Ready for my first roll... Silly questions!

[koraks]

@Steve906, if you only scan and process digitally, I don't think there are severe problems with your approach. When printing RA4, I'd expect that your approach would induce a significant color shift that could be largely corrected through filtration, and perhaps a little crossover that may or may not be noticeable.

 

[Steve906]

@Steve906, if you only scan and process digitally, I don't think there are severe problems with your approach. When printing RA4, I'd expect that your approach would induce a significant color shift that could be largely corrected through filtration, and perhaps a little crossover that may or may not be noticeable.

Thanks Koraks, just about to do one today so this thread just had me suddenly worried I was missing out on some super quality issues.

 

[MattKing]

It is the potential for crossover that is the challenge.
Changing the development time and the temperature changes the contrast of the different colour components of the emulsion, but the changes will vary between those components.
If the contrast of those components don't match, you will have to deal with at least some crossover. And as some other recent Photrio discussions about colour crossover will reveal, some of us are more sensitive to crossover than others!
Particularly when pictures of people are involved.

 

[Steve906]

It is the potential for crossover that is the challenge.
Changing the development time and the temperature change the contrast of the different colour components of the emulsion, but the changes will vary between those components.
If the contrast of those components don't match, you will have to deal with at least some crossover. And as some other recent Photrio discussions about colour crossover will reveal, some of us are more sensitive to crossover than others!
Particularly when pictures of people are involved.

Ah.. OK thanks for the info.
Just did a roll of 120 Ektar - 8min @ 30C/86F 4 inversions every minute (30 seconds continuous at start and 4 at 30 sec before end). Same as always.
I'll look carefully when dry & sc***ed to see if I can see any crossover. I've never really considered this before, most of my photography until a few years ago was 35mm. I'd like to think a bit better than holiday snaps. Now I'm definitely looking for a more professional result.

Sorry Bormental didn't mean to hijack your thread.

 

[Bormental]

@Steve906 No worries, I am very much interested in trying other temperatures too, but also determined to do one kit (8-10 rolls) "by the book" to develop a baseline first. I have also built a collection of lab-processed negatives of several film stocks, as another reference point. I do not mind minor color chanages as long as they can be easily addressed in post-processing, as I also don't wet-print.

 

[koraks]

Just did a roll of 120 Ektar

Ektar is the one film I'd be very hesitant to go outside the established box of proven-to-work parameters with. It's a great film if used well, but it *will* bite if you draw outside the borders.

 

[mshchem]

Latitude generally refers to tolerance in exposure, not development. C41 really works best when it's developed according to spec.

Of course, if the chemistry's datasheet says that 3:30 @ 102F are the correct variables to use, then it makes sense to stick to this. However, I would not expect severe consequences if standard C41 parameters would be used, i.e. 37.8C/100F for 3:15.

I've been processing color film since the Nixon administration. Again there's so much latitude in a film like Portra 400 from a exposure (-2 to +4 stops) and processing at 100°F to push 1 stop you add 30 seconds, 3:45 . But jo one bothers because you can shoot 400 speed daylight Portra at 1600 in wierd light and still get reasonable results. It looks like Cinestill is hedging, looks to me they are building in a 1 stop push, to help the typical amateur customers that use their chemistry.
Slide film is a whole different story.

 

[Bormental]

Phew... my back hurts! I've just completed developing my first four rolls. One is ruined [1] and the other three look very similar to my lab-processed rolls. They're drying right now. It is surprisingly hard to tell if you have a good color negative, at least when it's the first 4 rolls you developed.

Thank you everyone. Any tips to evaluate quality before I am able to scan?

[1] Processed first two 135 rolls in 600ml, they looked good. Then processed the next two 120 rolls in... (ta-da!) 600ml on auto-pilot... The top roll is ruined. I was so focused on keeping my temps at 102F...

 

[koraks]

Evaluating the negatives visually is indeed quite difficult. It gets a little easier after the first 100 rolls or so, but even then, it's very hard to impossible to say something about the more subtle aspects. Gross problems are easy to spot, such as excessive fog, damage to the emulsion etc., just as with B&W. But beyond that, it gets tricky. For me personally, the proof of the pudding is in RA4 printing the negatives. For you, it'll likely be scanning.

 

[MattKing]

I remember a discussion here with Ron Mowrey/Photo Engineer (RIP) where I mentioned that it was a challenge for most to evaluate colour negatives visually, and he responded that it wasn't difficult for him!
So after a few thousand rolls, you too might be able to do it easily.
Congratulations.
For the back, it helps to have a small stand that you can put one foot up on from time to time.
Like you will find in some bars!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have been doing this for decades and I am so bad evaluating color negatives that I do not bother to try any longer.

 

[Bormental]

Ok, while cutting and examining dried negatives today, I noticed that the color of the organge mask on my negs is slightly different from negatives produced by a lab. (ouch, not a good sign!). Mine are more yellow and less orange. I've ran some searches on photrio and here's my short list of suspects:

• Extended pre-washing. The C41 kit aid "1 minute" and I've done more than that (a bit over 2), thinking it's not critical.
• C41 kit does not mention a stop bath, but the advice here on photrio was to do one, I used Ilford Ilfostop for 10 seconds.

My scanner hasn't arrived yet and I have disassembled my DSLR scanning rig already, so I can't tell how bad this is. Thoughts?
Thanks.

[EDIT] just discovered some old posts by PE, where he said to only use acetic acid based stop bath with C-41, not citric acid like Ilfostop: "citric acid can hurt dyes".

 

[Mick Fagan]

I don't think anything you have done, which is outside of the standard C41 standard, is, or will be, an issue.

I have never seen a lab that does C41 with a pre-wash, nor have I ever seen a mini-lab with a pre-wash incorporated. I myself have never done a pre-wash with the C41 process. That does not mean doing a pre-wash is incorrect, it just means the vast majority of C41 processed on the planet does not have that happen. Don't worry about it, if it works for you, just keep on doing it.

The stop bath will not really change anything, it just stops the development instantly; well, within 2 seconds of it hitting the film anyway.

If you look back at your C41 negatives, going back years if you can, you will invariably see differing variations of the mask colour, "it's what it is," comes to mind.

Looking forward to seeing some results, hopefully, they'll be positive............................

Mick.

 

[foc]

I don't think anything you have done, which is outside of the standard C41 standard, is, or will be, an issue.

I have never seen a lab that does C41 with a pre-wash, nor have I ever seen a mini-lab with a pre-wash incorporated. I myself have never done a pre-wash with the C41 process. That does not mean doing a pre-wash is incorrect, it just means the vast majority of C41 processed on the planet does not have that happen. Don't worry about it, if it works for you, just keep on doing it.

The stop bath will not really change anything, it just stops the development instantly; well, within 2 seconds of it hitting the film anyway.

If you look back at your C41 negatives, going back years if you can, you will invariably see differing variations of the mask colour, "it's what it is," comes to mind.

Looking forward to seeing some results, hopefully, they'll be positive............................

Mick.

Totally agree.
No need for prewash.
No need for stop bath.
The orange mask in different films varies in orangeness.
C41 is really very simple (and boring) just do "exactly what it says on the tin" and you can't go wrong.
I think when people start tinkering with C41 (like they do with B&W) that is when problems are caused.

 

[koraks]

Ok, while cutting and examining dried negatives today, I noticed that the color of the organge mask on my negs is slightly different from negatives produced by a lab. (ouch, not a good sign!). Mine are more yellow and less orange.

Just to get it straight: the same film, of (roughly) the same age? Different film stocks do have different dye masks, so a difference is not a problem per se. If the same film, from the same batch, gives a different mask depending on who developed it, there is obviously an inconsistency. It's a different question if that inconsistency will create problems elsewhere in the process (i.e. if it will manifest problematically in the final image). So don't panic just yet.

• Extended pre-washing. The C41 kit aid "1 minute" and I've done more than that (a bit over 2), thinking it's not critical.

I don't prewash and don't see the need for it. But there's a bit of a diatribe on the pre-wash-or-not question. However, I don't see how it would significantly affect color mask properties.

• C41 kit does not mention a stop bath, but the advice here on photrio was to do one, I used Ilford Ilfostop for 10 seconds.

I haven't tried citric acid stop with C41 I think. Acetic acid would be the safe bet. I doubt, however, that the influence on the dyes is as big as you may fear at this point. My experience with RA4 paper (different dyes though!!) is that contemporary color dyes withstand citric acid just fine (no visible difference with acetic acid stop). There's a bit of carry-over of wisdom/best practices from older generations of films/dyes that's not necessarily valid for today's materials.

 

[MattKing]

Stop bath helps extend the life of your bleach and fixer, and ensures rapid cessation of development. Both are directed more to the quality, repeatability and economy of your process than they are to the specific results you obtain on a single film.
I wonder whether part of the reason for avoiding citric acid is its propensity to encourage mould growth if it is kept and re-used.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Stop bath helps extend the life of your bleach and fixer, and ensures rapid cessation of development. Both are directed more to the quality, repeatability and economy of your process than they are to the specific results you obtain on a single film.
I wonder whether part of the reason for avoiding citric acid is its propensity to encourage mould growth if it is kept and re-used.

The greatly beloved PE recommended stop bath and he was the one who would know.

 

[Bormental]

Just to get it straight: the same film, of (roughly) the same age? Different film stocks do have different dye masks, so a difference is not a problem per se. If the same film, from the same batch, gives a different mask depending on who developed it, there is obviously an inconsistency. It's a different question if that inconsistency will create problems elsewhere in the process (i.e. if it will manifest problematically in the final image). So don't panic just yet.

Yes, medium format Portra 160 from the same 5-pack. I have noticed that different stocks have different mask tint, with Ektar 100 being the most orange. Thank you for the encouragement. I am not panicking as the difference is barely noticeable.

For the next batch, I will pre-wash to 100F for exactly 50 seconds (1min pre-wash is recommended by C-41 kit and also by PE to get the film+tank to working temp) and will skip the stop bath.

 

[Bormental]

I couldn't wait for the new scanner to arrive, so I have re-assembled my camera-scanning rig today and ran the first 5-shot strip. Here're some samples (Portra 800)

These two were during sunset:

Inside, cloudy outside:

Sunny:

Do these look like Portra 800 to you? I have never developed this film at a lab before, it was my first time using it.

 

[foc]

Well done.
I think you did a great job.
You must be happy with the results yourself?

 

[pentaxuser]

I have been doing this for decades and I am so bad evaluating color negatives that I do not bother to try any longer.

Yes if it was in any way straightforward I am sure by now there would be articles and/ or pictures plus videos on it as there are on evaluating b&w negs. If there are any good instructional articles or videos I'd welcome the links to them

pentaxuser

 

[Bormental]

Thank you and yes, I am pleasantly surprised. This is, however, just one of the three rolls. I can't wait to scan my MF Portra 160 rolls.

 

[MattKing]

I couldn't wait for the new scanner to arrive, so I have re-assembled my camera-scanning rig today and ran the first 5-shot strip. Here're some samples (Portra 800)

These two were during sunset:
View attachment 252673

Do these look like Portra 800 to you? I have never developed this film at a lab before, it was my first time using it.

With respect to the above image, a couple of quick adjustments in FastStone yields this for me.

To my mind that looks much more like "near sunset" lighting - at least on my monitor.
Do you have any photos using the film where we can evaluate skin tones?

 

[Bormental]

Do you have any photos using the film where we can evaluate skin tones?

Only in a baking state You may notice some differences below. This film appears to be highly saturated, so I was lowering it down to taste on some shots.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Maaaaate! You're up and running with colour; congratulations.

Mick.