 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / December 2004E6 Processing
I am about to begin E6 processing using a second hand Jobo ATL-1000, can anyone offer me advice on which chemistry is best suited to this machine, I'm partial to Kodak's E6 one shot kit. It's a 5L kit but you can mix as much as you need. : I am about to begin E6 processing using a second hand Jobo ATL-1000, : can anyone offer me advice on which chemistry is best suited to this : machine,  SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > I am about to begin E6 processing using a second hand Jobo ATL-1000, > can anyone offer me advice on which chemistry is best suited to this > machine, Why not ask Kodak? I would suggest that if you use Kodak films to use Kodak chemistry, and if you use Fuji films to use their chemistry. >I am about to begin E6 processing using a second hand Jobo ATL-1000, > can anyone offer me advice on which chemistry is best suited to this > machine, The Tetenal 3 or 6 bath kits are made for processing volumes run in an amateur lab. They are also all liquid and therefore easy to mix in lesser quantities. Store any remaining concentrates in glass bottles filled to the brim. They'll last longer. I prefer the 3 bath, however you have more control with the 6 bath. My guess is the ATL is set to use the 3 bath kit. Jobo has a partnership with Tetenal, so your ATL might already have the necessary program placed in it's memory. FWIW, the 3 bath kit does provide excellent results. The 6 bath kit will allow you to control the contrast and overall slide intensity. For standard processing (what you'd get 'downtown') the 3 bath kit do the job. Jim P.S., Disregard the advise to use Kodak chemicals for Kodak film and Fuji/Fuji. It's not sound advise. > >I am about to begin E6 processing using a second hand Jobo ATL-1000, > > can anyone offer me advice on which chemistry is best suited to this [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > allow you to control the contrast and overall slide intensity. For standard > processing (what you'd get 'downtown') the 3 bath kit do the job. What you get downtown (assumimg you mean a pro lab) is not a 3 step amateur process. Professional labs use 6 step replenisment chemistry and monitor the consistency of the process through control strip plots. This would be typical processing. Professional results require PH adjustments and monitoring for in-control D-max, speed, color, etc. > Jim > > P.S., Disregard the advise to use Kodak chemicals for Kodak film and > Fuji/Fuji. It's not sound advise. Useless troll advice. E6 is a standarized process. I use Trebla E6 chemistry for all E6 films. > What you get downtown (assumimg you mean a pro lab) is not > a 3 step amateur process. Professional labs use 6 step > replenisment chemistry and monitor the consistency of the > process through control strip plots. This would be typical > processing. Professional results require PH adjustments and > monitoring for in-control D-max, speed, color, etc. Tom, Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't inferring that the pro lab downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would be about the same in terms of standard processing. >> P.S., Disregard the advise to use Kodak chemicals for Kodak film and >> Fuji/Fuji. It's not sound advise. > > Useless troll advice. E6 is a standarized process. I use > Trebla E6 chemistry for all E6 films. I didn't want to come right out and call Uran Commit a troll, but we all know how useless his advice is. BTW, where do you get the Trebla? > > What you get downtown (assumimg you mean a pro lab) is not > > a 3 step amateur process. Professional labs use 6 step [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would be > about the same in terms of standard processing. Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film with any E6 chemistry) but the only "standard" for results uses control strip monitoring. Amateur 3 step kits meet E6 process requirements, but the results will vary. > >> P.S., Disregard the advise to use Kodak chemicals for Kodak film and > >> Fuji/Fuji. It's not sound advise. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > BTW, where do you get the Trebla? Trebla is typically used for replenishement systems. It's identical to Kodak's chemistry. I used to get it from a local distributor. Trebla chemistry is sold by cases (i.e., first developer, reversal, color developer, pre bleach, fix, replenishers, final rinse as separate "kits.") Sometimes distributors will break these kits down and sell in smaller quanities, but generally you'd use Trebla if you're processing in bulk -- using 5 gal chem. or more at a time. A local photo supply might have/order it. Best to buy local so no shipping. The difference is if you process a lot of E6 (a hundred rolls or sheets at a time), it's very cost effective, maybe 0.80 - 0.90 cents per. But I've also used the Kodak 5L kits for smaller runs (100 sheets or less.) Still cheaper than lab processing. http://www.cpacimaging.com/photochem.asp >> Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't inferring that the pro lab >> downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > uses control strip monitoring. Amateur 3 step kits meet > E6 process requirements, but the results will vary. Funny you should say that. I used to get my E6 pro-developed. It had to be sent off to sydney resulting in a 3 week delay. The end result would always have some colour cast on it, varying on the type of film I used. I got a Paterson E6 3 bath kit, and started doing it myself in a paterson tank and haven't noticed any colour casts at all, irrespective of which film I use. My systems are probably grossly innacurate, there is a good chance my temps could be out by a degree or two (waiting on a more accurate thermometer), and I tend to be sloppier with my times than i should be, but i am getting better results than the so called professionals delivered. > > Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing > > means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film > > with any E6 chemistry) but the only "standard" for results > > uses control strip monitoring. Amateur 3 step kits meet > > E6 process requirements, but the results will vary. > Funny you should say that. I used to get my E6 pro-developed. It had to be > sent off to sydney resulting in a 3 week delay. The end result would always [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and I tend to be sloppier with my times than i should be, but i am getting > better results than the so called professionals delivered. Did you send it over night delivery, otherwise any conclusions you derive are subject to shipping conditions. Even processed film in very hot conditions can be damaged. As for color casts in the 3 step versus the 6 step, maybe subtle but side by side, its probably noticable. Especially if one is using process monitoring like control strips, after all there "IS" a reason "Better" Pro labs use them. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > > Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing > > > means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Especially if one is using process monitoring like control strips, > after all there "IS" a reason "Better" Pro labs use them. The main reason labs must monitor carefully their process is replenishment, they have to maintain their solutions constant thoughout the day and whatever the number of films are processed. An amateur usually work one-shot (I strongly encourage it), he can use the same water quality giving constant solutions from batch to batch. He must keep the right temperature for a little more than 10', not a full working day, once the film is out of the color developper, everything is easy. That's more than 6 years I process my E-6 (Kodak kit, 6 baths, 5 liters), results are very constant and really superior to what the pro labs in my region gave me before. I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best pro lab. Best regards, Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch >>>>Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing >>>>means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > and really superior to what the pro labs in my region gave me before. > I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best pro lab. How do you, with 5L of developer, keep from having to throw away most of it, because it's gone bad on you? Do you wait until you have sufficient films to use a whole batch? I process about 12 rolls a year, so unless I shoot a lot more, I have the problem of dead developer and need to keep throwing it away..... W > How do you, with 5L of developer, keep from having to throw away most of > it, because it's gone bad on you? The 5 liters process 40 films 135-36. I rarely throw products away as I use 1-3 kits per year. I do not mix the kit completely, only what I need and keep the concentrates in their bottles. I use a protective gaz (like Tetenal Protectan but, more recently, I replaced it by lighter gaz since I found Protectan is just a mix of butane/propane) to fill the bottles. > Do you wait until you have sufficient > films to use a whole batch? For the batches, it depends if I need the films quickly or not. If there is no urgency, I keep the exposed films until I have 5 or 8 rolls, then I process them in a single batch. > I process about 12 rolls a year, so unless > I shoot a lot more, I have the problem of dead developer and need to > keep throwing it away..... > > W For only 12 rolls a year, it's certainly better to find a good lab in your area. Doing it yourself may still be economical depending of the price you pay per kit and what a lab charges, but prices vary quite a lot around the world, I let you check by yourself. It may also be interesting if you don't have an easy access to a good lab. Regards, Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch >>How do you, with 5L of developer, keep from having to throw away most of >>it, because it's gone bad on you? [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > let you check by yourself. > It may also be interesting if you don't have an easy access to a good lab. There is a good C41 lab, and the prices are reasonable ($10 a roll, processed and scanned), E6, well one lab says $8.00 - $9.00 a roll for sleaved, $12.00 - $13.00 for mounted, not bad, but slide film around here is expensive. Case in point, a roll of Provia 100/F 135-36 runs about $12, 3 rolls of Superia 200 at the grocery store (24 exp) runs about $10.00 plus $5 a roll for develop only. I get it souped and then scan..... So for 72 exposures it's $25 for C41, and $42 for E6, guess I'll keep shooting negs...... Lately I have been doing some interesting experiments, shooting colour film as if it were B&W film, pulling out the individual channels with Gimp, and then adjusting them, and putting them back together, desaturating, then loading the result into PSE for further processing...... W so $12 + $13 f : >>>>Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing : >>>>means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] : > and really superior to what the pro labs in my region gave me before. : > I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best pro lab. : How do you, with 5L of developer, keep from having to throw away most of : it, because it's gone bad on you? Do you wait until you have sufficient : films to use a whole batch? I process about 12 rolls a year, so unless : I shoot a lot more, I have the problem of dead developer and need to : keep throwing it away..... The Kodak 5L one shot kit is a liquid kit and you can mix what you need. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > : >>>>Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing > : >>>>means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > The Kodak 5L one shot kit is a liquid kit and you can mix what you need. Know of a CANADIAN dealer that carries it? Shipping any kind of DG across International borders is not only a big pain in the don-key, it's also very expensive....... Kodak Canada lists it, so maybe I'll give them a call, to see if they can tell me of a dealer..... W > Know of a CANADIAN dealer that carries it? Shipping any kind of DG > across International borders is not only a big pain in the don-key, it's > also very expensive....... Kodak Canada lists it, so maybe I'll give > them a call, to see if they can tell me of a dealer..... A few years back Treck hall quoted me just under $60 for the 5litre kit. If you're in a city served by Treck Hall then give them a shout. Nick >>Know of a CANADIAN dealer that carries it? Shipping any kind of DG >>across International borders is not only a big pain in the don-key, it's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If you're in a city served by Treck Hall then give them a shout. > Never heard of these guys before today, turns out their Toronto Office is less then 10 miles away....... Guess I just need to find some budget, and the time to go pay them a visit..... Bugs me though, prices are not listed on the web-site...... W : > : >>>>Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing : > : >>>>means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] : > : > The Kodak 5L one shot kit is a liquid kit and you can mix what you need. : Know of a CANADIAN dealer that carries it? Shipping any kind of DG : across International borders is not only a big pain in the don-key, it's : also very expensive....... Kodak Canada lists it, so maybe I'll give : them a call, to see if they can tell me of a dealer..... Alas, as I live in the US I wouldn't want to buy the stuff from a Canadian dealer for that same reason. That and the fact that I can and do get the stuff from a local mom&pop camera store for less then I can get it from the larger stores. As you mention calling Kodak and asking them for the name of a stocking distributor in your area would be your best bet. You may also ask your local store to special order it for you. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > > > > Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing > > > > means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > An amateur usually work one-shot (I strongly encourage it), he can use the same water quality giving > constant solutions from batch to batch. No. Even with one shot the only way to monitor E6 process variables is using control strips. It's the batches of _chemistry_ that vary, not your own water source. Labs use replenishment because they are running a constant process that requires constant monitoring, but one shot processing also requires an in-control process _if_ you want consistent results from batch to batch. > He must keep the right temperature for a little more than 10', not a full working day, once the film > is out of the color developper, everything is easy. Color developer is critical. If you "guess" you have no way to adjust PH, color balance, speed, or density and results will necessarily vary, even if subjectively you're oblivious to those variations. > That's more than 6 years I process my E-6 (Kodak kit, 6 baths, 5 liters), results are very constant > and really superior to what the pro labs in my region gave me before. > I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best pro lab. Not quantitatively. And careful with that word "best." People who don't understand quantitatively what an in control process means aren't really able to tell a bad "pro" lab from a good one, because you can't ask the right questions about the process those labs are running. Lot's of bad "pro" labs out there. But that doesn't mean you are getting consistent "professional" results in your own out of control processing... > Best regards, > Claudio Bonavolta > http://www.bonavolta.ch > No. Even with one shot the only way to monitor E6 process > variables is using control strips. It's the batches of [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > mean you are getting consistent "professional" results > in your own out of control processing... I'm impressed, you seem to be the only one knowing where to find the real "pro" labs that can give the real "pro" quality ... Ok, maybe you're right, what I'm saying is just *my* results are consistently better than all the "false pro" labs we have in Switzerland included the Kodak lab and their pro service, one of the biggest and of the rare still doing K-14 in the world and certainly working with lots of control strips. My control strips ? Just my eyes with 25+ years of photography, 80% of them being slides. So once more: - I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best pro lab. - Regards, Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch > > No. Even with one shot the only way to monitor E6 process > > variables is using control strips. It's the batches of [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > I'm impressed, you seem to be the only one knowing where to find the real > "pro" labs that can give the real "pro" quality ... The lab I use also does E6 for some of the most well known chrome photographers in the US...I have checked their process and seen their plots. While many labs do control strips maybe twice a day and employ some guy who technically qualified, this lab keeps their process in control by the hour and uses Kodaks Q Lab. It's about as good as I myself can do. I have also used other labs that call themselves "pro." Many do crap. Their process is out of control and their results show it. Quite common. Problem is anyone can set up an E6 lab and say they do "pro" processing. You have to check out the lab... > Ok, maybe you're right, what I'm saying is just *my* results are > consistently better than all the "false pro" labs we have in Switzerland [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > My control strips ? Just my eyes with 25+ years of photography, 80% of them > being slides. It's still subjectivve consistency, and you may be satisfied with the results. But E6, while not difficult, is transparency color and has _strict_ tolerances. It's not like b&w, where you have 2 stops of latitude and if the desnity is off target you can easily compensate. Now color is subjective, so you maybe compensating somehow, or simply not notice you Dmax is slightly yellow or green or whatever... > So once more: > - I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best > pro lab. - If they do crap they're not a pro lab... > Regards, > Claudio Bonavolta > http://www.bonavolta.ch >So once more: >- I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best >pro lab. - I agree. A one shot process will generally, as long as the chemicals are fresh, easily do better than a large pro lab which is probably running a roller transport processor. I will be using control strips to set up my King Concepts Enterprise processor just to verify the correct time with the amount of agitation and temperature of the developers but once it's set up I should never have to check it again. : >So once more: : >- I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best : >pro lab. - : I agree. A one shot process will generally, as long as the chemicals : are fresh, easily do better than a large pro lab which is probably [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : and temperature of the developers but once it's set up I should never : have to check it again. I've run control strips with Kodak's one shot kit and the results I've gotten were well within tolerance. Even the best "pro lab" isn't going to be "dead on" all day long. I've spoken with instructors at the local college I take classes at that used to maintain E6 lines (one of them did so for Playboy) and was told by each that the wished that they could keep their lines as tight as the results I got. My personal opinion is that the 3 step kits and Kodak's one shot kit are designed to give good results with less then perfect control. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > >So once more: > >- I'm strongly convinced an amateur can easily match the results of the best [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are fresh, easily do better than a large pro lab which is probably > running a roller transport processor. No "best" lab runs E6 on roller transport... > I will be using control strips to set up my King Concepts Enterprise > processor just to verify the correct time with the amount of agitation > and temperature of the developers but once it's set up I should never > have to check it again. With one shot you don't have to recheck the chemistry once you've made initial adjustments. But you do have to make those adjustments for each new _batch_ of chemistry. It isn't "once and never again." In other words if you buy a 5 gal kit and make adjustments for PH, Dmax, color balance, etc., those adjustments are good _only_ for that 5 gallons of chemistry. Each batch (lot) oif chemistry is going to require slightly different process corrections if control strips are being used as a guide. > >> Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't inferring that the pro lab > >> downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > and I tend to be sloppier with my times than i should be, but i am getting > better results than the so called professionals delivered. Lot's of "pro" labs out there that are pro in name only, who in reality do horribly inconsistent E6. What your conclusion above says to me is that you don't really know the difference between a good lab and a bad one. When you got bad results, did you trouble shoot with the lab or with another lab to check or compare what type or quality of process they actually used? Do they use Kodak's Q-Lab? Did you see the plots, ask how often they ran control strips, etc.? Probably not. I repeat, the only _quantitative_ measure of "good" E6 processing results are if you have a process in control, and control strips are the only method for controlling E6 process variables. What you see from your own results may look good to you, but that's purely subjective. > Lot's of "pro" labs out there that are pro in name only, > who in reality do horribly inconsistent E6. What your [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Did you see the plots, ask how often they ran control strips, > etc.? The problem is, I can't just walk into an E6 lab. I contacted about 30 labs in the city I live and surrounding areas. Not 1 of them processes E6. Most of them send it to Sydney (about 1000km away). Not one of them would provide the name of the lab where they would send it. A couple of places said they send theirs to a "local person who has a Jobo". In the end I decided to get it processed via the same lab I normally use for my C41 processing. I figured they do a good job of that, and presumably would only send their E6 to a lab with similar standards. They were also one of the cheaper, at $12 for 24 exposure, and $15 for 36 exposure (process only). Their turnaround time was also one of the fastest, at an estimate of 2-3 weeks (it ended up being closer to 3 weeks). Most places quoted between $15-$20 for process only of 24 exposures, with 36 exposures jumping up to $20-$25, while one of the places that sent it to a "local guy with a jobo" quoted $30 for 24 exposures, but that included mounting, and wouldn't give me a lower price without mounting. The estimated turnaround time at most places was 4-6 weeks. Considering no-one would give me the name of the lab they would send it to (presumably for fear of me going direct and getting it done cheaper), talking to the lab was not an option. I would very much doubt any of the labs use Kodak Q-Lab. So after getting a few rolls done and spending a fortune, I decided that I was far better off developing my own. Now it costs me about $3/roll to process, I get results in a little over half an hour, and I'm much happier with the quality. Maybe they aren't totally 100% perfect with DMAX or colour balance, but they look ok, and IMO that's the most important test. I don't need control strips to tell me that slides I process have more accurate colour balance than the ones I paid a fortune for. Perhaps the labs that are charging up to $25/roll are involved in Kodak's Q-Lab, but that is one hell of a premium to pay for what would be only a marginal improvement in quality. > Probably not. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > E6 process variables. What you see from your own results > may look good to you, but that's purely subjective. > > Lot's of "pro" labs out there that are pro in name only, > > who in reality do horribly inconsistent E6. What your [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Kodak's Q-Lab, but that is one hell of a premium to pay for what would be > only a marginal improvement in quality. The lab I use when not doing my own charges between $7-9 max for a roll of 24 exposure 35mm, with perfect results. I never said you weren't getting better processing yourself than the crap labs you tried. I said you were wrong to conclude that reflected on better labs. In your case you're probably better off doing it yourself and if you do a lot of dedicated E6 you may want to consider investing in a Jobo and possibly using control strips (if you can get them where you are.) You'll get even better results. Then you'll be the "guy with a Jobo" who can charge $30/roll :) > > Probably not. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > E6 process variables. What you see from your own results > > may look good to you, but that's purely subjective. > I never said you weren't getting better processing yourself > than the crap labs you tried. I said you were wrong to > conclude that reflected on better labs. Thats really the core issue; I can verify its so true. > In your case you're > probably better off doing it yourself and if you do a lot [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Then you'll be the "guy with a Jobo" who can charge $30/roll :) Now lets not delude him or he will think he's a pro and someone else will bitch about his services ;-D SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > I never said you weren't getting better processing yourself > > than the crap labs you tried. I said you were wrong to > > conclude that reflected on better labs. > > Thats really the core issue; I can verify its so true. Well, sometime we can trade crap lab stories... ;) > > In your case you're > > probably better off doing it yourself and if you do a lot [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 >>>Lot's of "pro" labs out there that are pro in name only, >>>who in reality do horribly inconsistent E6. What your [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > The lab I use when not doing my own charges between $7-9 > max for a roll of 24 exposure 35mm, with perfect results. It's not uncommon, outside the United States, to find things incredibly more expensive then inside the United States. Especially when the nearest E6 lab is 1000 miles away. Shipping can be a killer, so Joe's photo store which sends out 2 rolls a day is paying shipping on that outgoing film, and return shipping. Assuming that they request a signature and receipt for that shipping, it's not uncommon to end up paying $50 for the shipping alone. W >>>> Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't inferring that the pro lab >>>>downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > E6 process variables. What you see from your own results > may look good to you, but that's purely subjective. Best way to find a good pro lab, is to ask a few "pro" people. That's how I found the C41 lab that I use, unfortunately they don't do E6, maybe they can recommend someone? W : > > What you get downtown (assumimg you mean a pro lab) is not : > > a 3 step amateur process. Professional labs use 6 step [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] : > downtown used a 3 bath process, but instead I was trying to say it would be : > about the same in terms of standard processing. : Guess what I meant was I don't know what standard processing : means. E6 is a standardized process (i.e., use any E6 film : with any E6 chemistry) but the only "standard" for results : uses control strip monitoring. Amateur 3 step kits meet : E6 process requirements, but the results will vary. I've had very good results from the 3 step tetenal<SP?> kit with my Jobo. I switched to using Kodak's 6 step one shot kit when I needed to process some film one sunday and I messed up when mixing the 3 step chemistry. The only E6 kit I could find from a store that was open on a sunday morning was Kodak's. Interestingly since there isn't as many washes with 100 degree water the six step kit is easier for me to use!! In my never humble opinion my thinking is that since the 3 step kits (and Kodak's one shot kit) are intended for the amature market and not the pro labs they are designed to give good results with less then perfect temperature control, timings and agitation. I first came to think this looking at the results of I got even though I knew from looking at the thermometer I have in my Jobo that the temperature was out of tolerance. I confirmed this with test strips and a densitometer. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > : > > What you get downtown (assumimg you mean a pro lab) is not > : > > a 3 step amateur process. Professional labs use 6 step [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > one shot kit) are intended for the amature market and not the pro labs they are > designed to give good results with less then perfect temperature control, timings This is could be true for 3 step kits, but I've never used them. Kodak E6 can also be purchased as individual chemistry and used one shot or with replenishment which is also the case with Trebla. However, I've never noticed any inconsistencies in results between the replenishment chem used one shot and a Kodak gal. kit 6 step used with strips. > and agitation. I first came to think this looking at the results of I got even though > I knew from looking at the thermometer I have in my Jobo that the temperature was [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > ------------------- > fwp@deepthought.com "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: > I've had very good results from the 3 step tetenal<SP?> kit with my Jobo. I switched > to using Kodak's 6 step one shot kit when I needed to process some film one sunday [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I knew from looking at the thermometer I have in my Jobo that the temperature was > out of tolerance. I confirmed this with test strips and a densitometer. Question: Will Kodak's system allow you to use dif. time/temperature combinations? I might not be able to maintain over 90 degree F temps. It looks like the price is close to one half that of the tetanal kits? Dan >"Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Question: Will Kodak's system allow you to use dif. time/temperature >combinations? I might not be able to maintain over 90 degree F temps. Since I don't see any evidence of the laws of Physics and Chemistry having changed in the 20 years since I did my experimenting, I can assure you that E-6 can be developed down to 75 degrees. While it's possible to go lower, I haven't had to. Look up a few time temperature charts and compare the processing times given for kits other than Kodak. If the temp you're using is not there, draw a line on a grph and extend to that. Within the ranges usually encountered there is a surprising linearity. There should be something mentioned in a Dignan newsletter by someone who has tried it and kept notes. The BJP should be a source if it's not closed to online access. Or, someone who has done it and has the info could post here. >It looks like the price is close to one half that of the tetanal kits? > >Dan Robert Vervoordt, MFA : "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: : > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] : temperature was : > out of tolerance. I confirmed this with test strips and a densitometer. : Question: Will Kodak's system allow you to use dif. time/temperature : combinations? I might not be able to maintain over 90 degree F temps. : It looks like the price is close to one half that of the tetanal kits? I've never been off by more then a degree and that was a drop in the temperature of the water batch. I don't know if there was any shift inside the processing tank. Like the Tetenal kit the Kodak kit is intended to be used at 100 degrees and I would doubt that you would get acceptable results with the temperature that far off. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com >: "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: >: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >Like the Tetenal kit the Kodak kit is intended to be used at 100 degrees and I would >doubt that you would get acceptable results with the temperature that far off. Watch it , Frank, you're disagreeing with me and we all know that I have the MFA. :) Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. Robert Vervoordt, MFA : >: "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: : >: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] : >Like the Tetenal kit the Kodak kit is intended to be used at 100 degrees and I would : >doubt that you would get acceptable results with the temperature that far off. : Watch it , Frank, you're disagreeing with me and we all know that I : have the MFA. :) :-) :-) : Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. I've never tried because I've never had a need to. :-) If you say it works with good results I believe you. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > : Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. > > I've never tried because I've never had a need to. :-) If you say it works with good > results I believe you. Years ago I used Photocolor with good results. I found their kit for $10.00 US more than Kodak's. I personally might like the 3 step system better, while having the convenience of their temperature choices. Would Velvia process with E100VS okay at the same time/temp combination? Dan >> : Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Dan Just from experience, I can say probably. I never had to have any concern in mixing any E-6 film from any manufacturer with any others in the same tankful of solutions. At one time, there seemed to be some advice about using a different time for Fuji, but I think this had to do with JOBO. Someone else could fill in about that. Robert Vervoordt, MFA "Robert Vervoordt" <rlv1@ptd.net> wrote in message > >Would Velvia process with E100VS okay at the same time/temp combination? > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA Thanks for the comments. I will probably be using my old Unicolor film drum in my homemade darkroom sink water bath. I rigged the agitator base upside down and made wheels for under the drum. The instructions for this drum are so old and before most current popular films were even made. The only thing they say is to use the chemical kits instructions, but to reduce the time by 15% for black and white. My belief has been that which transparency films, the crossover problem from errors in as in negative films is not as serious. Also I feel that longer developer times at lower temps make the timing less critical. Having said that, I still feel safer sending important exposed films to our local lab. Dan : >> : Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. : >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] : > : >Dan : Just from experience, I can say probably. I never had to have any : concern in mixing any E-6 film from any manufacturer with any others : in the same tankful of solutions. : At one time, there seemed to be some advice about using a different : time for Fuji, but I think this had to do with JOBO. Someone else : could fill in about that. That recomendation comes from Jobo about the Tetenal chemistry for which they are the US distributor. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message > : >Would Velvia process with E100VS okay at the same time/temp combination? > : > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That recomendation comes from Jobo about the Tetenal chemistry for which they are > the US distributor. If it is safer, I won't try processing Koday and Fuji together, until I check with Photocolor. But as long as they aren't processed together, the time/temp combination should work the same? Dan : "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message : > : > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] : they are : > the US distributor. : If it is safer, I won't try processing Koday and Fuji together, until I : check with Photocolor. But as long as they aren't processed together, the : time/temp combination should work the same? The 3 step Tetenal kit recommends different development times for Kodak and Fuji films while the instructions for the Kodak kit makes no mention of different times for Fuji and Kodak films. Since I don't use Fuji film it's not an issue for me. You may want to contact who ever makes your chemistry and ask them. At least develop test film before processing film that contain images you don't want to take a chance on wrecking. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com : > : Seriously, it is possible, has been done and Kodak won't admit it. : > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : US more than Kodak's. I personally might like the 3 step system better, : while having the convenience of their temperature choices. : Would Velvia process with E100VS okay at the same time/temp combination? I remember reading something about there being problems with developing Fuji and Kodak film in the same tank at the same time. If my rapidly failing memory serves that recomendation comes from Jobo. They are the distributor for Tetenal chemistry for the US. Something about an interaction between the chemistry in the films. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com >: >: "Frank Pittel" <fwp@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message: >: >: > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >I've never tried because I've never had a need to. :-) If you say it works with good >results I believe you. Hey, I'd believe you, too if you were talking about something you did. That's one of the great things we get around here, the experience of others. I'm grateful for anything that comes my way, and your comment is received with appreciation. Robert Vervoordt, MFA |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.