Can you develop colour film in Black and white chemicals?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Mooseman, Apr 29, 2009.

  1. Mooseman

    Mooseman Member

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Titile says it all folks. Just wondering if I can will it come out as black and white? this is kinda what I am looking for :smile:
     
  2. Fotoguy20d

    Fotoguy20d Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,234
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    You can develop Ilford's XP2 in B&W chemistry. I use the same timing as HP5. I've wondered myself whether standard color film can be processed that way.

    Dan
     
  3. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,768
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There are many many threads on this very subject. In fact, there was one here just about a week ago or perhaps 2 weeks.

    PE
     
  4. Pinholemaster

    Pinholemaster Member

    Messages:
    1,504
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Westminster,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Yes because color film IS B&W film with added ingredients.
     
  5. John Shriver

    John Shriver Member

    Messages:
    447
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Will the results be good (other than XP2): no. The yellow mask will still be in the negative, so Dmin is rather high.
     
  6. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,074
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There is one colour c41 film with which I am planning some b&w experiments. It is called rollei digibase.
     
  7. Aurum

    Aurum Member

    Messages:
    923
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Location:
    Landrover Ce
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yes you can. Density of the negatives won't be great, as your bog standard C41 doesn't have tons of silver in it compared to standard B&W. The density of C41 negs comes mainly from dye clouds formed during processing.

    The orange mask of standard colour films can also be a PITA for printing onto standard B&W paper. Maskless films like Digibase, XP2, or reversal films designed for E6 (Or Kodachrome) don't have this problem.
     
  8. Vaughn

    Vaughn Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,295
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Location:
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    That said, I was given some 8x10 Kodak color film to develop last week (I was told it was delta 100). I used a Jobo 3005 drum and got a bit worried at the color of the developer when I poured it out!..Wish I could remember the type of film it was...I seem to remember the number being something like 2029.

    Beautiful negs...the yellow base made them look a little bit like pyro-stained negatives. Lots of density, clean looking negs except for that yellow color.

    I used Ilford Universal PQ developer and some very hefty development.

    Vaughn
     
  9. Greg Davis

    Greg Davis Member

    Messages:
    2,057
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    Nicholasvill
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I've had students ignore me and get Kodak 400CN to use in class. They try to develop it in D-76 with very poor results. It has the typical orange mask, and the negatives are very thin and extremely flat in contrast.
     
  10. Vaughn

    Vaughn Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,295
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Location:
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Happens regularly here, also...and one of the first things they say is "There is something wrong with the chemicals!"

    Vaughn
     
  11. wclavey

    wclavey Member

    Messages:
    253
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    As someone above said, C-41 developed in B&W chemistry negatives do come out a bit flatter in contrast and I find that when printing, I generally start with a #3.5 or #4 filter. Here is a picture from a 5-yr expired (when I shot it) roll of NPH-220, 400 ISO, developed in Diafine. In addition to the orange base, I also had some fog to deal with. This is a negative scan with PS adjustment of the contrast - - the real print of it was made with #4.5 contrast filter, but a VERY LONG print exposure (120 sec at f/4.5).

    But since I have multiple backs for my MF camera, I keep a roll of expired C-41 color in one back and then my "real films" in the others and I use it as back-up and for everyday shooting, since it is very cheap to come by. But I have been accused of being a penny pincher (or nickel pincher, in one case...). :D
     

    Attached Files:

  12. Photo Engineer

    Photo Engineer Subscriber

    Messages:
    25,768
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  13. WGibsonPhotography

    WGibsonPhotography Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Location:
    Trinity, Ala
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Just out of curiosity, I decided to give developing a roll of c41 in Rodinal a try. The film is hanging up to dry now. Hopefully I'll have some scans next week. I wont offer any judgements of the "test" until I get some scans (or prints if I just decide I want to give Wal-Mart's photo lab some money...) :D

    BTW, the picture wclavey posted above is really nice even though it was altered in PS a bit :smile:
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Alex Bishop-Thorpe

    Alex Bishop-Thorpe Member

    Messages:
    1,455
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Location:
    Adelaide, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Colour film in Rodinal 1+100
    It works a heck of a lot better than I expected...but I havent tried to print them in the darkroom yet. I must admit I like the massively excessive grain.
     
  16. WGibsonPhotography

    WGibsonPhotography Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Location:
    Trinity, Ala
    Shooter:
    35mm

    I developed my roll at 1:50 in Rodinal for 20 minutes at 70F. I think I might have developed it too long because the negs look pretty contrasty.

    I like those pictures. Very nice. And I quite like the grain as well :smile:
     
  17. WGibsonPhotography

    WGibsonPhotography Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Location:
    Trinity, Ala
    Shooter:
    35mm
    well, I didnt get to print the negs, but I did scan them at school today (Yeah, I know. I did it "wrong" :smile: ). My enlarger is going to the shop in a few days, so this is the only choice I had. I'm about to post them to Flickr. I'll link when I get them up :smile:



    Edit: My computer is being a PITA right now. Hopefully I'll get them up tomorrow :/
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2009
  18. WGibsonPhotography

    WGibsonPhotography Member

    Messages:
    243
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Location:
    Trinity, Ala
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Well, after getting caught up with lots of stuff and not getting around to posting these, I finally got them on flickr. They look like crap, but here they are :D

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37189220@N08/3695707644/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37189220@N08/3694897215/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37189220@N08/3694897147/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37189220@N08/3695707390/in/set-72157621053320140/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/37189220@N08/3695707338/in/set-72157621053320140/


    I'm not a real big fan of them. This is something I wont be doing again, but it was a fun learning experience :D
     
  19. DutchShooter

    DutchShooter Member

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Location:
    The Netherla
    Shooter:
    35mm
    After reading a lot I decided to simply try.
    My process:
    -presoak 1 min in water
    -Rodinal 1+100 - 1min agitate, 60min stand development
    - usual stop, rapid-fix & wash.

    At first I thought it went wrong, as I didn't see any pics...but that was due to the dark orange mask.
    Pictures were taken with a ultracheap panoramic focus free camera without exposure measuring with a 1cm diameter plastic lens.
    By my 3-year old son :smile:
    On the cheapest c-41 film I could find locally (no-name ISO 200)
    Here are some examples:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  20. steven_e007

    steven_e007 Member

    Messages:
    829
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Shropshire,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What is the reason for wanting to do this?

    I've done it when I've found a colour film, either in the back of a draw or in a camera from eBay and I don't know what is on it. Could be nothing, or rubbish, or something ... unwholesome so I've chucked it in rodinal just to see (and of cause it always has wonderful pictures on it that I'd wished I'd got processed properly :wink: )

    Quality wise I've always got hard toprint rubbish with no redeeming features that I can see...

    Processing a Black and White C-41 film in BW chemistry is a different ball game altogether, there can be very interesting aspects to this.
     
  21. kittyhawk88

    kittyhawk88 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Location:
    Sydney, Aust
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Colour Film Konica 100 + D72 Success!!

    Yes! it works..

    I found a roll of 120 and souped it in D72 30 degrees C 15 minutes.. so found an old roll of colour film. Konica 100 ASA . Exposed at 80 ASA/ISO. EOS 500N.

    Pre rinse 2 minutes. D72 30 Degrees C. 15 Minutes. 1 full minute agitation on start and 1 minute agitation at each 5 minutes.. Full rinse for 2 minutes, Fix 5minutes.

    Negatives are nice and sharp just like Rollei 100.

    Past failures:

    20 degrees 7 minutes HC110
    20 Degrees 30 minutes Microdol X 1+3

    Looks like colour film likes being souped at 30 degress and twice development time..

    Am going to develop all those cheap colour film.

    HAve not got round to printing the negatives yet. Will post printing details later.

    Must admit that orange mask interesting to print through..
     
  22. dave26

    dave26 Member

    Messages:
    1
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    another experiance:
    agfacolor 100 c-41 film

    1. rinse in 30 °C water for 2 minutes
    2. developed in Fomadon LQR (1+10) (30 °C, 15 minutes)
    3. fixed with Fomafix (30 °C, 5 minutes)
    4. wash in 15 °C water for 30 minutes

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/bacsik/5503069311/
    scanned with Epson V500 in colour mode

    try & enjoy!
     
  23. kiwivagabond

    kiwivagabond Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have done heaps of this now. So much fun, and by heaps I mean 30ish films.........its been a short career back into analogue. I have a fridge full of 120 colour film, Portra, Ektachrome, Pro 100..........and I used them in my pinhole cameras, and my Bronica. They develop with a different coloured cast on them, but they scan awesomely..................some need tweaking some dont. Most of my film expired 2004 and earlier............the price was like too good to resist and definitely value for money. eg. 5 portra film, gold, ektachrome etc for 5 dollars. I have learned heaps. Enlarging from these negatives will be a different and more difficult journey I should imagine...............but so far its been awesome fun.......have used xtol, and last night tried Rodinal with great results.
    My process has evolved to 2min soak and rinse, 6 min devo, 2 minute stop, 4 minute fix, 15min wash, 1min fotoflow equivalent..........
    and it works awesomely. I have used that across 100, 400 & 800 iso with great results...............here are some images from that fun
    http://www.pbase.com/blindpoet/image/147184993
    http://www.pbase.com/blindpoet/image/147184952
    http://www.pbase.com/blindpoet/image/147042221

    theres a whole range on that gallery http://www.pbase.com/blindpoet/life_2012

    I am no purist.........obviously the image is scanned and some tweaked............but the film is useable and adds to the finished image ..........its own character.

    so go for it............buy up film and shoot it.....
     
  24. kiwivagabond

    kiwivagabond Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    While I have got the cheap colour film to learn on, and devolop in bw chems, there is a certain addiction forming I think. Part of that is akin to my move away from the digital age of control and perfection................yes getting real film eg bw will be perfect, again I have arrived at total control...........doing the colour film in bw chems...is exciting because I so dont know, its like a potter opening the kiln and not knowing..........and I have some lovely images from what would be considered failures...........definitely not perfect. So even if I had the money, and like you I have to watch mine.......colour film in bw chems would be a viable choice for me......I love the random................
     
  25. wilper

    wilper Member

    Messages:
    44
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I tried Fuji C200 in Maco Ecoprint B/W chem (1+12, 5 min, 20C) and I got some pictures on the roll at least.

    You can see the results here:
    https://photofying.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/experiments-with-film-roll-4

    Keep in mind that I'm a beginner at this whole film development stuff, so I may have gotten worse than necessary results due to mistakes in other parts of the process.
     
  26. John Weinland

    John Weinland Member

    Messages:
    26
    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    Southbury, C
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    That happened to me a few times (35mm) accidentally, and the results were horrible each and every time. Came out way underexposed, and very dark bluish/greenish, and splotchy. Not even sure if the film won't disintegrate later. Note: film was Portra 160 and the rolls were processed to completion in standard (XTOL I think) b&w chemistry. I did not discard the developer later, but probably should have.