Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,691   Posts: 1,482,386   Online: 711
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,016
    Some of the chemicals in the official E-6 formulation are just about impossible to get. Many years ago, the Dignan Newsletter published several substitute formulas, and others have been published since. But these are of questionable quality. Some people reported good results, others did not. And there is no assurance that the images will last as well as those processed with the official recipes. Experimenting with home brewed color chemistry may be fun and interesting, but it comes with no guarantees. The Kodak kits are easy to mix up in any amount you want, and they are quite economical. That seems to be the way to go.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    132
    While all of this is true, there shouldn't be anything stopping a hobbyist from giving it a try.

    Let's see a show of hands as to how many of us have...
    1. Shot outdated film?
    2. Cross processed?
    3. Home-brewed B&W devs
    4. Scanned, instead of projecting chrome films?
    5. Had a process go astray, and liked the results better?
    6. Used a "Bleach bypass" filter effect in Photoshop?
    I'm allergic to the Tetenal 3 bath hack not least due to the blix (bleach-fix) stage in the tail end. As I see it, as long as there's formaldehyde in the final rinse (or, if you use pre-bleach & bleach; and miconazole in the final rinse), the dyes will be stabilized just fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by nworth View Post
    Some of the chemicals in the official E-6 formulation are just about impossible to get. Many years ago, the Dignan Newsletter published several substitute formulas, and others have been published since. But these are of questionable quality. Some people reported good results, others did not. And there is no assurance that the images will last as well as those processed with the official recipes. Experimenting with home brewed color chemistry may be fun and interesting, but it comes with no guarantees. The Kodak kits are easy to mix up in any amount you want, and they are quite economical. That seems to be the way to go.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    106
    As noted, unless you have shmancy pancy Chemical Lab, brewing E6 from scratch would be painfully difficult and time consuming. Save yourself the time and buy a E6 kit. Kodak 5L single use kit works very well without many problems and and you get extremely high quality slides.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Alameda
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    394
    Images
    6
    One more thing, I did a LOT of E6 back in high school right after E6 came out (I still have early memories of doing E4!). Used to buy Ektachrome on 100 foot rools. I tried the other brands of chemicals. The results at the time didn't seem much different. However, I have gone through those old slides and believe me, I can really tell which ones were processed in Kodak chemistry versus the others. The Kodak E6 slides are still quite nice, the others have faded and colors look horrible.

  5. #25
    AgX
    AgX is online now

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,435
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by srs5694
    You can make slides from negatives! ;-)


    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Both Kodak and Fuji have discontinued the print film AFAIK.

    PE


    You could use cine-print film. You would have to look fort short ends however...

    In addition Agfa has a RA-4 print film for copying from C-41 film (a variation of their cine print film). You would have to cut sheets into unperforated 35mm strips however...

  6. #26
    niimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    12
    Very interesting, thanks all for sharing your info! I was under the impression that any other developing than B&W is quite dangerous because the chemical are more toxic? Or maybe it's true and you all are just dangerous folk! heheh E-6 is very pricey (I think about $12-15 per roll) around where I live so this may be something I will get into.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by niimo View Post
    Very interesting, thanks all for sharing your info! I was under the impression that any other developing than B&W is quite dangerous because the chemical are more toxic? Or maybe it's true and you all are just dangerous folk!
    Two points:

    1. "Dangerous" and "toxic" are relative terms. Something can be more dangerous than another thing but still safe enough for whatever one's comfort level is.
    2. Even B&W processing varies in danger. A pyro developer is, by most accounts, more dangerous than XTOL. Ever hear of uranium toner? It was somewhat popular once.


    I don't claim to be an expert on it, but my understanding is that E-6 (and other color processes) involve chemicals that are nastier than the average B&W chemical, but these chemicals aren't so nasty that they're unreasonable to use in a home darkroom. Read the documentation that comes with whatever kit you buy (and/or check up on the manufacturer's Web site) and follow its advice and you should be fine. I certainly wouldn't describe E-6 processing as "quite dangerous," although as I say in point #1, "dangerous" is a relative term, so that's a matter of what your reference is.

  8. #28
    niimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    Two points:

    1. "Dangerous" and "toxic" are relative terms. Something can be more dangerous than another thing but still safe enough for whatever one's comfort level is.
    2. Even B&W processing varies in danger. A pyro developer is, by most accounts, more dangerous than XTOL. Ever hear of uranium toner? It was somewhat popular once.


    I don't claim to be an expert on it, but my understanding is that E-6 (and other color processes) involve chemicals that are nastier than the average B&W chemical, but these chemicals aren't so nasty that they're unreasonable to use in a home darkroom. Read the documentation that comes with whatever kit you buy (and/or check up on the manufacturer's Web site) and follow its advice and you should be fine. I certainly wouldn't describe E-6 processing as "quite dangerous," although as I say in point #1, "dangerous" is a relative term, so that's a matter of what your reference is.
    Heh good points! Just knowing there are these "kits" does spark my interest. Thanks for the (sort of) assurance.

  9. #29
    kraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands (south)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,176
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by tim_walls View Post
    Ilfochrome is indeed beautiful from my currently limited experience (I've only produced half a dozen.) You're right, if your desired end result is a traditional print, E6 is nuts; but Ilfochrome prints are gorgeous and you get to keep the joy of the projector.
    Ahh, the joys of browsing APUG. I've just read this and a few other comments, and I find myself already checking availability and prices of Ilfochrome paper & chemistry. This is really tempting me to give printing Ilfochrome a try... :o

    And I think, above all, nothing makes you realise you're a photography bore more than sending an audience to sleep through a slideshow. If you only shoot C41, you're missing out on that
    LOL!

    shuttr.net
    -- A sinister little midget with a bucket and a mop / Where the blood goes down the drain --

  10. #30

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    306
    Here's a vote for the tetanal E6 kit. £46.00 for 5 litres that will process 60 films. Have reused working strength chemicals 6 months after mixing them with no desernable ill efect and kept stock solutions for 18 months in part full bottles before finishing the kit. As you get multiple uses of the mixed chemicals you just extend the dev times to compensate for chemical exhaustion, it is all in the multi lingual instruction book that comes with the kit.

    As others have said it is as easy as falling of a log, get yourself a kit and go for it.

    Regards Paul.

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