Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,751   Posts: 1,515,837   Online: 987
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
  1. #11
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    The ECN and C41 process differ enough to cause problems for you.

    The ECN is 0.5 in contrast and the C41 family is 0.6+ in contrast. Prints will not be optimum.

    Good luck.

    PE
    With my home built processor, it wont make a difference if I process it in the way I've been doing colour neg (Rodinal, Fix, Bleach, E6 CD, Bleach, Fix) as contrast will be set by the first dev right? This is intended for a short film to be telecined.

  2. #12
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,873
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by B&Wpositive View Post
    Can exposure in camera or developing time compensate for this contrast shift? Is archival stability impacted when processing ECN in C-41? Is there any other reason not to do it?
    Image stability will suffer and crossover will occur causing color shifts. Some contrast can be gained by push processing, but with the other problems, they will also be magnified.

    PE

  3. #13
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,873
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    With my home built processor, it wont make a difference if I process it in the way I've been doing colour neg (Rodinal, Fix, Bleach, E6 CD, Bleach, Fix) as contrast will be set by the first dev right? This is intended for a short film to be telecined.
    Other than the fact that ECN is a negative masked film with low contrast.

    So, in your process you will get a masked color positive with a low contrast. IDK what the quality will be in your process, so good luck.

    PE

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    301
    Images
    1
    It would be a negative, I believe, due to the first fix.

    Not sure why you would do it that way but I'm a firm believer in experimentation for its own sake, so let us know how it turns out!

    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Other than the fact that ECN is a negative masked film with low contrast.

    So, in your process you will get a masked color positive with a low contrast. IDK what the quality will be in your process, so good luck.

    PE

  5. #15
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,873
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by David Grenet View Post
    It would be a negative, I believe, due to the first fix.

    Not sure why you would do it that way but I'm a firm believer in experimentation for its own sake, so let us know how it turns out!
    Yes, you are quite right. Sorry for my error and thanks for catching it.

    I still don't know what it will do. I do know that the rem jet backing will make a mess of any process not equipped to handle it!

    PE

  6. #16
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    IMO the remjet is the biggest inconvenience. You have to deal with it even if you use C-41 developer, so if you go through this trouble, you could also mix your ECN-2 developer (http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/h2407.pdf page 30). Even if you omitted KODAK Antifoggant AF-2000 (which is not easily available), it would still probably be a much better formulation (with correct CD) than C-41 developer. With the correct ECN-2 developer, you could do a small push to increase the contrast a bit and probably get perfect results?

    On the other hand, if you use high-contrast paper like Ultra Endura, it may not be a problem at all?

    Baking soda seems to be good for softening the remjet. You just have to come up with a method to remove it without causing deposits to emulsion side. It is possible but you have to practice a little.

  7. #17
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Yes, you are quite right. Sorry for my error and thanks for catching it.

    I still don't know what it will do. I do know that the rem jet backing will make a mess of any process not equipped to handle it!

    PE
    Im intending on processing it similar to tube sheet film processing. So it shouldnt it be a problem, plus I can drag the film through a film squeegee after first wash or a bath to help remove it. Requires testing. I'm getting around 5000 ft whenever it shows up... maybe next week, plenty of stuff to test with.

    Anyway, film is wrapped emulsion side out around a tube. Like something 1m long, 10cm radius for 100ft worth of 16mm. Placed inside a bigger tube with a key and an inner radius of 10.5cm

    Should take approx 3.3 litres of developer solution, which is a bit more developer per square mm of film than 36 exp 35mm in 300mL.

    Cold/ambient process and uses minimal amount of chemicals due to high dilutions which is good, been working great so far, will need testing on the actual film Ill be using it on when it gets here though

    I was intending originally to process it to colour positive.. but no matter how I try to do a cold process with Rodinal or what I add to it, it comes out with either opaque film with no image or really really dense positives, it only seems to work in a hot process (~40c)...

  8. #18
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,139
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by B&Wpositive View Post
    How would you splice them? I wouldn't mind doing that actually to get enough to process. Like, shoot 20 rolls and splice them together to get 120 feet. And then send it all for processing as a reel.
    A small lab that might be open to such things would be Spectra in L.A., but their minimum for 35mm neg film is 400'. So if you could get a few people together or advertise the service, learn to hot splice undeveloped film in the dark and use a system of twin-checks that won't come off the film in the process to keep track of the individual rolls (I think this had to be done with Kodachrome K-Lab processing), and get a lab to process it, you might have a little side business there.

    I suppose you might be able to set up a light trapped system for splicing the leader of one roll to the trailer of the next roll with the lights on in a dark box, then close the doors of the box to roll the film from the canister to the big reel for processing.

    If you're printing by methods better discussed on APUG's sister site, http://hybridphoto.com , the reduced contrast might not be a problem. To print optically, you might be better off with Portra 400 in your flavor of choice or Portra 800.
    Last edited by David A. Goldfarb; 02-22-2010 at 09:44 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  9. #19
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,873
    Images
    65
    Athiril;

    Beware that diffusion in thick color films is your enemy. A thick film pack processed at lower than recommended temps will cause the top layer to be overdeveloped and the bottom layer to be underdeveloped. One way to overcome this is to develop the top layer to optimum and then soak the film in water after the development stage. This allows the bottom layers to catch up a bit.

    Also, if someone can remind me what AF2000 is, I might have a substitute.

    PE

  10. #20
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    If its just an anti-foggant couldn't benzotriazole substitute? I've replaced all restrainer completely with benzotriazole in E6 first devs to great result before. According to the site, AF2000 is a replacement for the hazzardous AF9.

    I'll see how it goes, I'm generally finding that 1+100 Rodinal, 1 hour stand is the place to be, maybe 50 minutes. Wouldn't that kind of lengthy developing time overcome that?

    In any case thanks for the tip, I'll see how it compares to regular C41 when processed in the same manner and see if adjustments need to be made

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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