26yr old Ektachrome, D76,Dektol mix, IT ACTUALLY WORKED ! Now What ?

I am new to photography, well not photography but certainly developing
and printing my own film.

This all started about 2 months ago because of my sons interest in B&W
Motion pictures,

I bought im a Bolex 8 all the lenses etc, I also picked up some other
nice camera's an Ala, and a Rolei, as well as many random camera's in 1
package deal.

One of the random camera's was a Minolta 400 Super 8, he and I had no
interest, in it because of the film cost/availablity (about 15 vs 8$
for a reel) But it had a roll of Exachrome 160 that expired in 1980
with it.

Sunday I was developing a couple of rolls of 120 I had just shot with
my new (to me) Mamyia C3, I had a tank of D76 left over that was used
enough I was debating putting back with the rest as well as a tray of
Dektol,

SO I said hey Ive read some people get an image with d76 on Ekta, he
said no way isnt the color different, I said yes but hey what do we
have to loose.

So we shot it and hammered the cartridge apart in our makeshift
darkroom.

Took the whole spagetti mess and shoved it into the tank of D76, but I
was left with some room so I dumped in the Dektol, put the lid on and
darn near shook it for about 7 minutes (give or take 2

Washed it, and pured in some fixer, 10 minutes later..........

I have an IMAGE, not only an Image a DECENT Image, but in negative of
course, I didnt think it would work at ALL let alone as well as it did,
but now I've got a negative not a reversal.

I've got to say 26 year old film in a HOT attic, with D76 and Dektol,
this is crazy isnt it ?

The cool part it as I dragged it into the driveway sun to dry, it got
covered in some cat hait, had some of the emulsion scratched off on the
threshold, and look genuinley VERY Cool when viewed. VERY Cool, you
would swear other than the computers (from in house shots) and the 2006
cars in the driveway it was shot in the 20's

NOW How can I get this to a positive ?

Is there a way to do it digitally ?

Thanks

Chris

The Guy who has no Idea what hes doing but is having fun doing it.

spake thus:

[hair-raising tale snipped]

NOW How can I get this to a positive ?

Is there a way to do it digitally ?

Yep; it's called a "film scanner". AKA cheap garden-variety consumer
desktop scanner with a transparency attachment. Will do anywhere from a
faily ****ty job to fairly decent, though I wouldn't expect much from
miniature (i.e., 35mm) negs.

Of course, you can pay more bux to have a pwofessional do it.

Or you could find someone with, say, a, whatchamacallit? oh, yeah, a
DARKROOM.


--
Save the Planet
Kill Yourself

- motto of the Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)

Video not really my thing (though I did some video transfer one place I
worked) but if you projected the S8 negative and refilmed it with a digital
movie camera you might have a shot at reversing it with a film editing
program (Adobe Premiere?).

And it you found the right film lab, they could do it for you optically
(provided you're ready for a second mortgage).

Keep us in the loop (pun intended) but you may want to post this on a
different forum.

--
darkroommike
wrote in message
oups.com...
I am new to photography, well not photography but certainly developing
and printing my own film.

This all started about 2 months ago because of my sons interest in B&W
Motion pictures,

I bought im a Bolex 8 all the lenses etc, I also picked up some other
nice camera's an Ala, and a Rolei, as well as many random camera's in 1
package deal.

One of the random camera's was a Minolta 400 Super 8, he and I had no
interest, in it because of the film cost/availablity (about 15 vs 8$
for a reel) But it had a roll of Exachrome 160 that expired in 1980
with it.

Sunday I was developing a couple of rolls of 120 I had just shot with
my new (to me) Mamyia C3, I had a tank of D76 left over that was used
enough I was debating putting back with the rest as well as a tray of
Dektol,

SO I said hey Ive read some people get an image with d76 on Ekta, he
said no way isnt the color different, I said yes but hey what do we
have to loose.

So we shot it and hammered the cartridge apart in our makeshift
darkroom.

Took the whole spagetti mess and shoved it into the tank of D76, but I
was left with some room so I dumped in the Dektol, put the lid on and
darn near shook it for about 7 minutes (give or take 2

Washed it, and pured in some fixer, 10 minutes later..........

I have an IMAGE, not only an Image a DECENT Image, but in negative of
course, I didnt think it would work at ALL let alone as well as it did,
but now I've got a negative not a reversal.

I've got to say 26 year old film in a HOT attic, with D76 and Dektol,
this is crazy isnt it ?

The cool part it as I dragged it into the driveway sun to dry, it got
covered in some cat hait, had some of the emulsion scratched off on the
threshold, and look genuinley VERY Cool when viewed. VERY Cool, you
would swear other than the computers (from in house shots) and the 2006
cars in the driveway it was shot in the 20's

NOW How can I get this to a positive ?

Is there a way to do it digitally ?

Thanks

Chris

The Guy who has no Idea what hes doing but is having fun doing it.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I am new to photography, well not photography but certainly developing
and printing my own film.

This all started about 2 months ago because of my sons interest in B&W
Motion pictures,

I bought im a Bolex 8 all the lenses etc, I also picked up some other
nice camera's an Ala, and a Rolei, as well as many random camera's in 1
package deal.

One of the random camera's was a Minolta 400 Super 8, he and I had no
interest, in it because of the film cost/availablity (about 15 vs 8$
for a reel) But it had a roll of Exachrome 160 that expired in 1980
with it.

Sunday I was developing a couple of rolls of 120 I had just shot with
my new (to me) Mamyia C3, I had a tank of D76 left over that was used
enough I was debating putting back with the rest as well as a tray of
Dektol,

SO I said hey Ive read some people get an image with d76 on Ekta, he
said no way isnt the color different, I said yes but hey what do we
have to loose.

So we shot it and hammered the cartridge apart in our makeshift
darkroom.

Took the whole spagetti mess and shoved it into the tank of D76, but I
was left with some room so I dumped in the Dektol, put the lid on and
darn near shook it for about 7 minutes (give or take 2

Washed it, and pured in some fixer, 10 minutes later..........

I have an IMAGE, not only an Image a DECENT Image, but in negative of
course, I didnt think it would work at ALL let alone as well as it did,
but now I've got a negative not a reversal.

I've got to say 26 year old film in a HOT attic, with D76 and Dektol,
this is crazy isnt it ?


Actually, it's not all that crazy. The developer affects only those areas of
the film that were exposed to light. When you "correctly" develope reversal
film, you develope a negative image, then chemically remove that image. The
remaining areas of the film, heretofore unaffected, are chemically "exposed"
and developed into a positive image. What you did was the first part:
developing the negative image.

As for the D-76/Dektol mix, you probably got a fairly high contrast
developer. Since you were dealing with old film, badly stored, that was a
good thing. (Are you re-using your developer? Personnally, I like the
dilute,-use-once,-throw-away method)

Next step now is to print each frame of the film, put the prints together in
a stack and flip thru them fast (16/second), and it will look just like a
movie!


--
Ken Hart

"As for the D-76/Dektol mix, you probably got a fairly high contrast
developer. Since you were dealing with old film, badly stored, that was a
good thing. " ....thanks that was kinda why I added the Dektol I had in the tray, as I've heard you can do some high contrast film with it if used at the right dilution, this film was so old I thought it might help. who knows if it did....

I've got a Regular 8 and a 16mm Projector (well my son does) I am
trying to look "printing" the negative to other film as a positive,

Either 8 or 16, anyone know how to do this ? Lay one on top ot the
other and expose ?

Thats really what Im lookign for is a way to transfer the negative
image to other moview film (Shoulda said that)

The crazy part was the age and storage conditions of the fiml but youre
right the D76/Dektol mix probably helped big time.

I didnt want to try reversal on the film I had, (1 I wasnt sure if
color reversal bleach is the same) and 2 I was so stunned I got an
image I fixed it, with the emlusion flaky and being developed with B7W
developer I also wasnt sure if reversing it would strip all the
emulsion off.So I fixed it.

(Are you re-using your developer? Personnally, I like the
dilute,-use-once,-throw-away method)

I use it for the day then it goes byebye at $4.50 a gallon its not
worth screwing up one roll of film, although now I will probably keep
the leftovers for just such experiments.

Interestingly I tried this on 2 rolls, 1 I shot (that came out good)
and 1 that was in the camera and shot, the one that was in the camera
managed to give me flaky green stuff (looked like algae) in the fixer
and no image.

Thanks

Chris

Ken Hart wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I am new to photography, well not photography but certainly developing
and printing my own film.

This all started about 2 months ago because of my sons interest in B&W
Motion pictures,

I bought im a Bolex 8 all the lenses etc, I also picked up some other
nice camera's an Ala, and a Rolei, as well as many random camera's in 1
package deal.

One of the random camera's was a Minolta 400 Super 8, he and I had no
interest, in it because of the film cost/availablity (about 15 vs 8$
for a reel) But it had a roll of Exachrome 160 that expired in 1980
with it.

Sunday I was developing a couple of rolls of 120 I had just shot with
my new (to me) Mamyia C3, I had a tank of D76 left over that was used
enough I was debating putting back with the rest as well as a tray of
Dektol,

SO I said hey Ive read some people get an image with d76 on Ekta, he
said no way isnt the color different, I said yes but hey what do we
have to loose.

So we shot it and hammered the cartridge apart in our makeshift
darkroom.

Took the whole spagetti mess and shoved it into the tank of D76, but I
was left with some room so I dumped in the Dektol, put the lid on and
darn near shook it for about 7 minutes (give or take 2

Washed it, and pured in some fixer, 10 minutes later..........

I have an IMAGE, not only an Image a DECENT Image, but in negative of
course, I didnt think it would work at ALL let alone as well as it did,
but now I've got a negative not a reversal.

I've got to say 26 year old film in a HOT attic, with D76 and Dektol,
this is crazy isnt it ?


Actually, it's not all that crazy. The developer affects only those areas of
the film that were exposed to light. When you "correctly" develope reversal
film, you develope a negative image, then chemically remove that image. The
remaining areas of the film, heretofore unaffected, are chemically "exposed"
and developed into a positive image. What you did was the first part:
developing the negative image.

As for the D-76/Dektol mix, you probably got a fairly high contrast
developer. Since you were dealing with old film, badly stored, that was a
good thing. (Are you re-using your developer? Personnally, I like the
dilute,-use-once,-throw-away method)

Next step now is to print each frame of the film, put the prints together in
a stack and flip thru them fast (16/second), and it will look just like a
movie!


--
Ken Hart

What you propose doing is called printing (just like still images). The
trick for you will be exposure control. There are places that will do this
for you. Another approach is digital, I ran across a program that will take
scanned images from movies and convert them to an .avi file (which I think
is pretty darn slick): http://www.winsite.com/bin/info?5000000037658 (FYI
here be popups to navigate around but the info is solid.)

Way back when there were places that sold lots of 8mm/super8/16mm and even
sold cheap cineprinters (at least I think that's what they were called)
there are probably even plans for DIY units (I have seen plans for a DIY
cineprocessor).

This is a more generic link to something called the 8mm metasite:
http://lavender.fortunecity.com/lavender/569/# which bills itself as a
jumping off place for small format filmmakers. Lots of annoying popups but
its a free site.

BTW I found several sources for Kodak Plus-X and Tri-X Super* reversal films
that a guy could process at home to a positive and not have to work so hard.

http://lavender.fortunecity.com/lave...plication.html
a short article on optical duplication

And you can also try our sister groups: rec.arts.movies.tech and
alt.movies.cinematography.super8



--
darkroommike
wrote in message
oups.com...
"As for the D-76/Dektol mix, you probably got a fairly high contrast
developer. Since you were dealing with old film, badly stored, that was
a
good thing. " ....thanks that was kinda why I added the Dektol I had in
the tray, as I've heard you can do some high contrast film with it if used
at the right dilution, this film was so old I thought it might help. who
knows if it did....

I've got a Regular 8 and a 16mm Projector (well my son does) I am
trying to look "printing" the negative to other film as a positive,

Either 8 or 16, anyone know how to do this ? Lay one on top ot the
other and expose ?

Thats really what Im lookign for is a way to transfer the negative
image to other moview film (Shoulda said that)

The crazy part was the age and storage conditions of the fiml but youre
right the D76/Dektol mix probably helped big time.

I didnt want to try reversal on the film I had, (1 I wasnt sure if
color reversal bleach is the same) and 2 I was so stunned I got an
image I fixed it, with the emlusion flaky and being developed with B7W
developer I also wasnt sure if reversing it would strip all the
emulsion off.So I fixed it.

(Are you re-using your developer? Personnally, I like the
dilute,-use-once,-throw-away method)

I use it for the day then it goes byebye at $4.50 a gallon its not
worth screwing up one roll of film, although now I will probably keep
the leftovers for just such experiments.

Interestingly I tried this on 2 rolls, 1 I shot (that came out good)
and 1 that was in the camera and shot, the one that was in the camera
managed to give me flaky green stuff (looked like algae) in the fixer
and no image.

Thanks

Chris

Ken Hart wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I am new to photography, well not photography but certainly developing
and printing my own film.

This all started about 2 months ago because of my sons interest in B&W
Motion pictures,

I bought im a Bolex 8 all the lenses etc, I also picked up some other
nice camera's an Ala, and a Rolei, as well as many random camera's in
1
package deal.

One of the random camera's was a Minolta 400 Super 8, he and I had no
interest, in it because of the film cost/availablity (about 15 vs 8$
for a reel) But it had a roll of Exachrome 160 that expired in 1980
with it.

Sunday I was developing a couple of rolls of 120 I had just shot with
my new (to me) Mamyia C3, I had a tank of D76 left over that was used
enough I was debating putting back with the rest as well as a tray of
Dektol,

SO I said hey Ive read some people get an image with d76 on Ekta, he
said no way isnt the color different, I said yes but hey what do we
have to loose.

So we shot it and hammered the cartridge apart in our makeshift
darkroom.

Took the whole spagetti mess and shoved it into the tank of D76, but I
was left with some room so I dumped in the Dektol, put the lid on and
darn near shook it for about 7 minutes (give or take 2

Washed it, and pured in some fixer, 10 minutes later..........

I have an IMAGE, not only an Image a DECENT Image, but in negative of
course, I didnt think it would work at ALL let alone as well as it
did,
but now I've got a negative not a reversal.

I've got to say 26 year old film in a HOT attic, with D76 and Dektol,
this is crazy isnt it ?


Actually, it's not all that crazy. The developer affects only those
areas of
the film that were exposed to light. When you "correctly" develope
reversal
film, you develope a negative image, then chemically remove that image.
The
remaining areas of the film, heretofore unaffected, are chemically
"exposed"
and developed into a positive image. What you did was the first part:
developing the negative image.

As for the D-76/Dektol mix, you probably got a fairly high contrast
developer. Since you were dealing with old film, badly stored, that was
a
good thing. (Are you re-using your developer? Personnally, I like the
dilute,-use-once,-throw-away method)

Next step now is to print each frame of the film, put the prints
together in
a stack and flip thru them fast (16/second), and it will look just like
a
movie!


--
Ken Hart

On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:10:45 -0500, "Ken Hart" wrote:

the film that were exposed to light. When you "correctly" develope reversal
film, you develope a negative image, then chemically remove that image. The

Sorta.

In the interest of true accuracy, to process color reversal film, you
chemically expose the latent photograpic negative image with a
developer that does not activate the dye couplers. The silver grains
are then not available for further exposure.

You then chemically expose the remaining halides to completion, and
use a color developer on THAT latent postive image. You then have a
color positive and all of the halides on the film have been converted
to silver.

Then, you bleach the silver back to silver salts, and use a fixer to
remove all of those, leaving behind only the dyes. Stabilize the
dyes, and you're done.

A six-bath process breaks this down into discreet steps (with a
pre-bleach between the color developer and the bleach). A three-bath
process combines the reversal and color developer steps into the
second bath, and the bleach & fixer into a blix, omitting a separate
pre-bleach.
--
Rob on the Web - Trouble In Paradise
http://rob.rnovak.net

EXACTLY What I was looking for thanks !!!!!!

While chemical flash is currently the re-exposure method of choice a blast
of white light will also do the trick. The old Unicolor E-4 kits had you
hold the wet reels of wet film up close to a photoflood lamp for re-exposure
and the old Morse G-3 wind/rewind tanks had a window in the side for the
same purpose with movie films (I saw one of these at the last swap meet I
attended--now I wish I'd plunked down the $10 bucks he was asking!).

It's cheaper and some of the foggants used for re-exposure are not very safe
chemicals but then holding wet reels of film up to a photoflood lamp that
might explode if splashed with water sucks, too.

--
darkroommike
"Rob Novak" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:10:45 -0500, "Ken Hart" wrote:

the film that were exposed to light. When you "correctly" develope
reversal
film, you develope a negative image, then chemically remove that image.
The

Sorta.

In the interest of true accuracy, to process color reversal film, you
chemically expose the latent photograpic negative image with a
developer that does not activate the dye couplers. The silver grains
are then not available for further exposure.

You then chemically expose the remaining halides to completion, and
use a color developer on THAT latent postive image. You then have a
color positive and all of the halides on the film have been converted
to silver.

Then, you bleach the silver back to silver salts, and use a fixer to
remove all of those, leaving behind only the dyes. Stabilize the
dyes, and you're done.

A six-bath process breaks this down into discreet steps (with a
pre-bleach between the color developer and the bleach). A three-bath
process combines the reversal and color developer steps into the
second bath, and the bleach & fixer into a blix, omitting a separate
pre-bleach.
--
Rob on the Web - Trouble In Paradise
http://rob.rnovak.net

That wasn't my point. If you say it can't happen and through some
unbelievable combination of stupidity and bad luck it comes to pass then who
is responsible? (Or at least who should feel morally responsible?) And if
Mr. Bad Luck used a halogen lamp instead of a photoflood? Sheesh. GE,
Kodak and OSRAM are all on my side on this one, I wager the Kodak labs have
processed a wee bit more film than you and I together and that lamp makers
know their product better than you or I. And I doubt that you've processed
film under every possible scenario or set of conditions.

Even you say the glass will just fall if the lamp cracks and I'm holding the
film UP to the lamp where is the glass going? Down towards me? (Actually I
know better but some newbie might not.)

--
darkroommike

"nailer" wrote in message
...
two things-
1. depending on quantity of water and type of glass, crack will or
will not happened.

2. If it cracks it will FALL down, not fly to your eyes.
Why would it? What force would do it?
Is a lamp pressurised?
Lamps are usually filled with nitrogen or argon, or empty )vaccuum).

I've done thousands rev processing using either an ambient light or
floodlight. Over 50 years I had not one accident and I am not aware of
any.

Unless you some really stupid things.
But it is not covered by a standard procedure.