If you're doing black and white, why are you trying it with C41? C41 is a color process, less forgiving than a true black and white, and more difficult to print through. (I suppose you can, but the orange cast of color film- even c41 B/w film makes printing difficult).
If you're doing black and white, why are you trying it with C41? C41 is a color process, less forgiving than a true black and white, and more difficult to print through. (I suppose you can, but the orange cast of color film- even c41 B/w film makes printing difficult).
thank you
Because I am a newbie
I would like to experience c-41 first , he is so easy for me
And in the future I will try another Chemicals like id11 or d76 for my ilford delta 400 and hp5 ,But I find some difficulty with mixing and Steps
I started with glass thermometer and switched to a dial type. They both work but the issue is the glass kind respond so slowly. I had to add cold water or warm water to adjust, then wait for a minute or two for reading and make further adjustments. It was very frustrating. The metal kind react almost immediately. It works much better for me.
For developers, I use 1/2 gallon regular tank and a bunch of 250cc bottles. Mix up a gallon, and pour into 1/2 gallon. The remaining goes into smaller ones. I use smaller ones first. When they are all gone, I pour 1/2 into smaller ones. That way, no part of developer is exposed to air. Works fine for me. You can buy bottles cheaply at Amazon.
By the way, BW processes are far more forgiving than C41 and chemicals are easy to obtain. It's up to you but if I were you, I'd go for BW processing, not C41.
1. definitly no, recycled water bottles and pop bottles work better and are free(after drinking contents).
2. no, but not necessary for film developing. Loading film into reel and tank is done in total darkness. Once loaded and lid in place developing is performed in normal light
3. yes, but dial type respond quicker and are easier to read.
4. Yes, but you can buy a double tank for that price, or a good stainless set for less. Stainless tanks come up to temp faster, use less chemistry. Plastic holds temps better , use more chems.
Rick A
Argentum aevum
BTW: the big kid in my avatar is my hero, my son, who proudly serves us in the Navy. "SALUTE"
If i were you, i'd stay away from trying to do c-41 at home. It's really nothing to do for fun. Besides that, the film is low-quality at best, and designed to be printed in a 1-hour photo lab. A student in a beginner photography class that i was a teachers assistant for last semester accidentally shot 4 rolls of the stuff and got just the negatives made. I helped her print them in our B&W darkroom at school, and it was a huge pain to print them. The contrast was all wacky, they had a bad tonal range, and they were low-quality. The prints turned out pretty bad, not to mention boring, with a short tonal range and bad contrast. Besides, have you seen the prices for c-41 processing kits? Compare that to a really nice set of the (three) chemicals you need for B&W, and i think you'll be surprised to find that you'll get much better results with much less money.
-Austin
If i were you, i'd stay away from trying to do c-41 at home. It's really nothing to do for fun. Besides that, the film is low-quality at best, and designed to be printed in a 1-hour photo lab. A student in a beginner photography class that i was a teachers assistant for last semester accidentally shot 4 rolls of the stuff and got just the negatives made. I helped her print them in our B&W darkroom at school, and it was a huge pain to print them. The contrast was all wacky, they had a bad tonal range, and they were low-quality. The prints turned out pretty bad, not to mention boring, with a short tonal range and bad contrast. Besides, have you seen the prices for c-41 processing kits? Compare that to a really nice set of the (three) chemicals you need for B&W, and i think you'll be surprised to find that you'll get much better results with much less money.
-Austin
The Ilford XP2 is an excellent C41 black and white film that prints very easily in a home darkroom - there is no orange mask. The Kodak version of that type of film prints best in a commercial colour lab environment.
This is an example of XP2 (scanned from a negative, but it prints well):
That being said, I too would recommend standard black and white film developed in standard black and white chemistry.
Matt
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
The Ilford XP2 is an excellent C41 black and white film that prints very easily in a home darkroom - there is no orange mask. The Kodak version of that type of film prints best in a commercial colour lab environment.
This is an example of XP2 (scanned from a negative, but it prints well):
interesting. Well i guess i am only familiar with the kodak so that makes sense as to why i don't like it. But if you're doing all B&W at home, why do c41, when it's exponentially easier, cheaper, and will ultimately print better, and be more archival, and then you don't have to worry so much about getting rid of the chemicals after you're done. Also B&W chemicals are much more readily available, and I do believe they will last longer. To me it just does not seem like a good idea to start out with c-41. I do understand the idea of starting with something hard to get you ready to do something easier, it works for the military, but not in photography. You won't see anyone getting good results if they start out using an 8x10 camera, before getting the building blocks down with a 35mm camera . Do what you wish, but it just makes so much sense to do traditional B&W.
Adv Reply
Originally Posted by tim k
