Why does B&W have endless processing combinations, but (modern) color only has 1-2?

Kirks518 · Oct 3, 2015

I'm sure there is a thread like this somewhere, but I'll be damned if I can find it.

With color film, you process either C-41 or E-6. Doesn't matter what brand, speed, or format, if it's negative, it's C-41, if it's positive, it's E-6. The developers for C-41 or E-6 may have some (relatively slight) variations in the instructions, but it's pretty straightforward. You can develop 2 (or more) rolls of C-41, no matter who made it, what speed it is, or what format, and the instructions will be the same.

But with B&W, there are endless combinations of developing processes. Every film gets handled completely differently based on the brand, speed, format or what-not. And then there are the developers for B&W that compound that. You can't develop Ilford Delta 400 with a roll of Kodak TMax 400 in the same tank and be successful.

I would think that color film would have the multitude of processes because (I think) it is a more complex medium with the dye layers, etc.

So for those in the know, why is it the way it is?

RobC · Oct 3, 2015

There were no standards when b+w started. every manufacturer went their own and the only standard was and is film speed.

By the time colour arrived on the scene the manufacturers saw the sense of having not only a film speed standard but a development standard too. Hence we now have C41 and E6 etc. Also with colour you can't play around with dev nearly as much becasue it won't give you good colour and the primary target is accurate/good colour reproduction.

b+w photographers, being what they are, will do anything except what the manufacturer recommends. You can ignore zone system, personal film speed tests and all the usual forum banter and just use box speed and do like the colour photographers do which is go out and take photographs when the light is right instead of trying to bend bad subject lighting to fit the neg and/or paper.

Mr Bill · Oct 3, 2015

I think the simple answer is that color is such a delicate process, by which I mean that a number of things have to happen "just so," such that there is not much room to juggle the conditions around. If you change the conditions, the multiple color layers don't necessarily stay in balance. So the design has been to lock down the process conditions, and the film designers make their films work under the specific process.

Sirius Glass · Oct 3, 2015

RobC said:
There were no standards when b+w started. every manufacturer went their own and the only standard was and is film speed.

By the time colour arrived on the scene the manufacturers saw the sense of having not only a film speed standard but a development standard too. Hence we now have C41 and E6 etc. Also with colour you can't play around with dev nearly as much becasue it won't give you good colour and the primary target is accurate/good colour reproduction.

b+w photographers, being what they are, will do anything except what the manufacturer recommends. You can ignore zone system, personal film speed tests and all the usual forum banter and just use box speed and do like the colour photographers do which is go out and take photographs when the light is right instead of trying to bend bad subject lighting to fit the neg and/or paper.

Yep, wot he done did sed.

Photo Engineer · Oct 3, 2015

It is a matter of having all of the color layers reach the optimum point at the same time and with the best dyes. If you follow the instructions that happens and if you don't the result is poor at best.

With B&W, you have a wide latitude for processing a single layer and you can tolerate a wide range of contrasts and fix things up when printing. With color, you either view directly or print and there is really only one contrast grade out there. And, BTW, reversal B&W is a bit picky as well.

PE

gone · Oct 3, 2015

Remember, colour is "realistic" while B&W is abstract. There are no hues w/ B&W to look odd (green people for example).... you're always going to get black, white, and shades of grey unless something goes drastically wrong. Compare that to colour, where a shift in hues, even small, can ruin your bride's complexion to the point where you'll rapidly be looking for another line of work. So colour, by it's very nature, needs to be under much tighter control all the way through the processes that take it from unexposed film to finished print.

Xmas · Oct 3, 2015

- memory failure - the processes were different in bye gone days but the mini labs killed off the non compatible film process eg why did Kodachrome die?

It is like the video cassette wars.

Sirius Glass · Oct 3, 2015

Xmas said:
- memory failure - the processes were different in bye gone days but the mini labs killed off the non compatible film process eg why did Kodachrome die?

It is like the video cassette wars.

Kodachrome had its own process for development. Kodachrome died as a result of lack of consumer interest partially as a result of the digital revolution.

Ektachrome had a process that kept getting upgraded over the years: E-2, E-4, E-6, ...

Xmas · Oct 3, 2015

Ilford and Agfa both had negative film and transparency film that was not compatible with Kodak processes like E2.
You posted the film back to a lab that could do the process.

Prehistory maybe?

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Oct 4, 2015

One Apugger had been posted leica magazines pdfs and I found there , there are carbro , dufaycolor , dye transfer at 1950s. I think there are lots of things at prehistory.

removed account4 · Oct 4, 2015

Kirks518 said:
I'm sure there is a thread like this somewhere, but I'll be damned if I can find it.

With color film, you process either C-41 or E-6. Doesn't matter what brand, speed, or format, if it's negative, it's C-41, if it's positive, it's E-6. The developers for C-41 or E-6 may have some (relatively slight) variations in the instructions, but it's pretty straightforward. You can develop 2 (or more) rolls of C-41, no matter who made it, what speed it is, or what format, and the instructions will be the same.

But with B&W, there are endless combinations of developing processes. Every film gets handled completely differently based on the brand, speed, format or what-not. And then there are the developers for B&W that compound that. You can't develop Ilford Delta 400 with a roll of Kodak TMax 400 in the same tank and be successful.

I would think that color film would have the multitude of processes because (I think) it is a more complex medium with the dye layers, etc.

So for those in the know, why is it the way it is?

i am by no means an expert in this, and don't play one on TV
but i have a sneeky feeling that the reason why there are only 1 or 2 processes
is because some of them were proprietary ( like autochromes )
and when they stopped, they stopped ... and another reason might be because
when 1 company is HUGE other companies probably figure it is a waste to compete
and reinvent the wheel, when their processes are "good enough"
the competition ended up being with the emulsions not the development formulas.
but with black and white, there was no competition like with color.
daguareotypes were proprietary ( a license/payment to daguerre was required )
with the processes that followed people stood on the shoulders and borrowed developers &c from the people before them.
they'd find the chemicals at the corner drug store or mail away from an annual.
lots of people selling the same stuff. but hypo never changed ( except for speed fixer ).
today, there are very few places that make glycin and IDK 50 years ago i don't think that was the case

Why does B&W have endless processing combinations, but (modern) color only has 1-2?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency