Printable View
Back in the 1980s, I used to shoot Ektachrome film and process it in C-22 or C-41 to get color negatives. Vague memories of having to increase the ASA and this technique worked best with some films, and for other films got terrible results. Anyone out there presently doing the same? Am looking for some basic starting info to try this again.
Thanks
I think you just need to do one test roll, I am about to shoot some 8 x10 Transparancy and Process in C41 and I was just thinking to rate the film as normal and process normal C41,
You are right there are different results with each film so I would maybe test two or three rolls process them normal and see which one gives you the negative you like.
Obviously you could bracket around the films ISO and that too will give you negatives of various quality that you can start nailing the right film and ISO rating. I am doing this to abstract the colour palette of my still lifes and making tri colour gums.
I agree with Bob. You can test out some different ASAs on a single roll pretty efficiently. I use Fuji Provia at box speed and cross process myself on a Jobo using Rollei C41 chemistry (rumored to be Fuji). I haven't tried Kodak transparency film but I heard it's more contrasty than Fuji. Also worth mentioning, the negs come out grainier as a result of the cross process. So, bigger negs would be better to shoot than say 135. I do my cross processing at the end of my color development runs as the transparency film appears to contaminate the chemistry--or at least I wouldn't want to run regular color negs after cross processing. I hear labs often charge more for cross processing as they run it at the end of their development sessions to minimize the effects of whatever comes off the transparency film. I'm likely a rarity these days, but I make c-prints in an analog darkroom (Saunders 4x5 enlargers printing to Fujimoto CP-31 processor). I find I need to remove most magenta from prints and sometimes have to engage the cyan filter to get the colors into the realm of plausibility. That said, as with Bob, the whole point for me with cross processing is using it as a method for abstracting images. Attached a recent sample I just shot in June--actually a scan of a c-print (Fuji Type-CN paper).
Attachment 182735
I cross-process aerochrome as C41, it seems to work fine just running it as a normal c41 process. Film speed rating the same too. (320-400 with yellow filter).
In flickr you may search: fuji cross processing , you have there +30k results, lomographers get a lot of fun with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg
https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=...s%20processing
Nice example Andrej... since you enlarger print , a trick I did with cross process was to flash in colour that will fill in the highlights, this E6 to C41 to print can give some really contrast in the high regions so I would use the Cyan filter as you mention but on a second enlarger set up a complimentary colour for the flash that would fill in some of the highlights but complement the basic image colour.Quote:
Originally Posted by agregov
glad you are still hard at it Andrej
Bob
You guessed right Bob, I've had trouble with the high zones in these cross process images. Would never have come up with that flashing idea. Brilliant, many thanks. Would love to come out for a Toronto visit in 2019. I'll ping ya with an update shortly.
Attached is an image that I shot with cross processed slide film back in the 1980s. Fortunately found some of the notes that I made back then. Seems that I got my best results with overexposed film (in the order of 3-5+? stops overexposure) that was underdeveloped. Unfortunately I did not record the degree of underdevelopment. Enlarged using a Durst 4x5 diffuse color head. With 35mm film crossed processed, I did get increased grain (though not a bad thing in some cases). This shot was shot using 120 Ektachrome film and enlarged to 16x16 inches. So now am in the process of getting some rolls of 120 Chrome film and a kit or two of C-41 chemistry. No longer have that Durst Type C processor, so will have to scan and print the images digitally. Thanks for all the feedback.
Greg
You will get real thick negs with that much overexposure I think, even with the underdevelopment. Ektachrome, especially tungsten 160, worked pretty well the few times I messed with x-pro. I usually shot it at box or maybe +2/3, normal dev.
I tried Provia once and the sky turned some obscene highlighter pink color, yuck.
Any time Andrej , remember fish stinks after four days though, Laura Barney and Lucy and I would love to see you again.Quote:
Originally Posted by agregov