Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,816   Posts: 1,581,629   Online: 754
      
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 89
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,521
    Images
    65
    Danz;

    When you mix a blix, especially from a liquid kit, the two parts tend to dilute each other. This dilution effect, coupled with the high silver and use of DIR couplers cause a lot of silver retention in the film. We were able to design only a limited number of blix formulations that did the proper job, and all of the others left some level of silver depending on the film / emulsion design.

    This retention caused what best can be described as a muted color, increased grain and higher contrast somewhat similar to bleach bypass but not exactly, as the CLS layer was removed but is not with bleach bypass.

    Now, you are doing 16 mm color negative film. This is a motion picture film. I cannot say what effect it would have as all of our work was with consumer film. You do not even give the brand. Many negative films do not use the technology (or at least did not) that Kodak and Fuji did due to patent restrictions. This would allow easier blixing, but would degrade sharpness and color fidelity.

    So, to answer you properly, I would have to say IDK in your case.

    PE

  2. #12
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,658
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by L Gebhardt View Post
    I have used Tetenal C41 kits in the past and had very good luck with them, even with reusing the chemicals to get more life from them (as per the directions). The last set of C41 chems I bought were the Kodak 1 gallon dev and 1 gallon fix and bleach. As you know these small sizes seem to have been discontinued. From all the threads I have seen recently on mixing your own C41 I suspect many others are in the same boat as me in not wanting to spend $250 on bleach in the 12 gallon size.

    Is there a good reason not to use the Tetenal 5L kit? I can't remember why I switched, but I think it was comments about their 3 bath E6 kits that made me move to all Kodak. No I am thinking I will go back to Tetenal for C41 unless someone gives me a good reason not to.

    One bonus is you can get it shipped from B&H.


    You can also happily dilute C41 chems from Tetenal just fine, you can also do stand development for high dilutions, see here:

    http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootf...7607394125990/


    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Blixed films have a bit of a look like bleach bypass processed film. I do know how to fix the problem and am working on the problem.

    PE
    Id just like to point out to you guys that Tetenal uses a separate Bleach and Fixer, the 2 x 1 litre bottles are your bleach and fix respectively, if you mix them together it becomes a blix, but you can keep them separate and do fix and bleach separately, or bleach bypass if you wish.

    The clear Ammonium thiosulphate is the fixer, and the red ammonium ferric EDTA is the bleach, you do not need to follow tetenal's directions and mix them together.

  3. #13
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,719
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    Id just like to point out to you guys that Tetenal uses a separate Bleach and Fixer, the 2 x 1 litre bottles are your bleach and fix respectively, if you mix them together it becomes a blix, but you can keep them separate and do fix and bleach separately, or bleach bypass if you wish.

    The clear Ammonium thiosulphate is the fixer, and the red ammonium ferric EDTA is the bleach, you do not need to follow tetenal's directions and mix them together.
    That's a very useful bit of information. Have you done this? If so how do you dilute. Just make 5L of each from the 1L bottles?

  4. #14
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,521
    Images
    65
    Athiril;

    In the examples you refer to for stand development, the results display "beefy" flesh tones and lots of grain. In fact, the poster complains about the grain. I doubt if you can improve C-41 just by stand development and certainly not by processing at room temperature. At 68 degrees, if you could do it, the development with normally mixed C-41 developer would be about 30 minutes or more, but if you try it, the bottom layer is very underdeveloped and there is a lot of crossover. Tsk.

    As for the bleach, of course you can use a bleach then fix sequence with a 2 part kit, but you have to use the proper dilution. At the time of the finalisation of the C-41 process and in more recent years, research has shown that the blix approach does not generally work due to two problems, namely stability and concentration.

    Separate solutions are more stable and can be made more concentrated. A proper approach is to use new chemistry for the fix stage which is the driving force for both stability and reactivity.

    PE

  5. #15
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,658
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Athiril;

    In the examples you refer to for stand development, the results display "beefy" flesh tones and lots of grain. In fact, the poster complains about the grain. I doubt if you can improve C-41 just by stand development and certainly not by processing at room temperature. At 68 degrees, if you could do it, the development with normally mixed C-41 developer would be about 30 minutes or more, but if you try it, the bottom layer is very underdeveloped and there is a lot of crossover. Tsk.

    As for the bleach, of course you can use a bleach then fix sequence with a 2 part kit, but you have to use the proper dilution. At the time of the finalisation of the C-41 process and in more recent years, research has shown that the blix approach does not generally work due to two problems, namely stability and concentration.

    Separate solutions are more stable and can be made more concentrated. A proper approach is to use new chemistry for the fix stage which is the driving force for both stability and reactivity.

    PE
    "Film is some un-named fuji C-41, asa 200." and its 35mm = grainy.

    I'm going to try this in 120 when my RB67 shows up with some Reala 100.

    The colour looks fine to me, I dont think we're all after a spot on colour reproduction system so that cadbury's purple = cadbury's purple.

    And as you know, colour can be affected by scanner and user trying to adjust it to what he or she thinks is correct, the user is likely to not be on a calibrated system either.

    So I think it is incorrect to assume that perceived colour difference of an un named film of who knows what age on what is likely to be an uncalibrated unmanaged system is due to unorthodox development.

    However I quite like the results, and the benefit of the digital darkroom is you can tweak it to where you want it.


    Quote Originally Posted by L Gebhardt View Post
    That's a very useful bit of information. Have you done this? If so how do you dilute. Just make 5L of each from the 1L bottles?

    When I'm doing non-experimental normal C41 development, I typically just use the same amount as you would normally.

    Normally its 3L + 1L + 1L, I use the same amount of chemical that would go into a blix bath.

    Eg instead of blix 180ml + 60ml + 60ml, I just use water 240ml + 60ml (for 35mm development, 300ml solution).

    So 1+4.

    I also save it in a bottle and re-use it, I thoroughly wash between baths so that I can re-use chems too.

    Though as with B&W dev, I've also used high dilutions and have just left it sitting there, agitating now and then, with no apparent difference to me.

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,521
    Images
    65
    Well Athiril, the Cadbury's purple may still be purple but may be desatureated or more heavily saturated depending on use of blix or some other development process. In the case of bleach bypass or blix processing, you add neutral density everywhere plus yellow which must be filtered out in printing. The silver increases the appearance of neutral grain.

    In the case of altered development cycles, the image structure (grain and sharpness) can suffer as well as create the crossover I mentioned above and this will not give Cadbury's purple.

    But, if you like it, use it. You are the person you are trying to please and I'm only pointing out possible pitfalls. I have been working on all of these problems since about 1965 after all and have done a lot of quantitative work on them. My goal however is to get the most optimum result from the widest range of products.

    I do recognize the value in the art of some of these process variations and the fun inherent in experimentation or just plain play!

    PE

  7. #17
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,658
    Images
    28
    Thanks for the response if you check out - http://www.flickr.com/photos/maestro...60136/sizes/o/

    You can see the grain structure - to me the grain doesn't look bad, but I have just gotten back from processing some Elite Chrome 400 with a bleach bypass and it is the worst grain I have ever seen on such a colour film.

    I also have a suspicion that the grain wouldn't be as prominent if you were to 'overexpose' the film for stand development.

    I'd also like to see the effect of significant overexposure enough to bring a high dilution development times back to something resembling normal

  8. #18
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,521
    Images
    65
    On the basis of a single photo with no comparison and not knowing the process cycle or film details, then I cannot judge the photo.

    Bleach bypass on a chrome film leaves 100% of the silver in the film, for all practical purposes. It leaves both the negative and positive silver images behind which is the worst of all worlds and should give slides that are nearly opaque.

    PE

  9. #19
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,658
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    On the basis of a single photo with no comparison and not knowing the process cycle or film details, then I cannot judge the photo.

    Bleach bypass on a chrome film leaves 100% of the silver in the film, for all practical purposes. It leaves both the negative and positive silver images behind which is the worst of all worlds and should give slides that are nearly opaque.

    PE
    I forgot to mention I cross-processed it with C41

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,521
    Images
    65
    It is still a single photo wiith no comparison.

    I have posted a direct C-41 comparison of Supra 160VC to EPP in C-41. That is a more realistic comparison if you wish to look at color and image structure. On a single stimulus basis it is impossible to make a judgment. It is like a single point hanging in space with no reference.

    PE

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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