Jump to content

Hand processing vs Lab / Reducing coasts of Film


Mendes Nabil

Recommended Posts

For still processing It's true. There is far better quality and control of the result. But most of that is down to the hand printing. In movie processing this doesn't normally apply, except possibly some DIY optical work.

However, in theory anyway there is a possibilty that home processing of movie film can produce better images than obtained by the lab. I am really talking about black and white. Different film emulsions have optimum developer characteristics and processing times, and these are not usually provided by the lab. Also there are stunning effects such as solarisation that can only be done at home during the development process.

 

The only thing I've wanted to try is home development of B&W stocks. I would love to try conventional B&W developers on Tri-X in Super 8, but the problem is that there are no easy tank solutions. And once I do get the film out as a negative I still have to send it to a lab for xfer, and we're only talking about a theoretical small change in contrast or granularity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

You've never been impressed by home processing of still images? Then you haven't seen much of anything.

I was referring to non-lab setups. People working at home in their kitchen vs a special location with proper ventilation and dust control. If you have a decent lab setup at home, you can get decent results with b&w, but even color can be very tricky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was referring to non-lab setups. People working at home in their kitchen vs a special location with proper ventilation and dust control. If you have a decent lab setup at home, you can get decent results with b&w, but even color can be very tricky.

You're over-generalising again. Dust is simply not a big problem with small tank processing in the average home for b/w, not in the UK anyway. You always expect to do a bit of spotting on a b/w print. If you're particularly concerned a drying cabinet is very simple to arrange but for 20 years I never bothered.

Perhaps the USA is particularly dusty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're over-generalising again. Dust is simply not a big problem with small tank processing in the average home for b/w, not in the UK anyway. You always expect to do a bit of spotting on a b/w print. If you're particularly concerned a drying cabinet is very simple to arrange but for 20 years I never bothered.

Perhaps the USA is particularly dusty.

NYC is incredibly dusty haha. I've sworn off darkroom printing for a few reasons but they all have to do with the limitations of living in NYC. Thankfully I am moving to Maine within a year or so and I will be either using a community darkroom or building one at home. I got into photography in the darkroom and I will die in the darkroom (so to speak). :-) I wish I was still able to make RA-4 color prints from home, but if I'm being completely honest my Epson R3000 pretty much matches or exceeds what I was able to do in the color darkroom. Plus you can print on fiber paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

dust is more of a problem in the drying stage, the final wash takes it off of the emulsion quite easily if there was some in the tank. if you are doing re-exposure for reversal it might matter a little. the Drying Spots are usually bigger problem than dust but can be managed with washing aid and using distilled water for the final wash

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was referring to non-lab setups. People working at home in their kitchen vs a special location with proper ventilation and dust control. If you have a decent lab setup at home, you can get decent results with b&w, but even color can be very tricky.

I have been doing super 8 film home proccessing for years in my kitchen with a lomo tank , E6 / B/W Its very easy to do ,

It takes time to learn , Like all things , And its cheaper than a lab :rolleyes: no dust etc ,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing super 8 film home proccessing for years in my kitchen with a lomo tank , E6 / B/W Its very easy to do ,

It takes time to learn , Like all things , And its cheaper than a lab :rolleyes: no dust etc ,

I've only done b/w with movie, and yes it is very easy to do provided you don't go longer than say 100ft at a time. Preferably shorter lengths than this. I would say that the results obtained in a lomo tank are equal to lab results, assuming everything's done perfectly (though scientific analysis may see some fluctuation in density). Cheaper also, but maybe not by much if doing reversal. Having said this it does save a lot of time and energy sending to the lab.

Aapo I agree distilled water helps. Also maybe in hard water areas some kind of water treatment device like Scalewatcher as it enters the house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

colour reversal is easier than colour negative to do at home but the developers are quite expensive. may be practical for Super8 but I'd hesitate to do it for 16mm because of the price of both the film stock and the developer. reversal is almost impossible to get in 35mm in usable lenghts for any mp use (I think the absolute minimum usable lenght for 4perf is about 100ft for MOS second unit indie work) so that is also out of question. the developer (I have used the Tetenal 3-bath kit) also ages quickly and the stuff is oxidation sensitive and the process is very temperature sensitive. and it includes formaldehyde which is not safe to breathe, I have a very good gas mask but why bother when lab developed colour neg is both cheaper and easier to work with :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

if you have enough time to experiment you can mix your own bleach bath and use the normal cheap b/w developers and fixers for the rest of the process, would be much cheaper than buying a dedicated reversal kit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

if you have enough time to experiment you can mix your own bleach bath and use the normal cheap b/w developers and fixers for the rest of the process, would be much cheaper than buying a dedicated reversal kit

 

for example http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/20061291034093.pdf

 

chemical safety precautions are of course required. the concentrated sulphuric acid is pretty nasty stuff and permanganate stains skin and clothing and is dangerous to eyes. the working solutions are not as dangerous, only the concentrated ingredients

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only done b/w with movie, and yes it is very easy to do provided you don't go longer than say 100ft at a time. Preferably shorter lengths than this. I would say that the results obtained in a lomo tank are equal to lab results, assuming everything's done perfectly (though scientific analysis may see some fluctuation in density). Cheaper also, but maybe not by much if doing reversal. Having said this it does save a lot of time and energy sending to the lab.

Aapo I agree distilled water helps. Also maybe in hard water areas some kind of water treatment device like Scalewatcher as it enters the house.

Its very cheap to do B&W reversal, More so than a lab it you also add shipping and vat on top etc ,

The hard part is the bleach , Then what type of bleach makes all the difference ?

I used to pay alot in lab costs years ago , Not any more :huh: I got my flimmaking down to the price of the film and chemical costs B/W :blink: ,

1L /e6 kit can do up to 7 /8 films thats pushing it too . But at most use it for 6 films .

 

learning to load the film on to the lomo film reel takes a while to learn .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

the Lomo UPB-1A (2x15m of 8mm or 16mm) needs closer to 2L and the smaller 10m tank needs something around 1L.

it would be very unpractical to slit the super8 cassette to 10m + 5m and develop them separately so thus one needs the larger tank and around two litres of developer.

 

the Ilford paper suggests potassium permanganate + sulfuric acid bleach and using sodium/potassium metabisulphite as a clearing bath. I haven't tested the recipe yet but I will try it next month, all those chemicals are very inexpensive and I already have the developers and fixers :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Lomo UPB-1A (2x15m of 8mm or 16mm) needs closer to 2L and the smaller 10m tank needs something around 1L.

it would be very unpractical to slit the super8 cassette to 10m + 5m and develop them separately so thus one needs the larger tank and around two litres of developer.

 

the Ilford paper suggests potassium permanganate + sulfuric acid bleach and using sodium/potassium metabisulphite as a clearing bath. I haven't tested the recipe yet but I will try it next month, all those chemicals are very inexpensive and I already have the developers and fixers :lol:

The LOMO UPB-1A needs 600ml for the lower spiral to cover with one super-8. It needs some 1000ml to cover two spirals with super-8. With the proper parts extra it could even hold three spirals with another 400ml to top it :)

 

600 ml comes nicely from two doses from the Fomapan Rev kit. Or a Tetenal E6 kit.

Edited by Andries Molenaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just processed 1x `super 8 cart Tri X from mixing chemicals to loading film into lomo reel Its taken around one hour in my kitchen .

 

My bleach was aready made up .

 

This is from loading film / reel to washing and hanging up and also cleaning down , fillm looks nice :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New to forum. Very pleased with normal-exposed super 8 Tri-X 7266 (In 2.5-litre or bigger, juice containers and small plastic buckets, 2 litres of Dektol 1:5 + 1/2 teaspoon sodium thiosulphate, 8min, 23C; bleach (permanganate, sulphuric acid, Calgon) with lights on after 2 minutes to ensure film is clearing; re-expose with 100W bulb; Dektol 1:3 until good and black: 2-5min; Kodak Fixer 1:1 after clip test recommended 4 minutes; photo-flo; hang on shower curtain rod). Thanks to Richard Tuohy for the key tip of being able to turn lights on to observe the bleach in the bucket.

This also worked for Fomapan 100R 8mm.

E6 kit from Argentix.ca worked with Agfachrome 200D even after being mixed and used for one super 8 cartridge then stored for 3 months or so in airtight containers. Question: why did the film appear not cleared, even after leaving it in the blix for 20 minutes with agitation, then it cleared while it was hanging up to dry (after wash and photo-flo)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After several years of home processing (and no permanent installation to do it) these are my conclusions, in order of difficulty (less to more):

 

- COLOUR REVERSAL (E6): Can be as good as the lab. It's not that difficult to maintain temperatures (for example with an aquarium heater), and you can be sure that your chemicals are fresh.

 

- B&W REVERSAL: As Doug Palmer pointed out, it can be MUCH better than the lab. D-94 is designed for quick industrial processing and kills a lot of the potential quality in many stocks. That extra quality can be obtained if you do it at home using different (and much slower) processes. On the other side, to get stellar results doing B&W reversal at home you need to experiment a lot and make a bit of investment in the beginning. When you are happy with the results, is dirt cheap.

 

- COLOUR NEGATIVE: Forget it. Removing the Rem-jet at home is a really painful process and the C-41 system is not adequate for Vision3 stocks. At the actual stock prices, send it to a pro-lab and don't bother with it.

 

In any case, at home you can make a lot of experiments and get incredible looks from your footage. Sometimes it's an art in itself! :)

Good luck in whatever you decide!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New to forum. Very pleased with normal-exposed super 8 Tri-X 7266 (In 2.5-litre or bigger, juice containers and small plastic buckets, 2 litres of Dektol 1:5 + 1/2 teaspoon sodium thiosulphate, 8min, 23C; bleach (permanganate, sulphuric acid, Calgon) with lights on after 2 minutes to ensure film is clearing; re-expose with 100W bulb; Dektol 1:3 until good and black: 2-5min; Kodak Fixer 1:1 after clip test recommended 4 minutes; photo-flo; hang on shower curtain rod). Thanks to Richard Tuohy for the key tip of being able to turn lights on to observe the bleach in the bucket.

This also worked for Fomapan 100R 8mm.

E6 kit from Argentix.ca worked with Agfachrome 200D even after being mixed and used for one super 8 cartridge then stored for 3 months or so in airtight containers. Question: why did the film appear not cleared, even after leaving it in the blix for 20 minutes with agitation, then it cleared while it was hanging up to dry (after wash and photo-flo)?

From my understanding of 100D it start to clear when drying , Then the colour s start to pop out, Never used the Agfachrome 200D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just a reminder here, motion picture film was all processed manually before the advent of machines. I have seen the huge manual processing racks, and the huge film drying racks that DeLuxe used in California in the 1930s. Manual film processing has many advantages over machine processing. Small amounts can be done, and can be done very well, as high in quality if not higher than that of machine processing. I have been manually processing film, since I was 14 years old, and also have used many film processing machines in my long photographic career. Color Reversal and B&W Neg or Reversal are very easily doable. Color Negative also works well with a bit more care required. The spiral reel method is one of the best, it's just that you have to ignore any of the original instructions for the any of those tanks and use a better variation. Film must be downloaded from the Super 8mm cartridge onto a 50ft projection reel, then wound back onto another, so that when you load the spiral reel [Lomo Tank, Powell Tank, Superior Bulk Film Tank, Jobo Reel etc] the sprocket hole side of the film is in the spiral groove. Once you have practiced with leader or scrap film and get the loading technique down, and all the other tasks involved it works quite well. Manually processed film will often last longer (due to complete adequate washes), has better contrast and tonal range (snappier image, and you can also modify the amount of contrast if needed), and finer crisper grain (which if doing B&W as Negative can be adjusted depending on which developer is used). I have color reversal film that I shot years ago, of an important family event and sent one out and processed the other one myself......mine is superior. Other color reversal films that I shot in the 1970s have various chemical byproducts from insufficient washing, as well as dye deterioration (most likely to insufficient or lack of Stabilizer Solution in the end stage). I have 35 year old Ektachrome film that has not lost any color and is as vibrant today as it was after I processed it, compared to shifted color on films done elsewhere, even by the great yellow father. If you want to invest a little bit in materials and supplies, you can process your own film, at the very least Black & White, either easily as Negative, or with more work, as Reversal (or even cooler, in a rich deep brown Sepia tone). Anyone that has ever processed a roll of still film, was able to load the spiral reel, and do it all successfully, can do movie film. The hard part here to remember is that a roll of movie film is logistically more difficult due to the film length. I have processed film in bathrooms, wiped down with sponges and vacuumed well before using them. I didn't have any dust or dirt issues when care was used, and had to wait until the entire family had long gone to bed......when I was a teen. So, yeah, if you want to try it, go ahead, just do all your homework first. I have a couple machines but still prefer manual processing here in my custom lab, as it yields high quality and allows me to offer processing of many long discontinued film types that otherwise would not get done by most people. Thanks for letting me add my thoughts.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my understanding of 100D it start to clear when drying , Then the colour s start to pop out, Never used the Agfachrome 200D.

Yes. This happened again, so that is correct. No worries now, hanging it up on the shower rod with it looking non-see-through!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen the huge manual processing racks, and the huge film drying racks that DeLuxe used in California in the 1930s

That must be a thrill. The film looks so great; I hadn't thought of the wonder of it being processed manually. Are these racks still available to see?

Thanks for your post. I am happy with bucket processing; don't feel the need to seek a spooler. Happy to have screened a home-processed super 8 (Tri-X 7266: Dektol 1:5+thiocyanate, R9 bleach, Dektol 1:3) the other day in Huntsville, Ontario, Canada [i tried to insert an image here, but it didn't like my URL] It was a home-made pop-up cinema tent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Thank you, Martin, great post!

 

One cannot explain enough that manual processing can be way better than machine development. Seriously done, processing in spiral reels is the best there is. I have achieved excellent results with manual processing of sound recordings, on the weirdest stocks by the way.

 

Those who know will agree. So much enthusiasm about the rich photography with early films . . . they were all developed by hand and printed on very basic equipment. The photographically perfect Lumière movies of 1895 were printed in the same apparatus. The operators would set the cinématographe up in front of a sun-lit white wall, remove the lens and crank. There’s hardly anything better.

 

After the pioneers things were only made faster. The latest 35mm continuous contact printers ran at 2000 feet per minute, more than 33 feet per second! (Debrie TCC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

BTW curious these days how many LOMO UPB1 there are available on eBay. Used to be one or two. Now there are over ten.

 

either someone has found a garage in Ukraine full of them OR people are not using DS8 and 2x8mm cameras as much than before. the UPB1 tank is for 10 meters of 8mm or 16mm film and the UPB1A is for 2x15m of 8mm or 16mm or alternatively 1 x 15m of 35mm. I have both tanks but almost always use the UPB1A unless when testing new developers when it is easier to take the smaller tank which only needs about one liter of solution, the 1A needs about 1.8L when both spirals are in use

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...