Can you explain how color print film could possibly work without spectral sensitization? Or did you just mean "has different spectral sensitivity from regular color film"?Print film is very unsensitive and not spectrally sensitized as camera film.
That is actually one thing I tried last time, since I got very low contrast images with the CN200, I used a longer developing time of 3:45 vs. the usual 3:15 (with Tetenal Colortec). Maybe I could use even longer times, what do you suggest, what did you use?
This may well come from the process rather than the medium. If one processes B&W negative film with a B&W reversal kit, contrast is equivalent to what one gets with E6 film+process.Color negative films and processes are designed to yield low contrast images with long latitude.
I think there might be a misunderstanding? I was talking about the negative C41 film CN200 but you seem to talk about the slide version CR200, right?@FilmCurlCom: Roller CR200 is advertised as having a "transparent synthetic base", so you should be able to achieve better than a Dmin of 0.4
Yep, sorry, I mixed those upI think there might be a misunderstanding? I was talking about the negative C41 film CN200 but you seem to talk about the slide version CR200, right?
If color negative film is already quite low in contrast, then multiplying the transfer curve of two negative films will give you insanely low contrast.What I was/am trying is to contact-print C41 negative film onto another C41 negative film (this time the maskless CN200) to get a positive that way.
This approach sounds a lot more reasonable, since ECP is meant to give high contrast, and light sensitivity is a non issue. Note, though, that ECP is meant as positive process for ECN, which is lower in contrast than C-41, so expect higher contrast from your procedure. Also note, that ECP-2 uses CD-2 instead of CD-4, so plan on modifying C-41 CD both in composition and process time in order to get ok results.Or, second option, to see if I could possibly contact-print C41 negative or better ECN-2 negative onto a ECP (which will be maskless too) and there the idea was if ECP could be cross processed in C41 chemicals, similar to ECN-2 cross processing (with all the known issues of different processes, stability, ... that are discussed a lot with regards to Cinestill for example).
I have made much comparative samples of color reversible process E6.
I used Kodak E100GX two films that were exposed identical.
Mamiya medium format camera.
A film I developed in the process compatible E6 (George).
The other film I have developed in the original E6 Tetenal proces.
Scanning two frames (E6 George + E6 Tetenal) I did on the Epson V800 as a single photogram.
The scanned image without any correction was not further processed.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/21121448@N06/30599998764/
In my process E6 compatible I used in color developers CD 2 substance.
George
AFAIK the terms CD-1, CD-2 etc. were coined by Kodak, and since they were the big game in town, these terms stuck. For equally understandable reasons there were different terms common at Agfa, and yet different terms in Eastern Europe. In the end, it doesn't matter, as long as we have unique ways of specifying compounds.In the color developers ORWOCOLOR 17 use Diethyl-p-phenylene diamine sulphate (TSS).
You call it CD-1.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?