Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,745   Posts: 1,515,644   Online: 792
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13

    Problem developing ECN-II in C-41

    I recently got a roll of Kodak Vision 2 500T film. I've tried a few test rolls developing in both C-41 and B&W. The results I've gotten have not been good. I understand that ideally this should be developed in true ECN-II chemistry, and I have found the homebrew recipe here on APUG which I plan to try when I can buy the chemicals and once i know the film is good. I also know that good results can be had in C-41 (http://www.flickr.com/groups/diy_col...7629804159613/). The results on this link look better than I had expected was possible doing this in C-41 and he claims it is without color correction.

    I shot 5 identical pics metering as 100, 200, 500 (500 is the native ISO), 800, and 1600. I have read tests that show this film can be used from 200 - 1600 without any push/pull. (http://www.ecn-2.com/vs/). I developed the test roll in fresh Rollei/Comprard C-41 chemicals. I removed the rem-jet with a washing soda presoak and an appropriate cloth before drying. Of the shots I took only the 100 was even scannable, but was still way under exposed. The first is the standard JPEG scan from VueSCAN. The second was the best i could get from a raw DNG with color correction in PS.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Scan-120808-0002.jpg 
Views:	35 
Size:	67.9 KB 
ID:	55170
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	scan0007 copy.jpg 
Views:	71 
Size:	332.8 KB 
ID:	55171
    So where did I go wrong? Why do my pics look like crap? By the way, i also shot some outside. They looked worse.

    There was no expiration date printed on the box, but i'm pretty sure all vision 2 is expired by now. I got it off ebay and the seller said it was purchased in '09 and refrigerated since then. Obviously I cannot verify this. I've had similar results with some Kodak C-41 that expired in 03. Is it possible that this film is just too expired and can't be salvaged? Or did I do something wrong in the developing?

    Please help. I've got about 95 more feet of this stuff that I want to make good use of.

  2. #2
    wildbill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,376
    Images
    140
    you messed up somewhere along the line. I've shot movie film much older than that which was fine (a little base fog).Iso 200 should even have been fine.
    www.vinnywalsh.com

    I know what I want but I just don't know how to go about gettin' it.-Hendrix

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    Well that's one vote for the film is still good. But why would these under expose so badly?

    I also did a test roll with a nearly exhausted set of c-41 chems and another with b&w ilfosol 3. All three rolls were way under exposed. Two were metered by my ae-1, while the other was metered with a handheld meter using a different camera.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    427
    Do the edge markings confirm that it's Vision 500T? Maybe the film is in the wrong can...

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by John Shriver View Post
    Do the edge markings confirm that it's Vision 500T? Maybe the film is in the wrong can...
    Good question. How often should the edges be marked? I'm looking at a 12 frame strip and see no markings at all. My typical 35mm films (like kodak gold) have markings every frame on both sides. I mean name and barcode, not just the frame numbers.

  6. #6
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,493
    Images
    28
    First up you can't not have colour correction/balance. It's colour neg. You have to to get a positive.

    I've had terrible results with 5201 in C-41, though great with in ECN-2 kit, and colour split bath.

    ECN-2 developer is also cheap as, for a whole lot of it.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by John Shriver View Post
    Do the edge markings confirm that it's Vision 500T? Maybe the film is in the wrong can...
    OK, I found the edge markings barely visible on the last roll that I shot. It says EH 38 1278 0223. I've read somewhere that the EH is kodak, but I could be wrong. Can anyone help me figure out the rest of the code?

    @Athiril, thanks for your reply, but I am already aware that ECN-II chemicals would be better. I'm trying to verify that the film is good before I buy them. Besides, i know that some great results have been achieved with C-41, so I know that it can be done. Also, I've recently color corrected some negatives shot on kodak gold and they came out far better than VueSCAN's interpretation. Just invert the negative DNG by inverting the curves, then you can see the positive before doing corrections.

  8. #8
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,493
    Images
    28
    If you want to verify the quality of the film, say grain, base fog and sensitivity, you can always try it as a B&W neg if C-41 is too much of a pain to get it working in.

    For what it's worth my 50D came out super thin in C-41 too, but my C-41 process is good, I run it almost daily.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    If you want to verify the quality of the film, say grain, base fog and sensitivity, you can always try it as a B&W neg if C-41 is too much of a pain to get it working in.

    For what it's worth my 50D came out super thin in C-41 too, but my C-41 process is good, I run it almost daily.
    Just tried another roll as B&W, stand developed in Rodinal 1+100 for an hour (ok, 55 minutes. I'm I was feeling impatient). These results turned out as well as I could expect for B&W xpro. The frame I posted was metered at 500. I think 400 might be a sweet spot for this film. I tried some illfosol 3 following dev times for Tri-X with bad results the other day. So far I like these and at least have a good use for this film now if I cant get good color results.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Scan-120810-0008 copy.jpg 
Views:	51 
Size:	170.6 KB 
ID:	55209

    Right now i'm trying a stand develop C-41 with Rollei/Comprard chems at 1+9 for 1 hour. I'll post later how those turn out.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    Here's one from c-41 stand develop. The chemicals may be getting to old, and I had to do a good bit of color correction to the DNG, but it looks like the potential is there. I think i'll try standard (and fresh) C-41 again with longer dev times.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	scan0018.jpg 
Views:	58 
Size:	319.4 KB 
ID:	55226

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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