Red meat: Conventional B&W vs. C-41 options

[RPC]

Sensitometry, showing parallel curves at 100F, and showing crossover at lower temperatures, is what imparts the truth, and I recall a thread where someone clearly demonstrated that with your processes. If your images are acceptable to you then by all means do it. I have clearly seen the crossover in such prints and find it objectionable.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Actually it's pretty much stone simple at home. I have a Jobo now but I've done many dozens if not hundreds of rolls of color with a big tub for a water bath and just putting my chems in aluminum cans for easier temperature adjustment. I don't bother with C41 (or E6 for that matter, which is just as easy only it has more steps) these days because I don't do that much and am happy to pay a few dollars to have it done for me. But if I shot more I would. There's not a lot of creativity involved though. It's not like B&W where you can choose from a huge range of developers each with their own traits. You can push a bit or pull a bit, and that's about it.

Bob, look, we don't all have the luxury that you do, so don't dismiss our efforts to still love film. There are plenty of reasons to shoot film and then scan. And you know what? If I have the next Stieglitz on a roll, I can have it made into "real" print, color or B&W.

Each to their own, so stop trying to convince us heretics, OK?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Sensitometry, showing parallel curves at 100F, and showing crossover at lower temperatures, is what imparts the truth, and I recall a thread where someone clearly demonstrated that with your processes. If your images are acceptable to you then by all means do it. I have clearly seen the crossover in such prints and find it objectionable.

Unicolor provides data for low temperature processing, so I guess they are OK with it.

I also think a lot of the need for "spot on" densitometry was necessary for fast, quality lab processing to prints. If scanned, probably not so much.

 

[RPC]

I'm not talking spot-on sensitometry, but way-off sensitometry.

There has been low temperature processes around for years, but notice that they aren't too popular.

 

[MattKing]

Unicolor provides data for low temperature processing, so I guess they are OK with it.

I also think a lot of the need for "spot on" densitometry was necessary for fast, quality lab processing to prints. If scanned, probably not so much.

I have a feeling you have never struggled with printing a negative that exhibits development induced colour crossover.

Whether you are printing optically, or scanning and adjusting digitally, development induced ​colour crossover is a Royal PITA.

The whole purpose of developing C41 at exactly the right temperature is to avoid development induced colour crossover.

Think of a head and shoulders portrait, where the shadows have one colour cast, the mid-tones have another and the highlights have a third.

That is what you struggle with when you have development induced ​colour crossover.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Who are you talking too??

Bob, look, we don't all have the luxury that you do, so don't dismiss our efforts to still love film. There are plenty of reasons to shoot film and then scan. And you know what? If I have the next Stieglitz on a roll, I can have it made into "real" print, color or B&W.

Each to their own, so stop trying to convince us heretics, OK?

 

[Roger Cole]

Bob, look, we don't all have the luxury that you do, so don't dismiss our efforts to still love film. There are plenty of reasons to shoot film and then scan. And you know what? If I have the next Stieglitz on a roll, I can have it made into "real" print, color or B&W.

Each to their own, so stop trying to convince us heretics, OK?

Huh? I'm not Bob nor am I trying to convince anyone of anything. I have nothing against digital and even said I would just shoot digital natively.

If I object to something it's the assumption of scanning without specifying that. I think the assumption for images shot on film should be optical printing (or projection) unless otherwise specified.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

 

[markbarendt]

Well, this thread went way sideways.

Just a couple thoughts here.

For the films (and resulting print) the OP was interested in, XP-2 and BW400CN, there would be no crossover.

Similarly, development induced crossover when using color film, is nearly irrelevant anytime the final print is meant to be B&W.

The color of the layers simply imparts a characteristic response in the "system", something like (but not the same as) the difference between using an ortho and a pan film might impart upon the resulting print. That change simply comes at a different point in the system.

I've not printed room temperature processed C41 films, but I have shot and printed some very old C41 film, that had very distinct color issues/problems after normal processing. On B&W paper, and it worked just fine. Similarly fresh, well processed Portra and Superia, has done the same for me.

 

[RPC]

Agreed, but in one post the OP mentioned being able to use one film for both b&w and color.

 

[markbarendt]

And one film for both is a cool benefit!

The other thing that I find truly great about C-41 is having just one process. It may require extra work for temp control, but one can mix and match the films in their tank as they please.

 

[David Lyga]

OK, here are my results.

C-41 developer: Kodak Flexicolor Developer.

My working solution is 1 + 9 with 2 ml of sodium carbonate, mono, added to each liter of working solution. Yes, this means that a ‘25 gallon size’ will make 250 gallons of working solution!

Temp: 80 F. Time: 15 minutes with frequent agitation.

I took these photos over the weekend. The film used was Fuji Super G+, ISO 100. The picture with me and the color swash was taken in Rittenhouse Square where there is a lot of greenery possibly to influence the tonal rendition of the (rather neutral) cement. - David Lyga

 

[Bob Carnie]

Took your image and read it .. here are the results from image of you with macbeth checker.


White shirt ( I assume it is) 3magenta 20 yellow
Cement 5 green 26 yellow
third nuetral check point 3 magenta 17 yellow

Basically over all you are about 15 -25 points off balanced colour

 

[flavio81]

Yes, i can see the color is very off, it is evident to the eye!!

Still, i guess it would be easy to balance in the digital domain.

 

[bvy]

Good work, David! Hopefully folks will believe us now when we say you can't get correct color balance from low temperature C-41 processing...

 

[RPC]

High crossover in the chart and his skin tone-I would say this would be very difficult if not impossible to correct in the digital domain.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Good work, David! Hopefully folks will believe us now when we say you can't get correct color balance from low temperature C-41 processing...

Digital does not solve all color balance problems.

 

[Bob Carnie]

three points on colour checker balanced to neutral within 1 pt.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I'm not talking spot-on sensitometry, but way-off sensitometry.

There has been low temperature processes around for years, but notice that they aren't too popular.

They haven't been "aren't too popular" because its a home developing alternative vs. labs. That doesn't mean in and of itself, it's not viable.

 

[RPC]

They haven't been "aren't too popular" because its a home developing alternative vs. labs. That doesn't mean in and of itself, it's not viable.

They have never been popular with either labs or home users because they just don't deliver the quality. If you want find out yourself if it is viable why don't you give it a try? Then you will be qualified to argue the point. I have tried it, and that is why I am arguing against it.

 

[David Lyga]

The shirt is buff in color, not pure white. - David Lyga

 

[Bob Carnie]

David- I balanced on the step wedge to within 1 pt on three steps- highlight mid and low.

you are seeing obvious cross over.... you could upload to me the original file and I will balance for that giving a more fair appraisal.

The shirt is buff in color, not pure white. - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

You are correct, the color of me is not perfect. But the color with the purple and yellow flowers is, and that leads me to think that I might have been off with my filtering.

I still say that this temperature variation is viable. Actually, to get color perfect is very difficult, as many on this board will fully agree. The most difficult thing with processing color is to get the developing time just right. Too little development time will lead to muddy results (i.e., lack of contrast). Even a bit too much will tend to overemphasize the hue differentiation, causing this crossover. Sometimes, with only certain instances, as with my purple and yellow flowers, this is even beneficial as compared with normal processing.

In sum, much of color work delves past objectivity, into the realm of subjectivity, which can either enhance or detract from the desired, creative results. - David Lyga

 

[Paul Verizzo]

They have never been popular with either labs or home users because they just don't deliver the quality. If you want find out yourself if it is viable why don't you give it a try? Then you will be qualified to argue the point. I have tried it, and that is why I am arguing against it.

I'm all for empirical evidence, so I accept your results (presuming your chemicals approved of lower temp processing.) but to say it was never popular is not evidence.

 

[David Lyga]

I still maintain that my processing was slightly at fault, NOT the temperature drop.

It is extremely difficult to take the pictures, process both the negatives and prints, then, with an old Canon S2 IS bridge camera to 'scan' the photos with, to expect perfect results. Many times, I HAVE gotten perfect prints when doing this at low temperatures. More noteworthy, I HAVE gotten terrible prints when doing everything 'right' with 'correct times and temps.

I am not refuting anyone here but simply saying that there are viable alternatives in this creative color process. - David Lyga

 

[markbarendt]

You are correct, the color of me is not perfect. But the color with the purple and yellow flowers is, and that leads me to think that I might have been off with my filtering.

I still say that this temperature variation is viable. Actually, to get color perfect is very difficult, as many on this board will fully agree. The most difficult thing with processing color is to get the developing time just right. Too little development time will lead to muddy results (i.e., lack of contrast). Even a bit too much will tend to overemphasize the hue differentiation, causing this crossover. Sometimes, with only certain instances, as with my purple and yellow flowers, this is even beneficial as compared with normal processing.

In sum, much of color work delves past objectivity, into the realm of subjectivity, which can either enhance or detract from the desired, creative results. - David Lyga

What I hear you saying David is; that you get results that are acceptable to you and that others you know have the same struggles with C41. I'm sure that's true.

What I have found though is that C-41 is remarkably consistent, if I follow the instructions. Given that, its very reliable at producing properly balanced results.