over-exposing to reduce saturation, pull proccess or not?

[hrst]

Hydrogen peroxide is used to increase contrast and it kills the developer so it becomes quite one-shot. (I've not tried it by myself yet but this is what I've read here.)

I've used sodium sulfite at around 0.5 g/l (IIRC! Please check this before trying) to reduce contrast and saturation in RA-4 developer. It works. And, it does not affect shelf life. I've also tried SLIMT and it works too, but you need much higher concentrations of ferricyanide at least for Supra Endura than usually published for BW paper usage.

It can be difficult to get any lab to do chemical modifications, and even if possible, will be expensive. But, the pull processing of the film can be quite a good way to achieve a drop in contrast and saturation. Try it with and without overexposure. You may get just what you are looking for.

You can also control contrast a little bit by modifying paper development time, so you can also pull process the paper. It won't do much difference, and affects first Dmax in a way that may not look nice, but for a small effect it works if you don't overdo it. Depending on lab's paper processor design, this may not be possible though.

I'd go with pull processing in this situation as it sounds easiest to try. For lost shadow speed, I'd add 1/3 or 1/2 stop of exposure. (Pulling 1 stop really loses some film speed, but not even close to 1 stop.) Then, in addition, you may want to try to overexpose another sheet at +1,5 stops and a third test at +3,5 stops. Or something like that. And "1 stop" pull process them all.

 

[markbarendt]

Hmm...let's see here... The OP is planning to shoot 8x10. His lab is souping the film and making prints for him since he does not have access to a color drkrm. He wants desaturated color and more powerful contrast control. Yes, he'll try overexposing and underdeveloping and that'll work to some extent. Should he try to make contrast reduction masks? Perhaps convince his lab to pour some Hydrogen Peroxide or citronic acid in their Colenta processor 20 gallon developing bath to reduce the contrast in his print? Or should he scan his 8x10 neg. and have at it in photoshop, and then have his lab print to ra4 laser light jet?

Actually the OP's complaint is that there is no more "neutral" film in 8x10. The goal seems to be simply to tone down say, Ektar, to get closer to Portra NC's pallette. I doubt that the OP is the only one in the world that has this want/need.

I'd also bet that any lab that is capable and competent in processing 8x10 C-41 has some real experience in ways to address the OPs concern easily. It wouldn't surprise me if they told him to underexpose Ektar a half stop and let them do the rest.

The big point I want to make here is that; the lab the OP chooses is the only one the can really answer this question. We simply don't know what tools they have, what skills they have, how they work, or what tricks they have up their sleeves.

 

[frotog]

Indeed. But I wouldn't place any bets on a contemporary lab's capability or competence in processing c-41, let alone c-41 in 8x10. Or, for that matter, the assumption that if indeed they do process c-41 that this is an indication of the lab's competence signifying a deeper understanding of the materials. It just ain't what it used to be. The only lab I know in which the processing is being done by someone who is actually familiar with the characteristic response of various film types is Praus in Rochester. And that's because not only is Edgar a top-notch analogue technician (the likes of which are no longer at the big name labs in nyc or LA) but he's also a photographer who regularly uses these materials.

The OP is not alone in wanting a less saturated, less contrasty c-41 film (read "neutral"). But he must understand that the marketplace is going the other way - paper and film have both gotten a lot more zingy than they were in the past. If you want a neutral look, Ektar would be a very bad choice. No amount of under or overexposing or pull processing this film will significantly change its nature as a super-saturated color film. The new Portra in 8x10 is all you got bud. And if that's too saturated for you than you'll follow what will most likely be your lab's sole recommendation (and I would be willing to place bets on this)...scan it, photoshop the curve you want to see and output to RA4 media with digital exposure.

For those of us with 20 cu. ft. chest freezers full of the pre VC endura paper, stockpiled 400 nc in 810 and a salvaged RA4 roller transport machine.... we have the luxury to follow the moral imperative to turn down the contrast and desaturate our images with the vagaries of chemical additives to our DEV. and the painstaking technical minutae of unsharp masks, registration pins, etc. I promise not to tell anyone here if I see you at the counter at Duggal with a CD-R in your hand.

 

[gongman5000]

Great info so far guys.

frotog, definitely have no illusions as to which way the market is going, in fact, when it comes to the outlook of future film availability I'm probably a bit more pessimistic than most. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the total number of available color negative films is half the already miniscule number in 12 or 18 months time.

My curiosity is mainly motivated by the fact that I'd like to leave myself the option to optically enlarge some of my negatives in the future despite the fact that it will undoubtedly become increasingly expensive to do so. And was hoping that there might be an easy way to knock the saturation of say some 800z MF negs down to the level of 400H or the new portra 400 down to the level of the recently discontinued portra nc. I was hoping there would be a way to do this with minimal lab intervention as money is definitely an issue. Fully aware that this might be wishful thinking, but you don't know until you ask...

 

[markbarendt]

was hoping that there might be an easy way to knock the saturation of say some 800z MF negs down to the level of 400H or the new portra 400 down to the level of the recently discontinued portra nc. I was hoping there would be a way to do this with minimal lab intervention as money is definitely an issue. Fully aware that this might be wishful thinking, but you don't know until you ask...

There actually is an easy way especially with roll film. Example; I mail stuff to Richard Photo Lab in LA for weddings and any stuff where there's a deadline. (Same lab used by Jose Villa)

We talked about my preferences, which they keep on file, we fine tuned that over the first couple orders on just how I like my stuff, and now it's processed that way without me even asking. They have been great.

Sure, it costs a bit more up front to use Richard Photo Lab vs. the local camera store but it is right the first time. The local processors cost me dearly in redo's and extra trips and still can't do as nice a job.

 

[gongman5000]

Good to know about Richards. I actually live very close to it and have been meaning to try them.