Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,902   Posts: 1,521,131   Online: 1046
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    But it's a negative, so you can't shoot with it right? You have to copy your neg ONTO it and then it's a positive?

    Either way it doesn't have an orange mask right? So you could X-process this in E-6 potentially? And not have the orange mask?
    Think of it like the B&W print films you've played with (I think you have?) It's a negative film, so sure you could shoot it in a camera and produce negatives, but it's realllllly really slow film because a contact printing machine for it can use tons of light and so it doesn't need to be fast.

    Just like color negative still film has its positive companion (paper) which puts everything back the way it should be again, color negative movie film has its companion (color print film) which puts everything back right again. Printing movie negative film onto RA-4 paper is mismatching things, so you have to find some way to compensate. Printing movie negative film onto movie print film gets everything just right... but then yes, you are left with a transparency, not a print. You talked Kodak into cutting up 5222 into 4x5, maybe you could talk them into coating some movie print film emulsions onto paper - that would be the ultimate easy solution!

    Duncan

  2. #12
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,012
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by frobozz View Post
    Think of it like the B&W print films you've played with (I think you have?) It's a negative film, so sure you could shoot it in a camera and produce negatives, but it's realllllly really slow film because a contact printing machine for it can use tons of light and so it doesn't need to be fast.

    Just like color negative still film has its positive companion (paper) which puts everything back the way it should be again, color negative movie film has its companion (color print film) which puts everything back right again. Printing movie negative film onto RA-4 paper is mismatching things, so you have to find some way to compensate. Printing movie negative film onto movie print film gets everything just right... but then yes, you are left with a transparency, not a print. You talked Kodak into cutting up 5222 into 4x5, maybe you could talk them into coating some movie print film emulsions onto paper - that would be the ultimate easy solution!

    Duncan
    Well isn't that just RA4 paper?

    Anyway I get it, thanks.

    How does one go about converting to ECP-2N ? I have hundreds of feet of ECN-2 film in 500T and 250D and would like to use it, but I prefer to scan transparencies for some reason lol
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Well isn't that just RA4 paper?

    Anyway I get it, thanks.

    How does one go about converting to ECP-2N ? I have hundreds of feet of ECN-2 film in 500T and 250D and would like to use it, but I prefer to scan transparencies for some reason lol
    You can develop your ECN-2 films as normal, ECN-2 process. Then just contact print onto Kodak 2383 or 2393 (ECP-2 process) and bingo, transparencies.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Well isn't that just RA4 paper?
    No, RA4 paper has an emulsion matched to C-41 negs; we need a paper with an emulsion matched to ECN-2 negs (i.e. ECP-2 film emulsion, coated onto paper instead.)

    Someone else already answered how you get transparencies from ECN-2 negs - contact prints!

    Duncan

  5. #15
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,916
    Images
    65
    There are so many problems using one developer or one process tail end for both consumer and MP films that it is not even funny. They were just not designed for compatibility. The results may look pleasing but the colors will be subtly off or the dye stability may be off, or the contrast may be off. The list goes one.

    Look at the process temperature and the stop baths for hints!

    PE

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Estonia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    181
    The sulfuric acid stop bath with a pH of 0.85 and the possibility of sulfur dioxide fumes is unsettling. But doable.

    Regarding contact prints: this is not your any slap two strips together and let some light through operation. Read the technical bulletins and see how many variables are in that process.

    In my opinion, you could do ECN2 in C41 with only a developer switch and you would get better images than with running it through C41 developer BUT I reckon the images won't print that well DIRECTLY but many of us don't do direct RA4 prints anyhow, so scanning, post processing to adjust for contrast and color and then printing is more than okay since negatives have a lot of "play" anyway, minor color shifts and casts are not an issue.
    But ECP2 results a positive image on a rather contrasty film, the process itself is finicky enough, so everything must be spot-on to get the transparencies you hoped to achieve. Can it be done? Yes. Is it reasonable? Hell no. But I won't diss you, it is a fascinating world but think everything well through before you jump to this process.
    Having worked as a movie theater projectionist before and after the switch to digital (we actually were the first theater to have both 35mm and digital capability in all of our screens in the region and we screened from both mediums side-by-side for several years before the 35mm prints stopped rolling in) I can tell you that a proper, well-done ECP print looks absolutely stellar. The blacks are rich, whites clear and everything is just right. But you need the proper workflow to achieve this.
    Last edited by VPooler; 01-24-2014 at 02:30 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #17
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    968
    Then there is the question of whether ECP is as "archival" as E-6.
    Truzi

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    12
    I was thinking about that, and thought I might use the "Color Asset Protection Film". According to the Kodak docs, it looks to be as good or better than E6 for archival purposes: cold dark storage up to a century!

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by ajseier View Post
    I was thinking about that, and thought I might use the "Color Asset Protection Film". According to the Kodak docs, it looks to be as good or better than E6 for archival purposes: cold dark storage up to a century!
    One caveat there - it's intended for protecting digital assets not camera negative ones...

    From data sheet at http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploa...2_SS_FINAL.pdf

    Exposure
    This film is designed for recorders only — if printed or projected the results will be less than desirable. A unique recorder calibration is recommended for optimal exposure. The film is finished with BH perforations for optimal transport in film recorders.

    Duncan

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,916
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Truzi View Post
    Then there is the question of whether ECP is as "archival" as E-6.
    Since no R&D has been done on E6 films for years, the current MP products are far more stable!

    EDIT: There is no guarantee on the stability of any MP film processed in the C41 developer (or tail end) though.

    PE

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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