How to Process 35mm Colour Kodak Negative

[Daniel Porto]

Hi,

 

There is no lab in Australia anymore but I have some negative film I would like to shoot with. does anyone know of a comprehensive guide in how to process this film? Thanks Daniel

[Michael Rodin]

Are we talking about debveloping Kodak Vision film cut into 36-exposure rolls for shooting stills or processing film footage at home? The latter just isn't possible without a machine. 

[Daniel Porto]

11 minutes ago, Michael Rodin said:

Are we talking about debveloping Kodak Vision film cut into 36-exposure rolls for shooting stills or processing film footage at home? The latter just isn't possible without a machine. 

Processing film footage at home. I might have to go down the path of shooting 100ft bulk rolls of ILFORD black and white stock - which seems to be easier to process at home.

[Philip Reinhold]

Talking about Cine or Fotofilm?

Im sure there are still many Labs for Foto- Film in Australia. I know at least 2 in melbourne.

Same with Filmlabs for Cinefilm, in Sydney there is Neglab and maybe some Australian can tell you about more options here.

However…when I was younger, I also developed color films at home, its not that difficult you just have to be more precice with the temperature. And I still do that from time to time with bnw, because I know my timings and chems to get my look.

I recently come across a pretty nice home film develop-machine: https://www.filmomat.eu/

 

 

 

 

[Tyler Purcell]

Motion picture color negative is very hard to process at home. Not only do the temp's of the chemicals need to be spot on, but also the rem jet coating needs to be removed, which is not easy to do and can very easily scratch your film. Standard photographic film does not have the rem jet coating, it's also not quite as sensitive to chemical temp's. 

Motion picture film in general is hard to process because nobody ever made a decent processing system for more than a few feet. The lomo tanks are very tricky to use and the film does touch each other sometimes, so it's impossible to get an even dispersal of chemicals. It's not like still film, where because it's so few feet (8 or so) you can easily keep it separated and allow the chemicals to spread evenly. 

I would never think about processing motion picture film at home, it just doesn't make sense. There are plenty of labs in the world and plenty of films being shot ON FILM in Australia, that ship overseas to be processed. So if they can do it, you can too! 

[Robino Jones]

I hand process 35mm color film in b&w developer sometimes and it has a really cool look. For special projects only, I wouldn't process large batches by hand if you need consistency. I use 5207 and 5213 and you can process up to 100' in a lomo tank. You can also use little 35mm still film stainless steel reels for testing small batch and fine tune your chemistry.

For the remjet here's how to take care of it. I used to do the baking soda / hot water trick and it was not good, was really hard to do but with this recipe, you dip the film in the solution and then rinse with water, the remjet comes out automatically like magic.

To create the Remjet removal solution you will need these:

- Sodium sulfate https://www.freestylephoto.biz/101340-Formulary-Sodium-Sulfite-1-Lb

- Sodium Hydroxide https://www.lowes.com/pd/Roebic-Laboratories-Inc-32-oz-Drain-Cleaner-Crystals/4751600

- Sodium Metaborate (Borax) https://www.freestylephoto.biz/101285-Formulary-Sodium-Metaborate-1-Lb

1. Bring 900ml of water (filtered is better but not required) to a boil. (I put 900ml so if you let the water boil by mistake you'll have the required 800ml left)
2. Pour 800ml of the hot water in a beaker
3. Add 1 to 2 grams of Sodium Hydroxide and stir until it’s completely dissolved.
4. Add 100 grams of Sodium Sulfite and stir until it’s completely dissolved.
5. Add  20 grams of Sodium Metaborate (borax) and stir until it’s completely dissolved.
6. Fill the beaker with water until you reach 1000ml
7. Done! Bottle the solution.

I don’t use it warm - just room temp,  same as your processing chemicals.

To use it, simply pour the solution in your developing tank before you start processing and let it sit for 30sec. Agitate a little and pour the solution back in your bottle - that stuff is reusable. Then fill your processing can with water and agitate a bit and pour out. The black remjet stuff will come out. Rinse and repeat 2-3 times and you’re done you can now start processing.

[Daniel Porto]

Thanks everyone. Yes I was refering to ECN-2 processing for Kodak Negative Film (I have about 7 rolls). But Tyler I think your right if I decide to process this film I will send it a Lab overseas as NegLab in sydney hasn't been responding to emails.. But that being said Ill try shoot and process 100ft bulk rolls of ILFORD stock, just for a bit of fun. Im not looking for a 'perfect' image and scratches and other 'mistakes' will only add to the look I am trying to achieve. Going to use a handcrank camera aswell ?

Thanks

[Aapo Lettinen]

3 hours ago, Robino Jones said:

- Sodium sulfate

.....

Sodium Sulfite and stir until it’s completely dissolved

please don't make typos on chemical names, one letter can make a huge difference in the chemical properties. (for example Sodium Sulfite is relatively harmless antioxidant used in winemaking and film developers.  Sodium Sulfide will emit lethal hydrogen sulfide gas if exposed to water so confusing it to Sulfite could have serious consequences. On the other hand, Sodium Sulfate would just not work as an antioxidant on this application but would not be dangerous)

[Aapo Lettinen]

14 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

 

Motion picture film in general is hard to process because nobody ever made a decent processing system for more than a few feet. The lomo tanks are very tricky to use and the film does touch each other sometimes, so it's impossible to get an even dispersal of chemicals. It's not like still film, where because it's so few feet (8 or so) you can easily keep it separated and allow the chemicals to spread evenly. 

I would never think about processing motion picture film at home, it just doesn't make sense. There are plenty of labs in the world and plenty of films being shot ON FILM in Australia, that ship overseas to be processed. So if they can do it, you can too! 

B/W negative processing at home is actully very economic. It just takes lots of time and you need to handle the chemical waste.

The Lomo tanks are pretty easy to load when you are used to them. The angle of feeding the film is very important and you need to be able to check the layers by feel to detects possible errors. I can make a tutorial sometime if you want :) 

the biggest issue when b/w home processing is to get the film dry. I am planning to do a continuous feed dryer for this because getting more than about 50feet of film dry at a time is pretty challenging without getting lots of dust to it

[Daniel Porto]

30 minutes ago, aapo lettinen said:

B/W negative processing at home is actully very economic. It just takes lots of time and you need to handle the chemical waste.

The Lomo tanks are pretty easy to load when you are used to them. The angle of feeding the film is very important and you need to be able to check the layers by feel to detects possible errors. I can make a tutorial sometime if you want ?

the biggest issue when b/w home processing is to get the film dry. I am planning to do a continuous feed dryer for this because getting more than about 50feet of film dry at a time is pretty challenging without getting lots of dust to it

Oh yeah good question. What do you do with all the waste?

[Mark Dunn]

4 minutes ago, Daniel Porto said:

Oh yeah good question. What do you do with all the waste?

B/W chemicals are pretty innocuous on a small scale. Combining developer and fixer produces a pH-neutral solution no more harmful than most household cleaners. They can go down the sink, well-diluted.

[Aapo Lettinen]

4 hours ago, Mark Dunn said:

B/W chemicals are pretty innocuous on a small scale. Combining developer and fixer produces a pH-neutral solution no more harmful than most household cleaners. They can go down the sink, well-diluted.

probably small amounts will not cause much problems. But they are still hazardous waste, containing toxic chemicals which are especially harmful to aquatic life and which wastewater treatment can't remove effectively. Phenol compounds like metol and hydroquinone, various bromide compounds, silver based metal compounds, unused sulfates and sulfites. Combining developer and fixer in a closed container generates gases and lots of pressure which may rupture the bottle or other container at some point. 

If one would have the possibility for it, it would be quite useful to slowly evaporate the water contents of the used working solutions so that the solid waste would be much easier to store and send to processing (and much cheaper to process as well). Would need suitable methods to control the dust so that it would not spread around

[Mark Dunn]

The OP isn't proposing to open a commercial lab, he'll be producing small quantities of waste occasionally. Anyway you can re-use developer (with replenishment or extended time) and fixer is very long lasting. So he would hardly be taxing the waterworks.

Of course you wouldn't mix dev and fixer in bottles- you'd do it in the open tank. I wasn't suggesting storing the mixture.

[Tyler Purcell]

6 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

B/W negative processing at home is actully very economic. It just takes lots of time and you need to handle the chemical waste.

Economic if you don't place value on your time. If an hour of your time is worth $50, than the 100ft or so if film you can process at a time, cost WAY more than a lab would per foot. Plus it's impossible to get lab quality from home with so many feet. I didn't even mention the drying issue because to me, that's an easy thing to solve, just need to build a drying drum out of wood. The problem is consistency of the chemical dispersal.

If you were able to cross process 35mm negative into positive and projecting it, I could see the benefit of processing at home for checking a few feet of film for cameras registration. Sure the cost would be high, but you'd get nearly instant results. I just don't see the validity of it for much else due to the inconsistent nature of the results. 

[Aapo Lettinen]

15 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Economic if you don't place value on your time. If an hour of your time is worth $50, than the 100ft or so if film you can process at a time, cost WAY more than a lab would per foot. Plus it's impossible to get lab quality from home with so many feet. I didn't even mention the drying issue because to me, that's an easy thing to solve, just need to build a drying drum out of wood. The problem is consistency of the chemical dispersal.

If you were able to cross process 35mm negative into positive and projecting it, I could see the benefit of processing at home for checking a few feet of film for cameras registration. Sure the cost would be high, but you'd get nearly instant results. I just don't see the validity of it for much else due to the inconsistent nature of the results. 

Is it really cheaper to send ONE 100ft roll of film for overseas processing instead of processing it at home even if you calculate your workhours? the shipping is not cheap either. Additionally labs tend to charge more per ft for b/w processing which is why I always shoot color negative when using labs. Both the film AND the processing is cheaper that way. The only benefit of b/w in that setting is that you can develop at home so that you will save time and money and will get the results almost instantly which is especially handy with camera tests.