Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,821   Posts: 1,581,836   Online: 1149
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    Ok, a slightly different thing now-

    Can you please look over this and tell me where I go wrong?

    I'm going to reverse process Plus-X negative film in 16mm

    First dev: HC-110 for 5 minutes
    Stop bath for 3 minutes
    Bleach in normal room light until it looks good (Farmer's reducer?)
    Hold about 10 cm under a 60 watt incandescent light and re-expose on each side for about 30 seconds
    Re-develop in normal room light with HC-110 until it looks proper
    (I eventually want to try using Caffenol for the second developer)
    Fix 5 min
    A few problems I notice, with my limited knowledge of photo chemistry:

    1. You want to bleach before re exposing, not while re exposing.
    2. Mr. Grant has pointed out that ferricyanide bleach will not work for this, as it does not remove the bleached silver of its own accord like the permanganate bleach listed in the Ilford recipe, but instead "marks" it for removal by fixer. If it is not removed before you re expose and re develop, the process will not work.
    3. Farmer's reducer is ferricyanide bleach mixed with the main ingredient in fixer. If you use Farmer's Reducer as your bleach, it would make sense that you will also remove silver that you intend to re expose.
    4. How are you going to handle the remjet layer?

    Finally, what are you aiming to achieve? Saving about 18 cents per foot in processing costs ($18 per $100 feet)? If this is all, consider the volume you will be shooting and the time, chemical costs, and such that you will spend on this to determine if it is really worth while. If this is just a fun experiment, have at it, but if you intend to save a whole bunch of money, I would not count on it.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 04-21-2009 at 07:12 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  2. #22
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    A few problems I notice, with my limited knowledge of photo chemistry:

    1. You want to bleach before re exposing, not while re exposing.
    2. Mr. Grant has pointed out that ferricyanide bleach will not work for this, as it does not remove the bleached silver of its own accord like the permanganate bleach listed in the Ilford recipe, but instead "marks" it for removal by fixer. If it is not removed before you re expose and re develop, the process will not work.
    3. Farmer's reducer is ferricyanide bleach mixed with the main ingredient in fixer. If you use Farmer's Reducer as your bleach, it would make sense that you will also remove silver that you intend to re expose.
    4. How are you going to handle the remjet layer?

    Finally, what are you aiming to achieve? Saving about 18 cents per foot in processing costs ($18 per $100 feet)? If this is all, consider the volume you will be shooting and the time, chemical costs, and such that you will spend on this to determine if it is really worth while. If this is just a fun experiment, have at it, but if you intend to save a whole bunch of money, I would not count on it.
    Remjet? Is that like anti-Halation dye? If so, doesn't that wash out with the first developer?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  3. #23
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    Not to be thick, but what is the difference between the bleach and clearing bath? Is the clearing bath just to remove all the bleach?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    The clearing bath removes the bleach (or makes it possible to be washed away, perhaps). The Ilford data sheet talks about this. You really need to read some data sheets on the process to understand it better, IMO.

    The remjet coating is put onto the base side of motion picture film. It works as a shield for the base side; to absorb the minor abuse of being run over the camera internals at high speed. It also works as an anti-halation layer and to cut down on static electricity due to the motion of the film. The base side of your film will not be glossy if your film has this coating. When processed at a movie film lab, I believe that the coating is removed prior to development. It does not come off with a simple presoak. There are ways to remove it if processing at home, though I have never looked that deeply into it myself.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 04-21-2009 at 09:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  5. #25
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    Remjet? Is that like anti-Halation dye? If so, doesn't that wash out with the first developer?
    According to Kodak:

    • Remjet, a removable jet black layer, is the coating of carbon black particles in a water-soluble binder on the bottom of the film. It has four purposes: antihalation, antistatic, lubrication, and scratch protection. The remjet carbon layer is also conductive and prevents the build-up and discharge of static charges that can fog film. This is especially important in low relative humidity environments. Remjet also has lubricating properties. Like the supercoat on top of the emulsion, remjet resists scratching on the base side and helps transport the film through cameras, scanners, and printers.

    Remjet is typically found on motion picture film which must go through the camera at a high rate of speed. I don't think Ilford uses it, even on their Motion Picture films. Kodak does use Remjet on Kodachrome, the only still film that uses it today.
    Last edited by wogster; 04-22-2009 at 07:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    587
    The Ilford website has (or had) a useful PDF about reversal processing, and there are many websites that describe the process as well (not to mention books). B&W reversal isn't nearly as "tolerant" as regular B&W processing and the usual mix-and-match that we can do when developing negatives doesn't usually work out with a reversal process. If you want to do it at home, it's best to start with a tried and tested process and then go from there.

    Using Farmer's Reducer as a bleach will remove both your negative image (developed silver) and incipient positive image (undeveloped silver halide) and you'll be left with blank film.

  7. #27
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    In your opinion, would it be easier/cheaper to buy the raw chemicals or get a kit? I found a kodak kit (http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/KP02005/specifications), but I can't find the Tetenal kit anywhere.

    I am seriously considering getting all the raw chemicals from the formulary and making my own, but I'm still feeling a little daunted by the entire process. I wish The Formulary had a boxed set for reversal processing...

    *BTW, how does one remove the remjet?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  8. #28
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,426
    Images
    148
    It's easy to make up your own chemistry, and would be far cheaper. It isn't difficult but you do need a decent set of scales.

    Ian

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    896
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    In your opinion, would it be easier/cheaper to buy the raw chemicals or get a kit? I found a kodak kit (http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/KP02005/specifications), but I can't find the Tetenal kit anywhere.

    I am seriously considering getting all the raw chemicals from the formulary and making my own, but I'm still feeling a little daunted by the entire process. I wish The Formulary had a boxed set for reversal processing...

    *BTW, how does one remove the remjet?
    Get the raw chemicals for sure.
    And I don't feel the reversal process is more difficult than the negative one.
    On the contrary I've found it to be simpler, longer but very rewarding in terms of sharpness, tonality (can't get better than this) and grain.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin