C41 home dev video tutorial

Excellent video, mabelsound!

I find this thread very appropriate as I just developed my first 2 rolls using the unicolor kit just hours ago! Cross-processed even! Velvia 100F and Kodak E100SW. I have to say, the temperature control wasn't very difficult at all, at least not as difficult as I had imagined.

Here are 2 examples from each roll:
E100SW
3127556298_c93d1092ac.jpg


3126728459_a69114bce2.jpg



Velvia 100F
3127553206_83fb55e496.jpg


3126725121_806d1ebf35.jpg



Keith and anyone else who has done cross-processing at home:
Did you find you had to wash the film more than usual? The recommend 3 minutes from the directions still gave me a lot of purple liquid. I had to wash a bit more to get most of that purple out.

Any thoughts or tips on cross-processing at home? Maybe I should have stuck with regular C-41 on my first try, but I feel really good about it.


One last thing. I have to that all my fellow RFF'ers for providing the impetus for me to do this. I've especially been following the threads by Keith and mabelsound, so thanks to you guys! 🙂😎
 
Hi Schow,

I can't say I remember having to wash the film any longer than normal due to residual dye but I think I definitely gave it more than the three minutes they recommended ... it seemed kind of short. Cross processing is good fun and the rather different results you get are quite spectacular.

How did you scan these shots ... what was the procedure, negative positive? I found getting decent scans far more challenging than actually developing the film! 😛

[edit] .... I meant to add, I found the frames that were very slightly under exposed the easiest to scan!
 
Last edited:
Hi Keith and mabelsound,

Let me try and expound on the process a bit.

In terms of the actual scanning, I have always scanned my cross-processed film as a color negative. This time was no different, though I am interested in the process of scanning as a positive and flipping it in photoshop.

I used my Dimage Scan Dual IV (purchased a few years ago here!) and scanned with Vuescan (Mac version). As far as the settings go, I found that leaving the “Filter” effects (restore colors, restore fading, sharpen) unchecked/ blank to be best in terms of what I “know/ feel” Velvia 100F and E100SW should look like. When selecting any of the “Filter” options the pictures did sometimes change dramticaly. I’ll post a few examples later today. I did play with the color/ white balance settings, but the different options didn’t change the picture too dramatically.

I feel that Keith is right about the shots that were slightly underexposed as easier to scan, and at times it was very frustrating. Now, I’m not sure what you mean by the underexposed shots to be easier to scan. Does the scanner actually have difficulty or is the shot not what you expected? I’m not the most technical guy, but I did notice that my shots that were shot in overcast or shadowy conditions to look better (more the norm of what I think the shots should look like) than shots in full sun or bright conditions. Like I said, I’m not the most technical guy, but my anecdotal evidence might support Keith’s experiences.

To be sure, most of my frustrations were scanning Velvia. E100SW was relatively painless. To end, I also think/ feel that I should have washed more as I have now noticed my stabilizer (which goes in after washing) is slightly pink in color now. Perhaps the residual dye (is that correct?) played a role in scanning difficulties. I hope this sheds more light on the situation. I'd be happy to expound on anything else, to the best of my knowledge.

Should we undertake a traveling cross-processed film strip project amongst us do-it-yourself’ers in order to see how different scans and workflows make for different pictures?


Sherm
 
Very cool, John!
Don't know when I'll get around to do this myself, but this will become very handy.

... except I cringe when I saw you squeeze your freshly developed roll 😀 😀
 
shadowfox said:
Very cool, John!
Don't know when I'll get around to do this myself, but this will become very handy.

... except I cringe when I saw you squeeze your freshly developed roll 😀 😀
Click to expand...

So do you let yours drip-dry? I don't squeeze at all, really, I just have a very soft kitchen sponge I cut a slit in, and I gently run the film through that. I don't use a squeegee, it always seems to scratch the negs. But now I never have scratched negs (at least not from the sponge).
 
schow said:
Hi Keith and mabelsound,

Let me try and expound on the process a bit.

In terms of the actual scanning, I have always scanned my cross-processed film as a color negative. This time was no different, though I am interested in the process of scanning as a positive and flipping it in photoshop.

I used my Dimage Scan Dual IV (purchased a few years ago here!) and scanned with Vuescan (Mac version). As far as the settings go, I found that leaving the “Filter” effects (restore colors, restore fading, sharpen) unchecked/ blank to be best in terms of what I “know/ feel” Velvia 100F and E100SW should look like. When selecting any of the “Filter” options the pictures did sometimes change dramticaly. I’ll post a few examples later today. I did play with the color/ white balance settings, but the different options didn’t change the picture too dramatically.

I feel that Keith is right about the shots that were slightly underexposed as easier to scan, and at times it was very frustrating. Now, I’m not sure what you mean by the underexposed shots to be easier to scan. Does the scanner actually have difficulty or is the shot not what you expected? I’m not the most technical guy, but I did notice that my shots that were shot in overcast or shadowy conditions to look better (more the norm of what I think the shots should look like) than shots in full sun or bright conditions. Like I said, I’m not the most technical guy, but my anecdotal evidence might support Keith’s experiences.

To be sure, most of my frustrations were scanning Velvia. E100SW was relatively painless. To end, I also think/ feel that I should have washed more as I have now noticed my stabilizer (which goes in after washing) is slightly pink in color now. Perhaps the residual dye (is that correct?) played a role in scanning difficulties. I hope this sheds more light on the situation. I'd be happy to expound on anything else, to the best of my knowledge.

Should we undertake a traveling cross-processed film strip project amongst us do-it-yourself’ers in order to see how different scans and workflows make for different pictures?


Sherm
Click to expand...

A simple cross-processing experiments thread might be enough...thanks for all this great info! I'll post about it when I get around to trying it...I've got a few rolls of Velvia in the fridge and will try to shoot them this week.
 
mabelsound said:
So do you let yours drip-dry? I don't squeeze at all, really, I just have a very soft kitchen sponge I cut a slit in, and I gently run the film through that. I don't use a squeegee, it always seems to scratch the negs. But now I never have scratched negs (at least not from the sponge).
Click to expand...

Yes, drip to dry, no watermarks, except... when I got towards the bottom of my last fixer bottle, it developed white sediments that deposits small white rings on my frames.

Not until later that I got an idea from someone to use a coffee filter to guarantee that the white stuff didn't get into the tank when fixing. That's a good tip and maybe useful later on.

I guess the sponge way is ok, I cringe because it seems that with just one tiny grit, it will result in a long white line throughout the roll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom