I explained what causes crossover in the film itself, and how trying to post-correct CAN cause the kind of effect in image he's explaining about. But given all the intermediate variables of scanning and posting on a screen, each of these workflow steps would have to also be analyzed. The web is a helluva crude instrument for sorting such things out unless everyone's respective instrumentations and screens have been cross-calibrated. And I wasn't there with my own light meter and experience when he took those shots to begin with, so one more variable it's hard pin down. It is likely he hasn't learned proper color temp filtration yet, so that is the most probably thing to comment about, since it's the only way to really control crossover to begin with. ...Note that in the tree and lawn scene, at least on my monitor, the shaded part of the image in mostly in the trees above, yet also in the tree trunks below; and all these deep shadows have a characteristic blue-cyan bias, while the brightly sunlit lawn has gone quite warm, exactly as I would expect with Ektar. Shadows under a blue sky are indeed blue, just as the Impressionists learned. Ektar does not artificially warm these low values like Portra and other CN portrait films do, And it does risk a degree of cyan crossover into the blue at the extremes. It's inherent to this particular film. There are ways to tame it somewhat, which I have already suggested on numerous threads. But once the crossover has taken place, rather than being corrected at the time of the shot, it's going to be hard to untangle the overlapping dye curves. Argue all you want, or use that nonsensical "I can do anything in Photoshop" talk. Yeah, someone can probably clean up a train wreck that way too; but it would have been a lot easier just to stay on the rails to begin with.