Dynamic range developer for color

[gabriele turchi]

please please , excuse my ignorance, and i say something really stupid

is there an equivalent to the 2 bath system used in B&W (which allow dynamic range adjustments while developing) for color developing?

or shooting color means that whatever DR has been photographed cannot be modified at the developing stage at all?

thanks
g

[koraks]

I'd say the official answer would be "no", as the C41 process is standardized and doesn't allow for any contrast adjustments. However, I know that at least one forum member has been experimenting (or will be?) with extended or contracted development times to influence contrast. I suppose you'd have very little room for adjustments (depending a bit on the film used), since adjustments to developer times will influence color balance as well.

But maybe there are other solutions to your problem; what situation is it that requires you to adjust the contrast during processing?

[jp]

Contemporary c41 films like Ektar 100 and Portra 160 have a massive dynamic range, like tmax 400. I just shoot it with adequate exposure for the shadows and never run out of mid-section of the exposure curve until you get something so dense the epson can't scan it. Be satisfied that it's captured. As for printing, I scan and inkjet print, but if I were doing wet printing, I'd probably either not mess with the film developing temperature for fear of color shifts or hire someone to print wet from a digital file.

[gabriele turchi]

thanks

i see that changing the timings or formulas could heavily affect color cast , thereof non being a flexible process as it could be for B&W.

i have inquired about it because i have been shooting some 4x5 in the last few days in tuscany , spectacular sunsets etc.. looking at my spot meter i was always outing that the DR would not be enough... therefore i thought if the 2 bath strategy would have been possible (and so shooting accordingly ) ,also for now, i hope that assuming 12 stops of DR in the negative (portra 400) is ok .. (but sometimes you kind of need 15...)
thanks

g

[gabriele turchi]

thanks JP
do yu know how many stops can capture the portra 400?
12- 13?

thanks
g

[koraks]

Well, I trust you will come up with some stellar images from that beautiful region! Be sure to post them here! !

[Drew Wiley]

Contrast can be modified for darkroom printing by using unsharp masking, using pan films, to either increase or decrease contrast. I have a lot of experience with this. This can also obviously be done after scanning, when printing digitally. Very little can be done with the film itself. You choose color films for their contrast range (latitude); but this comes with a price - you give up something to gain something else. And some older chrome films could be "pull" processed to give a little more wiggle room. though few films do well with this now. Masking is a far more flexible approach, and non-destructive to the original, but has a distinct learning curve of its own. But don't expect any color film to realistically span the range of black and white films; and those that span the most tend to be relatively bland
in terms of contrast and color saturation.

[jp]

thanks JP
do yu know how many stops can capture the portra 400?
12- 13?

thanks
g

I haven't used Portra 400. I have only used 160 and Ektar 100 both of which VASTLY exceed the range of any digital 35mm camera which are supposed to be 12-13 stops.

[Drew Wiley]

Yet analogously, how much of this range is actually usable. I can't think of any color film that spans 12 stops with decent reproduction ability at the extremes. Very
few black and white films will unless you resort to some sort of midtone compaction. Digi- whatever is infected with a lot of marketing nonsense at the moment,
though there is HDR. Bending the rules always comes at a cost. I'm more concerned about color reproduction than range. Tuscany? I've seen plenty of work done
with old-shcool Vericolor, Porta, digi, ... Heck, I'd just shoot whatever gives the look I like. That would have been even a chrome film in the past; now it would
be Ektar. If portraits were the priority, Portra 160; if a compromise usage, Portra 400. It's like talking about favorite flavors of ice cream. But for extreme lighting ranges, a black and white film with a long straight line like TMY or Fomapan 200 is the ticket. I wouldn't expect the need there. But them, I like things believable. Overdone HDR is particularly annoying. One expects some depth in shadows.

[Drew Wiley]

Of course, they had the best answer a century ago, when panchromatic films were first available. Tri-color exposures thru RGB filters onto long-scale black and white film sheets, then reassembled for the print. A bit involved.

[tuco]

I thought I read somewhere that you can over expose and under develop ( just like BW film) to compress the highlights. That would imply highlights would develop faster than the shadows like BW film. I never tried it myself on color negatives and I suspect if you did you couldn't do it to the degree that you can with BW film due to, perhaps, color shifting issues. But maybe look into that.

[Drew Wiley]

It's film, so you could hypothetically do that relative to mere contrast, but not with respect to how the different dye layers respond and interact. The color would
go pretty wacko. But there are other problems too, chemically.