Odd/interesting output from accidentally exposed E6

[fotoobscura]

I had a roll of fairly expired transparency film (Provia 400F) in a camera and I dropped the camera mid-roll. The back opened in broad daylight and I then closed the door and decided to just keep shooting (this is not an uncommon thing to happen to me and sometimes done intentionally). I finished the roll and developed it in regular E6 chemistry.

Trying to understand if this would be reproducible or was this just "lucky"?

See attached. This is straight out of the film scanner, no adjustments.

Thanks

 

[afriman]

Looks like a "solarized" image - part negative, part positive. I remember it being quite a popular experimental darkroom technique in the 60s and 70s. But even under controlled conditions, it tended to be unpredictable.

 

[Photo Engineer]

This looks like exposure through the back of the film. That is what is facing you when you open the camera.

PE

 

[fotoobscura]

What I find curious is that the entire roll is "evenly" exposed like this....usually when this happens I get random results from light bouncing around..

This looks like exposure through the back of the film. That is what is facing you when you open the camera.

PE

 

[bdial]

If it's the entire roll, then you may have a light leak somewhere. Opening the back mid roll (assuming this is 35mm) would only expose what's between the cartridge and the take-up spool, plus a layer or two on the spool. Anything still in the cartridge would be unaffected.
Or else, a chemistry problem, I'd say.

It is an interesting result though, doesn't look like the usual fogging.

 

[Photo Engineer]

This can also result if the reversal step is not sufficient.

PE

 

[fotoobscura]

Interesting...........

This can also result if the reversal step is not sufficient.

PE

 

[kevin klein]

I like it. It's a prize winner! I wouldn't mind having a print of that.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Do a series!!

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

Good luck trying to reproduce it.

 

[AgX]

A direct-reversal effect by red light (backside exposure) on the least exposed grains.

 

[fotoobscura]

Interesting...But the entire roll exposed by sunlight similarly while inside a camera? to me PE's suggestion makes more (logical) sense..

A direct-reversal effect by red light (backside exposure) on the least exposed grains.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak has published a set of photos of process errors and this is one of them. They are not available now except in out of print books AFAIK.

PE

 

[AgX]

Interesting...But the entire roll exposed by sunlight similarly while inside a camera? to me PE's suggestion makes more (logical) sense..

Yes, but you did not say before that the whole film strip looks that way.

 

[fotoobscura]

Apologies. Yes the whole roll looks like this (for the most part). The images with flash are particularly bizarre.

Yes, but you did not say before that the whole film strip looks that way.

 

[fotoobscura]

PE not in a tech pub somewhere? I'd love to find this book or publication. This is my favorite right now:

https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/photomicrography/chromeprocerrors.html

Kodak has published a set of photos of process errors and this is one of them. They are not available now except in out of print books AFAIK.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

That FSU reference is pretty poor unless you are a photomicrographer. The book (or manual) I refer to is "Kodak Color Films" , Publication E-77. It has been updated many times, but an example of light reversal in the FD is on page 20 of my edition. Later editions show improper light reversal before the FD.

Each edition seemed to feature different faults as the process(es) changed.

PE

 

[fotoobscura]

PE- I can buy most of these on Ebay- any specific edition I should target? I'm very interested in the processing errors.

That FSU reference is pretty poor unless you are a photomicrographer. The book (or manual) I refer to is "Kodak Color Films" , Publication E-77. It has been updated many times, but an example of light reversal in the FD is on page 20 of my edition. Later editions show improper light reversal before the FD.

Each edition seemed to feature different faults as the process(es) changed.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sorry, I have no idea without going through a mountain of books. It is probably from the middle range of editions.

PE

 

[fotoobscura]

No problem, thanks for the initial info. Seems like a great resource would be a website that had all of this...Perhaps I'll buy several books and scan them, put them up, etc. I literally don't know of any websites that show detailed technical explanations of processing errors for anything except BW.

Sorry, I have no idea without going through a mountain of books. It is probably from the middle range of editions.

PE