dmr
Registered Abuser
I decided to do a quickie sanity check to see for myself how much, if any, things like temperature and dilution affect my C41 processing, so I bought a pack of plain vanilla drugstore Kodak Gold 200 and shot three rolls (hold that thought) as identically as I easily could.
I took some shots of some test charts and some real-world shots, namely a neighbor's garden and the greenspace to the rear of the lot.
Below is a set of two test chart photos from the first two rolls. The upper two are cropped slightly and the bottom two are full-size crops from the scans. Both were done in the Jobo with pre-wet, develop, blix, wash 8 times, and stabilize. In each set, the top one was developed at 72F and the bottom one was developed at 102F and timed according to instructions. All were scanned at 3200dpi on the KM SD IV.
To me, anyway, the test shots processed at 72F look a bit "cleaner" and have less apparent grain.
At normal viewing distance on the monitor, however, it doesn't appear to be that much difference.
For the real-world shots, the change in apparent grain was not nearly as evident. The position of the camera and such had more effect on the look and feel of the images than did the temperature.
And for the third roll, I intend to process that to test the one-shot diluted solutions, but I have to wait (tomorrow or Saturday, probably) for more chemistry to come in. (You may now release that thought.)
I guess I could have diluted the stock solutions, but I want to do the test as a one-shot, rather than to re-use the solutions that already did two rolls.
Any thoughts?
I took some shots of some test charts and some real-world shots, namely a neighbor's garden and the greenspace to the rear of the lot.
Below is a set of two test chart photos from the first two rolls. The upper two are cropped slightly and the bottom two are full-size crops from the scans. Both were done in the Jobo with pre-wet, develop, blix, wash 8 times, and stabilize. In each set, the top one was developed at 72F and the bottom one was developed at 102F and timed according to instructions. All were scanned at 3200dpi on the KM SD IV.
To me, anyway, the test shots processed at 72F look a bit "cleaner" and have less apparent grain.
At normal viewing distance on the monitor, however, it doesn't appear to be that much difference.
For the real-world shots, the change in apparent grain was not nearly as evident. The position of the camera and such had more effect on the look and feel of the images than did the temperature.
And for the third roll, I intend to process that to test the one-shot diluted solutions, but I have to wait (tomorrow or Saturday, probably) for more chemistry to come in. (You may now release that thought.)
I guess I could have diluted the stock solutions, but I want to do the test as a one-shot, rather than to re-use the solutions that already did two rolls.
Any thoughts?
brbo
Well-known
Hardly a difference between them. The bottom (102F) "full crop" is obviously not a full crop (100%) since the elements in the picture are much smaller than in the 72F crop, so we obviously can't judge grain and sharpness but when I did a test like this there was much bigger difference (grain and color wise).
BTW, how do you know that scanning didn't neutralize differences in the negatives? Did you scan to raw with locked exposure and inverted both scans exactly the same? Do you have a flatbed scanner, so you could lay down both negatives side-by-side and scan both of them as one picture?
BTW, how do you know that scanning didn't neutralize differences in the negatives? Did you scan to raw with locked exposure and inverted both scans exactly the same? Do you have a flatbed scanner, so you could lay down both negatives side-by-side and scan both of them as one picture?
Ranchu
Veteran
Second one is soft as butter compared to the first, skin tones way yellow. Greytag Macbeth light red patch is orange. I'm confused, I thought you were supposed to develop c41 around 101 degrees? it looks much better at 72. I really appreciate the testing.
x-ray
Veteran
Who manufactured the kit. Can you get your color balance correct? As mentioned it's yellow with some red. Saturation looks low.
Keep in mind not all kits are formulated the same necessarily. Kodak formulates its chemistry for optimum results at one temp.
Keep in mind not all kits are formulated the same necessarily. Kodak formulates its chemistry for optimum results at one temp.
FujiLove
Well-known
It probably has little to do with what you're seeing here, but FYI Jobo recommends a 5 minute pre-warm, rather than a pre-wet for C-41 and E6. I.e. the tank should be loaded with film and run in the water bath, but the developer should be the first liquid to touch the emulsion. I believe Kodak recommend the same, but I can't put my hands on the data sheet right now.
I'd guess some or all of what you're seeing here is due to the process and limitations of scanning. For instance, is the film processed at 38C more dense than the other one? If so, your scanner could be struggling to extract information from it and consequently adding noise and apparent grain. Have you looked at both sets of negatives on a light table under a loupe?
I'd guess some or all of what you're seeing here is due to the process and limitations of scanning. For instance, is the film processed at 38C more dense than the other one? If so, your scanner could be struggling to extract information from it and consequently adding noise and apparent grain. Have you looked at both sets of negatives on a light table under a loupe?
dmr
Registered Abuser
Thanks, this is the stuff I'm looking for!
A few comments.
The only tweaking I did (in Gimp) was to set the white point using the white border and the black point at the darkest of the gradient squares.
They may be slightly different in size 'cuz I was probably standing in slightly different positions and distances. I guess I should have used a tripod and kept that in place, huh?
It was the Cinestill kit, which appears to be the same as the Arista kit, which seems to be much more common.
I did RTFM on the Jobo but I don't remember it saying to dry-warm instead of the pre-bath. I followed the instructions for "rotary tube processors" (or some wording like that) in TFM (actually TFS) for the kit.
The light for the chart was a highly-accurate laboratory standard calibrated light source consisting of bathroom room light from an overhead fixture of one curly-cue bulb and a ring of small incandescent bulbs around the vanity.
Thanks again. I do appreciate it.
A few comments.
The only tweaking I did (in Gimp) was to set the white point using the white border and the black point at the darkest of the gradient squares.
They may be slightly different in size 'cuz I was probably standing in slightly different positions and distances. I guess I should have used a tripod and kept that in place, huh?
It was the Cinestill kit, which appears to be the same as the Arista kit, which seems to be much more common.
I did RTFM on the Jobo but I don't remember it saying to dry-warm instead of the pre-bath. I followed the instructions for "rotary tube processors" (or some wording like that) in TFM (actually TFS)
for the kit. The light for the chart was a highly-accurate laboratory standard calibrated light source consisting of bathroom room light from an overhead fixture of one curly-cue bulb and a ring of small incandescent bulbs around the vanity.
Thanks again. I do appreciate it.
Arved
Member
The differences are very slight. Much less than, say, the difference between two different films processed identically. i.e. I'm seeing much less variation here than I would expect from Ektar 100 and Portra 400 processed in the same tank.
These are some of the best results I've seen from (relatively) low-temperature C41 development (not that I've seen a lot).
These are some of the best results I've seen from (relatively) low-temperature C41 development (not that I've seen a lot).
x-ray
Veteran
I'm much more interested in color balance whether there's a color shift or crossover as well as dmax and dmin as allowed to grain.
Your color is off because of the light source e you shot it with. CFL bulbs like any consumer fluorescent have big voids in the spectrum. Your film was designed to be shot under daylight and that's how it should be tested.
Your color is off because of the light source e you shot it with. CFL bulbs like any consumer fluorescent have big voids in the spectrum. Your film was designed to be shot under daylight and that's how it should be tested.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
The guy who is selling enc2 kits on ebay or directly (if you know him) has developing instructions only for 24C with longer times. It works for me with cinefilm (it has crappy WB anyway ).
But I struggle to find times for 24C and C-41. My C-41 kits are for classic temperature and times in the manual only. Enlighten me, please!
).But I struggle to find times for 24C and C-41. My C-41 kits are for classic temperature and times in the manual only. Enlighten me, please!
phrons
Established
There is a difference, but it doesn't make a real world difference.
Did you look at it under a loupe?
I have experienced scans can differ at least for me because I am horrible like that.
Did you look at it under a loupe?
I have experienced scans can differ at least for me because I am horrible like that.
Arved
Member
The guy who is selling enc2 kits on ebay or directly (if you know him) has developing instructions only for 24C with longer times. It works for me with cinefilm (it has crappy WB anyway
But I struggle to find times for 24C and C-41. My C-41 kits are for classic temperature and times in the manual only. Enlighten me, please!
I found this on the web:
Looks like C-41 development times on the X-axis, and temperature on the Y-axis. I have no experience with this, so take it for what it's worth - at best it's worth what you paid for it. Looks very much like a reaction rate curve from my High School Chemistry class days (I'm no chemist, but I did well enough that I was my instructor's teaching assistant the following year).
Agitation is unknown - probably continuing the standard agitation schedule throughout (what a chore!).
Times for Bleach/Fix/BLIX are going to be correspondingly longer.
There are also some articles on the web regarding stand developing C-41 at room temperature. The following are typical (Google is your friend):
https://www.lomography.com/magazine...g-and-optional-bleach-bypass-for-cool-effects
http://www.addicted2light.com/2014/03/14/how-to-develop-color-negatives-in-c-41-the-easy-way/
Again, I have no experience with any of this, but present it in the hopes it will encourage you to further research and possible experimentation.
Warmest regards,
- Arved
brbo
Well-known
I thought I would share my findings with developing at different temperatures and various deviations from standard C-41 process. I have a problem with streaking when developing 4x5" film at standard temps and times, so I'm trying to find an alternative process to give me longer developing times and less aggressive start and finish to development stage.
Here is my comparison. I used FujiHunt XPress C-41 kit and Jobo CPE2 processor.
1. 30deg, 8:00
2. 38deg, 3:15 (standard C-41 development)
3. 38deg, 3:15, prewash (> 5min), wash between developer and bleach (3 water changes within 1 min)
4. 32deg, 6:30, prevash
Scanned on Howtek 4500 drum scanner, negatives placed side by side and scanned in one go. These are only 800dpi scans so they are not suitable for grain/sharpness comparison...
Scanned as slide:
Scanned as negative (Aztek DPL software):
The results from different developing regimes when scanned side-by-side in one go are quite noticeably different. No surprises there.
But what if I was to treat every frame as a separate picture and invert it in ColorPerfect (just to arrive at a base for final post-processing)?
I cropped 30deg and 38deg frame and inverted them individually:
30deg above, standard C-41 below:
Here is my comparison. I used FujiHunt XPress C-41 kit and Jobo CPE2 processor.
1. 30deg, 8:00
2. 38deg, 3:15 (standard C-41 development)
3. 38deg, 3:15, prewash (> 5min), wash between developer and bleach (3 water changes within 1 min)
4. 32deg, 6:30, prevash
Scanned on Howtek 4500 drum scanner, negatives placed side by side and scanned in one go. These are only 800dpi scans so they are not suitable for grain/sharpness comparison...
Scanned as slide:
Scanned as negative (Aztek DPL software):
The results from different developing regimes when scanned side-by-side in one go are quite noticeably different. No surprises there.
But what if I was to treat every frame as a separate picture and invert it in ColorPerfect (just to arrive at a base for final post-processing)?
I cropped 30deg and 38deg frame and inverted them individually:
30deg above, standard C-41 below: