made a batch of ECN2, the PH is at 10.40! How can I lower it the required 10.25?

 

[dE fENDER]

The required chemicals depend on the solution. Use acetic acid to lower, sodium hydroxyde to increase pH in the developer.

 

[Mogsby]

The required chemicals depend on the solution. Use acetic acid to lower, sodium hydroxyde to increase pH in the developer.

Thanks! I'll have to get on FleaBay for those as I do not have them. I am closely following the Kodak recipe, but I do not have the AF2000! so it is left out. Also I do not have Kodak Anti-Cal, I use De Ionised water as a work around that. Could the missing AF2000 be affecting the PH?.
The Cheap digital PH meter I have is from Amazon and possibly not too accurate judging by some of the reviews. But I ran a test roll of Fuji Reala through the Dev anyway, just to see what I get, waiting for the film to fully dry before I can scan it. The Neg's look OK though.I should really PH test the Dev again now I have run a film through it.
The batch I made a week ago I followed the Red Processing recipe, it worked as in I got images but they were thin and have a Blue hue to the film base. There was another thread on here about the Blue hue (hold the film in daylight at an angle and I clearly see it, PE thinks its a Developer problem, I thought it could be a Fix problem!. I did manage to get rid of it once with a re-run through the Fix. But depending on the film after more tests with re-fixing sometimes the problem has not gone away. I get plenty of ECN2 pour off solution from a mate in a cine lab, but its not day fresh, hence the quest to make my own from scratch with powders and get a truer result.

 

[Max lisch]

Acetic acid is just vinegar. You could use a cheap clear vinegar from the super market or hardware store. I would use a very small amount and check the pH.

 

[lantau]

I use a few drops of dilute sulfuric acid. There will be sulfate from oxidising sulfite anyway.

I just got hold of the chemical that is AF2000. I exposed a roll of 500T with identical shots of a colourchecker and cut it in half. Developed with freshly made Dev without AF2000, then added it and processed the other half. Unfortunately I'm a little busy and will need some time before I can digitise and compare the film.

I really wonder if it all was worth the trouble. But I can tell you that the pH didn't change upon adding AF2000. I bought a good, locally made, pH Meter that is precise to 0.005 units and couldn't tell much difference beyond the last digit.

 

[Photo Engineer]

High pH would make the images darker, not lighter. The blueness may be due to insufficient bleaching or washing - or fog.

PE

 

[Mogsby]

I really wonder if it all was worth the trouble. But I can tell you that the pH didn't change upon adding AF2000. I bought a good, locally made, pH Meter that is precise to 0.005 units and couldn't tell much difference beyond the last digit.

Thanks! I can rule out the missing AF2000 having an effect.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Look here for information on the effects of pH on image quality: http://www.kodak.com/motion/Support...ocessing_Manuals/H24_Modules_Online/index.htm

PE

 

[Mogsby]

High pH would make the images darker, not lighter. The blueness may be due to insufficient bleaching or washing - or fog.

PE

Ah! Ok. thats useful to know.
The Fuji reala I have could be at fault, it is old and is not 500 iso anymore, I shot a roll at the rated speed and the negs were thin. I shot another roll at 250 iso, the film I ran last night. The result was bulletproof negs, maybe 400 is a more realistic speed to shoot it at. But, both rolls showed the Blue Hue!. Today I shot a short strip of each Vision3 500T with 85 filter and UV at 320 iso, Vision2 250D at rated speed and Vision2 50D at rated speed. I taped them togther and ran then on one reel. There is NO Blue hue from what i can see, have to wait for the film to dry to truley see. But could the old age of the Reala cause it to be fogged?.
The top two pics are the Vision2's the 3rd pic is the Vision3. The Vision3 has a film base bordering on Brown!.
Last pic is a 5mp scan of the Reala I shot at 250 iso.

 

[Mogsby]

Here are the scans from the Kodak films Dev'd in homebrew ECN2 minus the AF200. All shot under full cloud within half an hour. Camera is Canon T70 with 35mm F2.8 lens set to auto.
622_04 Vision3 500T with 85 filter.
214_04 Vision2 250D.
858_04 Vision2 50D.
The 500T has the closest colours!
My experiment shows me that the older film is no good and sadly I just bought 2000ft of Vision2 500T .
I have one more test to do with the 65mm Vision3 250D thats date coded 2016. Not easy as i have to roll it onto 616 spools with the backing paper and shoot with a 1930's Kodak folder .
I think its time to dump all my old film on FleaBay and work with fresh film when it comes to Cine film. The C41 homebrew and old C41 film is actualy OK, is workable, the old Cine film seems unforgiving .

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I'm still ttying to figure why with C-41 formulas available why anyone would want to develop C-41 film in ECN-2 chemistry.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, these are ECN films, so the developer appears to be the right general formula. But I think the motto "any which way but right" suits this case for one reason or another.

PE

 

[Mogsby]

View attachment 186189

Well, these are ECN films, so the developer appears to be the right general formula. But I think the motto "any which way but right" suits this case for one reason or another.

PE

It is a fitting Motto for me.
If I showed my utter fails you would be thinking 'Duke of Hazzard' as a motto!.
You are right, its ECN and like any colour work its either right or wrong.
I bought a Paterson thermal tank to try and iron out the variables, its working but the heater creates a hot spot due to no circulation so I have a small 12v submersible 200lt/h water pump coming from Amazon. Consistency with colour work seems to be part or all of the key.
I will get it right some day as my Italin friend did when he dressed to go see Dunkirk at the cinema View attachment 186189

 

[Photo Engineer]

The attachment didn't work!

 

[Gerald C Koch]

But I ran a test roll of Fuji Reala through the Dev anyway, just to see what I get, waiting for the film to fully dry before I can scan it.

 

[Mogsby]

The attachment didn't work!

Here you go!.

 

[Mogsby]

Well, these are ECN films, so the developer appears to be the right general formula. But I think the motto "any which way but right" suits this case for one reason or another.

PE

I'm honestly trying really hard to get better results, I installed a mini pump in the Thermo Tank, that has helped a great deal. But after tonights experiments I think it is the film as much as me that is at fault.
Colour card pic is the Vision2 500T date on film edge is 2006.
Street pic is the 65mm V3 500T that I slit down to 60mm and shot with an Ensign Ranger II. Film is date coded LS 2016.
I used the same batch of homebrew ecn on all the films posted on this thread, also the same £10 scanner. I had to stuff the Vision3 throgh the scanner with no tray, its just about fits through the slot.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The positive images look light which implies that the negative is too dark.

PE

 

[Mogsby]

The positive images look light which implies that the negative is too dark.

PE

You'r right, they are too dark, likely because I use water wash as a stop because I read somewhere that the acid stop will harden any carbon backing left on the film making it more difficult to remove in the last wash. I processed another two strips of film tonight and changed things, I used a B+W stop bath, I suppose that is OK to use?. I poured out the Dev at 2:50 so I could get the stop in there spot on 3:00 for 30 secs. What was left of the backing seemed to come off OK in the final wash. When the film is dry I will find out!. The film does look lighter, esp the film base around the frames.
But! PE, Is the grain on the old Vision2 2006 film (especialy in the shadows and blacks ) something that is natural to out of date film or a processing error ?.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I do not know the answer to your question about grain. A B&W stop seems to be OK, but Kodak recommends Sulfuric Acid!

PE

 

[Mogsby]

I do not know the answer to your question about grain. A B&W stop seems to be OK, but Kodak recommends Sulfuric Acid!

PE

The B&W stop concentrate has growth in it so I doubled the mixing instuctions. I have 60% Sulfuric Acid I could use.
The final test would be to have the film proccesed in a cine lab.
Looking at the pic, this was taken on one of my Praktica's that i tried to repair and its so annoying I have not set the prism properly.
I suppose there comes a point where its time to move on from the old half broken cameras beyond economical repair and out dated film and move on. I think I should sell my out dated film stock and use the money to buy a small amount of fresh Vision film and maybe a better camera setup.
I'm not realy learning/progressing anymore. Just stuck in a spiral of flogging a dead horse.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Remember that all in-camera cine films are lower in contrast than the C41 products. This may cause you problems with your overall use of these films.

PE

 

[Mogsby]

Remember that all in-camera cine films are lower in contrast than the C41 products. This may cause you problems with your overall use of these films.

PE

That's a valid point you make!.
I processed another short strip of the V2 500T tonight.
Another thought as to why the scans are light and bloomed in places when scanned is that the carbon soot is getting on the emulsion!. Could it also add to the the bad grain look?. I have tried the re bath step that is mentioned in the ECN Module 7. I found that it causes some of the emulsion to fall away. It Is small tank developing after all.
Another problem that has arisen out of using the stop bath is that there are stains on some parts of the film, Maybe its mixed too strong/no t enough agitation or no good as the concentrate is 2 yrs old now and has growth in it. I have 60% sulphuric acid!. Any idea of the dilution rate to make 1lt of stop? also do I have to add any other chemicals?.
I've yet to put the latest purchased V2 500T through the Dev my lab mate gave me. I'll do that and see if there is any difference. Or did I do that already :/ . I really need to keep more notes.
When I put the negs in the enlarger to look at them with the focus finder all i can see is dust and any clumps of backing, no way i can see the billions of microns of the stuff that I am sure is there.
I really need some fresh 35mm Vision3 film I can get Lab processed, to use as some sort of control. I'm sure my Kodak followed Recipe is petty spot on as the C41 Dev i made is pretty good.

 

[lantau]

That's a valid point you make!.
I processed another short strip of the V2 500T tonight.
Another thought as to why the scans are light and bloomed in places when scanned is that the carbon soot is getting on the emulsion!. Could it also add to the the bad grain look?. I have tried the re bath step that is mentioned in the ECN Module 7. I found that it causes some of the emulsion to fall away. It Is small tank developing after all.
Another problem that has arisen out of using the stop bath is that there are stains on some parts of the film, Maybe its mixed too strong/no t enough agitation or no good as the concentrate is 2 yrs old now and has growth in it. I have 60% sulphuric acid!. Any idea of the dilution rate to make 1lt of stop? also do I have to add any other chemicals?.
I've yet to put the latest purchased V2 500T through the Dev my lab mate gave me. I'll do that and see if there is any difference. Or did I do that already :/ . I really need to keep more notes.
When I put the negs in the enlarger to look at them with the focus finder all i can see is dust and any clumps of backing, no way i can see the billions of microns of the stuff that I am sure is there.
I really need some fresh 35mm Vision3 film I can get Lab processed, to use as some sort of control. I'm sure my Kodak followed Recipe is petty spot on as the C41 Dev i made is pretty good.

I found that V3 500T has a 'noise' of blue spots in the shadows. I think I've got it under control now, but I haven't down much shooting this year. However I accumulated quite a few rolls over the last two months due to events I was shooting. We'll see what comes out of them. I waited with the processign because it took me forever to finalise my chemical orders, and the AF2000 ingredient was part of it. I just didn't want to use another batch without knowing if it is an important part of the formula. I definitely got good results with the ECN-2 process previously.

While I think that it is mostly the emulsion, and I really don't recommend pushing 500T, I always had the nagging suspicion that the blue noise could also/additionally be finely dispersed remjet. Remjet is red-brown when left in only a thin layer. It becomes blue upon reversal. So I gave up on removing it in the developing tank. Wiping down both sides of the film to get it all off is a nightmare, may not remove all traces and will scratch the emulsion. And I find that V3 emulsion when wet is super sensitive to mechanical damage. Since I don't man handle this way other films which I develop I may not realise if other films are just as prone to damage.

I remove the remjet in the dark prior to development. It is similar to the method PE mentioned a few times. He and his colleagues did it on a counter top, but I don't have a large counter top which can be placed into total darkness. I hang the film instead. The emulsion side is left dry and untouched and the dry film can be spooled onto the spiral as usual.

So what I do is to mix the Prebath, I use the carbonate version at pH 10.0, and hang the undeveloped film in the dark. I use the MOD54 film clips. They have a good grip on the film, but you still need to be careful not to apply too much force. The prebath is in a bottle and will last a long time. I wet a microfibre cloth with a small amount of it and wipe up and down the film base, twice. Rinse the cloth with tap water and repeat. Rinse again and repeat. Remjet will be gone. The exact technique of how to hold the film and wipe is up to you. I make sure the emulsion side stays bone dry. The cloth needs only be wet, not dripping. At the end I use a paper kitchen towel to wipe the cleaned surface dry. Takes a wipe or two.

Still in the dark I cut off the film above the lower film clip (there is still remjet under the clip), clip the corners and start feeding it into the spiral. Eventually cut the film below the upper film clip and finish spooling. Spiral goes into the tank and the lights come on.

Before continuing with a second film I strongly recommend to remove any drops of black remjet containing water from the floor, the bath tub, etc. If you wait only dilute (sulfuric) acid will help.

Another thing about remjet: It only takes a brief exposure to the alkaline solution for it to loosen up. Some german blogger wrote about that and inspired me. Unfortunately I don't have the link anymore to give him proper credit. If you really want to do the dev tank method then only fill in the prebath with as little movement as possible. Wait a few seconds and pour out. Then continue with water to shake and remove the remjet. With the alkaline solution around the stuff becomes really sticky. Once exposed to the alkali the remjet seems to change, chemically. While it looses its tight bond to the film base it seems to become chemically inert, but it is still a physically sticky mess. Whatever staines you get from it cannot be removed with alkaline solutions. As mentioned above I have success with strong acids. The same acid will help you remove stains from oxidised CD3, which may stick to your mixing container.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Generally, rem-jet is near impossible to remove and hard to tell from grain. Automated processes do a good job, but manual processes often do not.

PE