This looks too good to be true

[wartree]

Some time ago i asked if i could make color with few chemicals besides the b w ones.
But i found this http://www.flickr.com/photos/27820713@N04/4410036417/in/photostream/

seems a great way to get colour on the cheap, it only requires bw fix and developer.

 

[mrred]

I really can't see it being that much cheaper. A c-41 kit (which includes everything) is $18 in freestyle. Have your checked out the hair product isle lately?

Oh, and the real thing gives you the proper colours.

 

[wartree]

I really can't see it being that much cheaper. A c-41 kit (which includes everything) is $18 in freestyle. Have your checked out the hair product isle lately?

Oh, and the real thing gives you the proper colours.

the shitty part is that i cant get c-41 kit for 18 here. And if i order it from uk or something, it can get pretty expensive with fees and vat.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Following the link on that flickr page, I found a group where all sorts of interesting chemical experiments are being tried:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/latensification/

 

[mrred]

the shitty part is that i cant get c-41 kit for 18 here. And if i order it from uk or something, it can get pretty expensive with fees and vat.

That's a different story. You only referenced price on your original post.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes, this clique posts here and has some fair results using hair dye and Betadine bleach. It gives a low quality muted color image, but not up to the "standard". You get what you pay for! This route will give you at best, a sepia like color image.

PE

 

[markbarendt]

I can hardly imagine C-41 being expensive anymore.

My first kit was Trebla's and worked out about a buck a roll and I wasn't even being efficient with my replenishment.

Now that I have learned the process and chemicals I'll bet my chemical costs are getting close to 50 cents a roll or less.

 

[markbarendt]

the shitty part is that i cant get c-41 kit for 18 here. And if i order it from uk or something, it can get pretty expensive with fees and vat.

Contact a Mini-Lab supply house rather than a photography store.

 

[benjiboy]

In my experience if things look "Too good to be true" they usually are.

 

[Athiril]

Wartree where are you?

The quality of the image is absolutely rubbish, and I can tell you that the denisty range (dMax - dMin) will be very small, and make the quality from scanning and correcting contrast really bad with scanner noise and other issues (I guess the same with printing) - and this is one of the better experimental results using that type of process!

You can buy CD-2, and CD-3 from ArtCraftChem in the US, I got 220g of CD-2 to Australia from the US for ~$40, while I know CD-4 is best for C-41 for many reasons, the quality of image you will get will be worlds and worlds apart from the link you posted, and since you're looking at the above linked process so you can simply get your hands into colour, then I think you'd be extremely happy with a CD-2 or CD-3 developer.

If you're in Australia, see my post here about getting C-41 on the cheap by mixing and matching different brands/parts - http://athiril.blogspot.com/2010/05/processing-c-41-colour-negative-film.html

While it may still not be up to exact standard from an all-Kodak or an all-Fuji process, I'd say you couldnt tell the difference without control strip testing etc, and it'll beat the crap you get back from many labs in this country.


You also -should- be able to get much higher quality from using the right hair dye and other mix of chemicals with proper bleach and fix than what is being done on flickr.

 

[Photo Engineer]

There is a distant chemical relative to CD-4 in one of the hair dyes, so it may be that the choice of hair dye is critical. One of these people gave a URL to the site of the manufacturer with the contents of the dye listed. It is here on APUG.

The quality and dye stability both will be low.

PE

 

[Sirius Glass]

If it was practical, it would have been a commercial product. If is was usable but not commercially practical, it would have been posted here.

Steve

 

[Photo Engineer]

If it was practical, it would have been a commercial product. If is was usable but not commercially practical, it would have been posted here.

Steve

Steve;

It was posted here, and when a number of us made some negative comments on the results in terms of quality and etc.. then they left APUG and quit posting. This is the group that I referred to in my original post.

PE

 

[srs5694]

You can buy CD-2, and CD-3 from ArtCraftChem in the US

You can also get CD-2 and CD-4 from Photographer's Formulary. ArtCraft used to carry CD-4, too, but I haven't seen it on their Web site in at least a year. I don't know why they dropped it. I also don't know why both places carry CD-2. I don't know what, if any, current process uses it.

 

[Photo Engineer]

CD2, 3 and 4 are becoming more and more difficult to obtain. CD6 is almost impossible to get. I have a tiny quantity of CD4 and CD6, and that is about it. My understanding is that demand for raw color developers is almost zero nowdays. So, the products move slowly. They do not have an infinite shelf life!

PE

 

[Pickles]

Thank you Athiril and PE. This thread gave me my first big smile and laugh of the day. It's so nice to know I'm remembered. *mischievous grin*
Love you guys. Peace.

 

[nickrapak]

CD2, 3 and 4 are becoming more and more difficult to obtain. CD6 is almost impossible to get. I have a tiny quantity of CD4 and CD6, and that is about it. My understanding is that demand for raw color developers is almost zero nowdays. So, the products move slowly. They do not have an infinite shelf life!

PE

Is CD6 even being made anymore? Wasn't the only process that used CD6 the K-14 process?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I honestly don't know what the status of CD6 is.

PE

 

[bblhed]

It may produce less than desirable results, but you gota love that they are trying, you probably wouldn't use it for paying work, but it looks like it could be fun.

 

[Athiril]

I honestly don't know what the status of CD6 is.

PE

Do you have the CAS number for it?

You can also get CD-2 and CD-4 from Photographer's Formulary. ArtCraft used to carry CD-4, too, but I haven't seen it on their Web site in at least a year. I don't know why they dropped it. I also don't know why both places carry CD-2. I don't know what, if any, current process uses it.

Last I looked the prices were a bit too expensive next to ArtCraft's.

The bottle from artcraft says "Print Developer #2" on it. That may give a hint perhaps?

CD2, 3 and 4 are becoming more and more difficult to obtain. CD6 is almost impossible to get. I have a tiny quantity of CD4 and CD6, and that is about it. My understanding is that demand for raw color developers is almost zero nowdays. So, the products move slowly. They do not have an infinite shelf life!

PE

They got in fresh stuff for me and had to wait on it before sending it, so it seems they can still get new stock of CD-2 at least.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Some of these are used in hair dyes, and that is why some report color images from hair dyes.

There are CAS #s for these somewhere on APUG, but try here: http://www.chemicalbook.com/ChemicalProductProperty_EN_CB9296075.htm CAS: 50928-80-8

Print developer #2 is a gross misnomer.

PE