Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: saiguy on January 25, 2018, 11:46:18 am
-
Scanning 35mm mounted slides and using SilverFast 8 Archive software. I'm really stumped how to work with this red mask. Any help be much appreciated.
-
Scanning 35mm mounted slides and using SilverFast 8 Archive software. I'm really stumped how to work with this red mask. Any help be much appreciated.
Is this "red mask" part of the slide, or is it something that is showing after the scan? I use Silverfast ai Studio 8, not the Archive version, but with a bit more information I might be able to offer a suggestion.
Gary
-
Scanning 35mm mounted slides and using SilverFast 8 Archive software. I'm really stumped how to work with this red mask. Any help be much appreciated.
I'm assuming you are talking about a lith film used for screen printing processes - is this correct? If so the mask is built-in to the film and you would need to use SilverFast's colour correction tools to neutralize it. There are several colour correction tools in SilverFast that can be deployed for this purpose.
-
The red mask was an integral part of Kodacolor and other negative color films intended to make prints. Not part of slides (positives) such as Ektachrome. I don't know why this mask was necessary, but there you have it. Any competent scanning program will have a "Color Negative" setting that automatically compensates for the mask.
-
The red mask was an integral part of Kodacolor and other negative color films intended to make prints. Not part of slides (positives) such as Ektachrome. I don't know why this mask was necessary, but there you have it. Any competent scanning program will have a "Color Negative" setting that automatically compensates for the mask.
Peter - the O/P is talking about COLOR POSITIVE film - not negs. If it's negs, the answer is simple - he uses Negafix in SilverFast - it has profiles for neutralizing the various hues of "orange masks" in a very large number of colour negative films. That's easy.
-
I'm assuming you are talking about a lith film used for screen printing processes - is this correct? If so the mask is built-in to the film and you would need to use SilverFast's colour correction tools to neutralize it. There are several colour correction tools in SilverFast that can be deployed for this purpose.
Hi Mark,
That was my initial thought as I read the words 'ruby red', as in ruby-lith. However, the OP does mention scanning 35mm Slides, which would rule out the ruby-lith possibility, would it not? I tried to emulate what he described by scanning a slide in Colour Neg Mode, but other than a mild colour shift I could not reproduce what the OP is encountering. Having printed thousands of colour negatives I am quite familiar with the orange/red film base, but I could do nothing In Silverfast ai Studio 8 to produce anything close to what the OP described.
Gary
-
Hi Mark,
That was my initial thought as I read the words 'ruby red', as in ruby-lith. However, the OP does mention scanning 35mm Slides, which would rule out the ruby-lith possibility, would it not? I tried to emulate what he described by scanning a slide in Colour Neg Mode, but other than a mild colour shift I could not reproduce what the OP is encountering. Having printed thousands of colour negatives I am quite familiar with the orange/red film base, but I could do nothing In Silverfast ai Studio 8 to produce anything close to what the OP described.
Gary
The O/P needs to clarify exactly what film he's talking about.
-
The red mask was an integral part of Kodacolor and other negative color films intended to make prints. Not part of slides (positives) such as Ektachrome. I don't know why this mask was necessary, but there you have it. Any competent scanning program will have a "Color Negative" setting that automatically compensates for the mask.
The orange-red mask is necessary when printing a colour negative on Type "C" papers and or Duratrans material. The Type "C" papers are of course negative emulsions, meant for printing from negative film. However, the paper/Duratrans materials do not have such a mask built in, so the mask in the film acts as a sort of neutral layer to overcome the way the colour paper etc. emulsions are produced. For instance, if you were to print a B&W neg on Type "C" colour paper you would have to sandwich a blank colour film base with the B&W neg to achieve anything close to a neutral B&W image. Or, rachet up the colour printing filters to accommodate for the lack of the colour mask, although that method would require considerable testing of various filter combinations.
Gary
-
The O/P needs to clarify exactly what film he's talking about.
EXACTY!
-
The orange-red mask is necessary when printing a colour negative on Type "C" papers and or Duratrans material. The Type "C" papers are of course negative emulsions, meant for printing from negative film. However, the paper/Duratrans materials do not have such a mask built in, so the mask in the film acts as a sort of neutral layer to overcome the way the colour paper etc. emulsions are produced. For instance, if you were to print a B&W neg on Type "C" colour paper you would have to sandwich a blank colour film base with the B&W neg to achieve anything close to a neutral B&W image. Or, rachet up the colour printing filters to accommodate for the lack of the colour mask, although that method would require considerable testing of various filter combinations.
Gary
Actually the purpose of the orange mask is to help compensate for impurities in the dyes that make up the film layers. Impure dyes introduce wrong colours that need to be filtered out. Yellow and magenta colour couplers in the magenta and cyan layers are used for this purpose and they combine to produce the orange cast. Specifically, The magenta layer transmits some blue light so the coupler is yellow to counteract the blue, and the cyan layer transmits some green, so the coupler is magenta to counteract the green (remember your Lab opponent colours); the combination of the magenta and yellow make up the orange colour known as the mask in colour negatives. But all that said, the O/P isn't clear on whether it is conventional orange masks he is dealing with. All this is about negative film and he's talking about positive film. Needs clarity.
-
I am amazed by all the replies. All I can tell is that they are mounted slides and positives. I'm sure they are "store bought". Have seen jumbo slides, called Super 35mm ??, in the past with this same look from the Grand Canyon NP store, and elsewhere.
Gary, Ai studio 8 has the same tool set as the Archive Suite.
I can post a photo, but it will be a pink&white.
Can remove/reduce the red using SF8 tools, but never have gotten a good photo. Why would National Parks and others sell slides that are seemingly impossible to tame?
Was hoping someone knew the taming trick.
-
First time trying to send a photo attachment. Hope it works.
-
Peter - the O/P is talking about COLOR POSITIVE film - not negs. If it's negs, the answer is simple - he uses Negafix in SilverFast - it has profiles for neutralizing the various hues of "orange masks" in a very large number of colour negative films. That's easy.
He said color positive film but I don't think he meant it. I have never seen a color positive film with a red mask.
-
Actually the purpose of the orange mask is to help compensate for impurities in the dyes that make up the film layers. Impure dyes introduce wrong colours that need to be filtered out. Yellow and magenta colour couplers in the magenta and cyan layers are used for this purpose and they combine to produce the orange cast. Specifically, The magenta layer transmits some blue light so the coupler is yellow to counteract the blue, and the cyan layer transmits some green, so the coupler is magenta to counteract the green (remember your Lab opponent colours); the combination of the magenta and yellow make up the orange colour known as the mask in colour negatives. But all that said, the O/P isn't clear on whether it is conventional orange masks he is dealing with. All this is about negative film and he's talking about positive film. Needs clarity.
Hi Mark,
A somewhat more in depth explanation, but inevitably arriving at the same conclusion. Without the orange-red layer in colour neg film it would be impossible to produce a properly colour balanced print. Which is why the chromagenic "B&W" films also incorporated the orange layer, to accommodate for the inadequacies/shortcomings of the Cyan and Magenta layers, even though they were balanced for a neutral/B&W rendition of the original scene. Of course that film was simply a stopgap solution for sudo B&W printed on Type "C" papers etc.
Gary
-
First time trying to send a photo attachment. Hope it works.
Worked fine. Looks to me a lot like faded Ektachrome, as in the attached 55-year-old pic of my young self. :)
-Dave-
-
He said color positive film but I don't think he meant it. I have never seen a color positive film with a red mask.
That's why I asked him if the red "mask" was part of the original slide or something that was noticed after the scan had been produced. However, I do not understand why it wouldn't have been noticed in the pre-scan and corrected before committing to the final scan. He also mentioned "mounted 35mm slides", and I haven't yet seen "mounted 35mm colour negatives", so I have to take him at his word. As Mark mentioned, he has to let us know exactly which type of film he is referring to. If it is indeed a positive film he obviously has an issue with the Silverfast settings somehow. As mentioned previously, I could not replicate this problem while scanning a 35mm Ektachrome scanner calibration slide.
Gary
-
Worked fine. Looks to me a lot like faded Ektachrome, as in the attached 55-year-old pic of my young self. :)
-Dave-
I agree, but I have asked twice if the orange/red colour is indeed incorporated in the slide, or something that only shows after the scan. Cannot seem to get an answer to that. If it is in the slide itself there are ways of correcting that before the final scan is implemented, as well as some excellent methods of doing so after the scan.
-
I think Telecaster has this right. My parents used to bring back store bought slides from overseas trips back in the 1960's. They all "faded" to this colorcast. I am wondering if a book such as Ctein's "Digital Restoration" might have a more in depth answer?
-
The color is in the slides. They are positives. I have seen these before and always from store bought. If they are faded Ekchrome then they all fade the same. I think it is some kind of weird film and have no way of knowing the type. My post had no editing. I can reduce the red but yet to find a way to make it look like a "normal capture". Thus the original post.
Another sample. Thanks for all the replies,
-
The color is in the slides. They are positives. I have seen these before and always from store bought. If they are faded Ekchrome then they all fade the same. I think it is some kind of weird film and have no way of knowing the type. My post had no editing. I can reduce the red but yet to find a way to make it look like a "normal capture". Thus the original post.
Another sample. Thanks for all the replies,
Just a quick attempt in Photoshop - Auto Color - Levels to control contrast - Saturation - Color Balance. Not great, but better I think.
-
The color is in the slides. They are positives. I have seen these before and always from store bought. If they are faded Ekchrome then they all fade the same. I think it is some kind of weird film and have no way of knowing the type. My post had no editing. I can reduce the red but yet to find a way to make it look like a "normal capture". Thus the original post.
Another sample. Thanks for all the replies,
I too am of the opinion that these examples are faded Ektachrome or equivalents maybe dating early 60’s.
The processing may have been E2 or E3 and would have had an effect on the stability of the dyes as would the care taken in the processing stages. In any case the reddish cast is typical of the fading of dyes with this process
-
Thanks Garnick for your reply. That's about what I can get from SF8 at scanning phase. It is a weird film.
-
I agree, based on the evidence presented it's faded Ektachrome - some dyes fade more than others leaving the cast. SilverFast has tools that can repair this - more or less depending on how far gone. You can use Auto CCR, the Grey Pipette, Color Balance, ACR, Selective Color Correction, additively and non-exclusively.
-
Oh - one more thing - make sure you have the appropriate profile selected in Color Management Preferences.
-
Thanks Mark and others. Surprising that so many slides can collectively fade over time, if that is what is happening. Have to deal with what I have. Using an Ektachrome profile as it is a color positive. I'll use the SF8 as best I can to get a good start scan for further tweaks.
Appreciate all input,
-
I too am of the opinion that these examples are faded Ektachrome or equivalents maybe dating early 60’s.
The processing may have been E2 or E3 and would have had an effect on the stability of the dyes as would the care taken in the processing stages. In any case the reddish cast is typical of the fading of dyes with this process
I agree as far as E2 is concerned, but E3 was definitely better, IF all of the steps were adhered to as necessary, and of course E4 was another step up. In the late 90s I was in charge of a Kodak Q-Lab for process E6, which was a very in depth and comprehensive procedure. Controls run and analyzed every morning, as well as chemical testing and finessing as necessary. It was a very intensive procedure, but it certainly kept the E6 process online and gave our customers confidence that the output was exactly as expected. We were also audited by Kodak every three or four months to make sure the process was well within their parameters. The Q-Lab certification brought in more business due to the very stable E6 process, which also had a positive effect on the rest of our services.
I do agree that the OP's example is likely a rather old and faded Ektachrome. Of course Kodachrome was also prone to fading to some extent, even though Kodak had very strict controls for Kodachrome processing labs. However, with the proper tools and time one can often recover much of the colour and detail in such situations.
Gary
-
I agree as far as E2 is concerned, but E3 was definitely better, IF all of the steps were adhered to as necessary, and of course E4 was another step up. In the late 90s I was in charge of a Kodak Q-Lab for process E6, which was a very in depth and comprehensive procedure. Controls run and analyzed every morning, as well as chemical testing and finessing as necessary. It was a very intensive procedure, but it certainly kept the E6 process online and gave our customers confidence that the output was exactly as expected. We were also audited by Kodak every three or four months to make sure the process was well within their parameters. The Q-Lab certification brought in more business due to the very stable E6 process, which also had a positive effect on the rest of our services.
I do agree that the OP's example is likely a rather old and faded Ektachrome. Of course Kodachrome was also prone to fading to some extent, even though Kodak had very strict controls for Kodachrome processing labs. However, with the proper tools and time one can often recover much of the colour and detail in such situations.
Gary
Interesting, I think even with the E4 process the film and process combined to make a not really stable system as far as longevity concerned certainly compared to the complex system that was Kodachrome. E6 improved on this but still not up to Kodachrome life expectancy.
I was professionally involved with setting up colour labs also including C41, E6, R14 and print systems including the setting of QC systems. Some of the larger labs ran several high volume processors running many tracks at 30+ ft per minute with developer tanks holding 1500-2000 litres and replenished being mixed in volumes of 500 litres. The largest employing a full time technician whose job was to monitor and maintain machine chemistry processing control strips at regular intervals during the day and any time corrective action applied.
-
Interesting, I think even with the E4 process the film and process combined to make a not really stable system as far as longevity concerned certainly compared to the complex system that was Kodachrome. E6 improved on this but still not up to Kodachrome life expectancy.
I was professionally involved with setting up colour labs also including C41, E6, R14 and print systems including the setting of QC systems. Some of the larger labs ran several high volume processors running many tracks at 30+ ft per minute with developer tanks holding 1500-2000 litres and replenished being mixed in volumes of 500 litres. The largest employing a full time technician whose job was to monitor and maintain machine chemistry processing control strips at regular intervals during the day and any time corrective action applied.
Hi Tony,
My experience dates back to 1968 when I started working in a custom colour lab in Toronto, Canada. I was there for almost 6 years, managing the last year and a half. Handled E3, in which we cooked every format from 35mm to 11x14 tranies. A lot of work for Sears and Eatons catalogues then. The fellow I worked was a Rube Goldberg sort of guy, always inventing a better way to get things done, including building some his own processing equipment. Very interesting times indeed. We certainly didn't handle the sort of volume you describe, but it definitely kept us busy. Of course we ran C41, E3 and some R14. Also an AutoPan machine for the large display trans on Ansco film, which was also processed in E3 chemistry I believe(it's been a long time). A second AutoPan for large prints, and a 24" Keonite for the smaller prints. I guess that's about all I can remember clearly. Since 1974 I've operated my own one-man lab for professional photogs, mostly just printing and C41 processing, until stepping into digital in 2003. Until I moved my business home in Feb. last year I was running a 9900 printer, but stepped back to a P7000(24") here. Not doing much work here, but at least I have the printer I wanted. Well, it seems we have hijacked this thread long enough now I suspect. Sometime reminiscing can be cathartic, and sometimes not.
Thanks for the conversation Tony.
Gary
-
Just triaged my late friend's photo collection. The Kodachrome from the 1940s and 1950s made the test of time color-wise for the most part, but the Drewerycolor, Ektachrome (Probably E2, E3) and other chromogenic transparencies didn't fare quite as well. Many have faded to the ruby (grapefruit) red that sounds like what is described here, basically the drastic fading of the cyan dye layer. In the late 1970s early 1980s when this first cropped up, Kodak had a solution with procedures and techniques to copy the fading work onto newer film stocks to at least start the fading over again. About the same time, probably mid 1980s, the newer film stocks for cinema that were created to be more environmentally friendly (and this went for other products) stared having issues, opening a new can of worms...
Anyway, jump to the 1990s, Kodak had some neat software that I think was part of the Epson scanners from Applied Science Fiction that figured out the color fading issues and fixed it magically. Alas, APS was sold but I think similar software exists from Silverfast today. Otherwise, it's a matter of doing a Google search to find what techniques others have used, perhaps even something on Youtube...
Sometimes this will bring back the colors of the image reasonably well, other times, what you get is what you get. If the image is more important or dear than the colors, simply make it grayscale and be done with in. In any case, remember the issue of digital rot and print it out on good paper with good pigments and start the clock anew.
-
Since they are "store bought" slides, my guess is they were "print slides" made from a master negative, and printed on C-22, or C41 processed print film stock like motion pictures were distributed. The "red mask" is the result of fading, just like what you see from prints from the 60's and 70's. Kodak recognized the problem of fading slides and developed the E-6 slide process and film in the mid 1970's, (Kodachrome was considered the fade free champion) Kodak claimed E-6 films were nearly as fade free as Kodachromes.
-
Since they are "store bought" slides, my guess is they were "print slides" made from a master negative, and printed on C-22, or C41 processed print film stock like motion pictures were distributed. The "red mask" is the result of fading, just like what you see from prints from the 60's and 70's. Kodak recognized the problem of fading slides and developed the E-6 slide process and film in the mid 1970's, (Kodachrome was considered the fade free champion) Kodak claimed E-6 films were nearly as fade free as Kodachromes.
Hi John,
You're bringing back some old memories. Many moons ago I used the Kodak C22/C41 'Print Film', but I'm wracking my feeble brain to remember the actual name of that product. As you mentioned, it was/is widely used in the motion picture industry for 'printing' movies from Negative film stock. I used it to produce slides from colour negs and it worked quite well for what it was. As I recall, it was rather grainy, but I could be mistaken about that. Funny how lost memories are kindled by one small bit of information. Albeit, not quite enough info it would seem. I also have a somewhat broken memory of a couple of Kodachrome labs in the U.S. that 'developed' a rather bad reputation for producing slides that had a propensity for fading after just a few years. I believe Kodak finally closed them down eventually, but cannot say for sure, but of course all of that is moot now. Here in Canada there were three Kodachrome labs, Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver I believe. It was when Kodak introduced the Q-Lab certification that they tagged Ektachrome-E6 as being in the same category as Kodachrome in the fade parade. As I write, some old memories start to manifest themselves, so I think it's time to stop writing ;)
NOTE: I just Googled 'Kodak Print Film', and apparently that is the name of the film we were referring to and I had forgotten. I suppose 'Print' refers to the term 'Print It', as used by the director to commit a segment to a final print. Hey, sounds good enough for me.
Gary
-
My dad's Kodachromes from the 1950s & '60s have held up very well. Mine from the 1980s look like I just got 'em back from Kodak.
This one is 57 years old. Besides level-ing & color balancing the re-photograph of it (Olympus E-M5 + 60mm macro) and then desaturating a bit it's unedited.
-Dave-
-
My dad's Kodachromes from the 1950s & '60s have held up very well. Mine from the 1980s look like I just got 'em back from Kodak.
This one is 57 years old. Besides level-ing & color balancing the re-photograph of it (Olympus E-M5 + 60mm macro) and then desaturating a bit it's unedited.
-Dave-
So if Kodachrome has such a reputation for standing the test of time why did they switch to Ektachrome?
Dave, so how well did your '61 baby shot clean up from editing?
I gave it a go in ACR and looks like it fixes up pretty well, but it required a lot of back and forth tweaks to HSL, Split tone and white balance.
-
Dave, so how well did your '61 baby shot clean up from editing?
I haven't really tried to "neutralize" it as it was shot via tungsten flash bulb on standard Kodachrome. Instead I just desaturated a bit. (The re-photograph goosed the reds beyond the original too.) It is what it is. :) My dad sometimes used Type A (tungsten balanced) with flash, but this one was a one-off at the end of a roll.
-Dave-
-
So if Kodachrome has such a reputation for standing the test of time why did they switch to Ektachrome?
...
I think the simplest answer was competition and in a word Fuji.
In reality I would say that a number of reasons:
- Complex processing initially only done by Kodak until a legal ruling made Kodak open the process to other labs. Still a complex process and not all prepared to invest in another specialised processing line.
- Fujichrome and Kodak Ektachrome used the simpler E6 process eroding demand for Kodachrome. As an example I could get E6 film processed in several pro labs in the city at least 4 times per day meaning I could take a test sheet for processing and assess the labs quality control by examining the film before committing to processing the real deal. In spite of claims of specialised QC you could find variance in film processing running from slight magenta to slightly too blue (these should normally have been checked in QC and chemicals added to balance the process!). In contrast there was nowhere locally equipped to handle Kodachrome.
- Archival stability for Kodachrome in particular applies to dark storage. Its colour stability not as good as some other films when exposed to light e.g. projection. Other manufacturers film fading characteristics under these conditions much higher.
Probably many more reasons could be added. There was a rumour, I think last year, that Kodak Alaris were considering reintroducing Kodachrome. I suspect that due to the specialised processing this not likely to happen, I would be happy to be wrong though!
FYI a little more detail: http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pdf/HW_Book_18_of_20_HiRes_v1c.pdf
-
Hi Tony,
"In spite of claims of specialised QC you could find variance in film processing running from slight magenta to slightly too blue (these should normally have been checked in QC and chemicals added to balance the process!)." Yes, I know exactly what you mean, and if that was a Kodak Q-Lab they were simply not abiding by the parameters set out by Kodak. In 1995 I put my lab business into hibernation and took a job managing another lab in town. They were not doing as much custom work as I was, but I brought along all of my customers as well, which required a few changes in my new surroundings. That was also part of the deal. Now to the E6 process. It had been probably 20 years since I had done any Chrome processing, and that was E3. The lab I moved to was running a Noritsu E6 machine for processing up to medium format Chromes. Since I had a lot of work to do when I first landed there, it was probably a month or more before I had time to address the E6 process. I had at least done some reading to catch up to some extent. One day I asked the fellow 'in charge' of the E6 line to show me his graphs/plots of the process. Well, the absent look on his face told me everything I needed to know, so we went from there. When I asked how he managed the E6 line he said he would read the control strip and check the numbers on the densitometer. Obviously he had no idea of the history of his process, so I immediately found some graph paper I had brought along and began to plot the E6 numbers to see what was happening. Even though the control strips were close to expiry, it was very obvious that the process was at least a stop and a half overcooked. When I asked the fellow supposedly in charge he said they would simply tell their E6 customers to adjust their exposure accordingly. At that point I imagine the look on my face told him everything HE needed to know. After running more control strips and diluting the first developer a bit I approached the owner and told him that I needed to do some emergency surgery on the E6 line. I then made sure all of the racks were timed properly, as well as all chemicals at the proper temperature etc. That was about all I could do at that point, but after a week of work I at least had the process back to where we could tell our E6 customers to exposure their Chromes as indicated by the ISO number. About a month later I found myself at one of the Kodak buildings in Toronto for a four day Q-Lab seminar. Of course I was the only one there who had no experience with Q-Lab other that what I had read before I joined the group. I asked if they might perhaps forgive me for posing so many questions and they were all very understanding. Made it through the seminar and then one of the techs(John Ball) spent a day and a half with me at the lab, going through all of the procedures required to operate a Q-Lab. In 2000 I resurrected my own business in a building owned by another photofinishing company in town and of course they knew I had experience with the E6 process. About a year later they decided to get into the Q-Lab business and bought a used Noritsu E6 processor, with which I was very familiar. I helped them set up the Q-Lab and ran the process for a couple of months and then trained one of their staff to run it, since I also had my own business to take care of. After they were certified I also helped them with the process on several occasions, until digital caught on and the E6 process was phasing out.
Oh my, I did get carried away again, didn't I? As I mentioned earlier, once I start writing, the memories start flooding in. I do apologize for such a long story, but of course it's up to the reader to bail out at any time.
One note about Fujichrome. I recall back in the days when I was making 4x5 internegs to print enlargements from Chromes, the Fiji Chromes were always a pain in the nether regions. For a few years they couldn't seem to get rid of the green cast in the D-Max. None of the Kodak products exhibited this issue, but whenever I got a Fujichrome to print I would always make sure the customer would loupe the slide and make them understand that their deep shadows would carry a green cast to some extent. Eventually Fuji did fix that, after complaints from various sources, but until then it was not a good situation.
P.S. When I worked at the Toronto lab we had many shooters who would use the same routine you mentioned, have us process a 'test' trannie, take a good peek and then process the rest of the job. Or, shoot one trannie and process. Occasionally if there might be slight colour cast the photographer could add a CC filter to accommodate and shoot the rest of the job and get it in for processing the same day if possible.
Again, my apologies - :-[
Gary
-
I'm actually quite enthralled with the history of film processing outlined in this thread. Real world anecdotes from experienced professionals I find to be the most interesting and reliable. There's a lot of meat to chew on here since I used to work a darkroom as a prepress production tech for commercial printers. And I do think everyone has been on topic considering this is a discussion on why the OP has issues with ruby red color positive film.
I'm bookmarking this thread because the next time someone reminisces about the good ol' film days I'm going to send them here. Fortunately for LuLa in the last 3 or so years I'm not coming across a lot of discussions on this.
One last nagging issue with Kodachrome I've had concerning its early application in the '30's & '40's when the government sent out photographers to shoot rural and working class America now seen in large format Kodachromes on Shorpy is... who was meant to see and enjoy these images if it was so expensive and complicated to implement?
I mean if it weren't for the internet and Shorpy and Library Of Congress I would never have seen this high quality of Kodachromes outside the typical low quality family photos I've seen from amateurs and hobbyists.
-
One thing I haven't mentioned here about Kodachrome is the 'Fungus' issue. Yes indeed, it certainly does exist and has been well documented. If any of you good folks have a library of Kodachromes, you might want to take a peek at some of them. Or, perhaps not. I recall reading about this quite a few years ago, but don't recall the reason for it happening, if indeed the actual reason was known. I do recall that Kodachrome seemed to be more inclined to develop fungus than most films. I recently did an audit of some my old Kodachromes 60s & 70s vintage and didn't see the issue there, but anything older might show it. I have seen it a few of times in slides I had to scan for customers, and it was not a good sight. In one case I asked the customer if he had a lot of chromes, and if so could I get one that he might not want any longer. He did supply me with one and I tried every method I could think of to reduce the fungus enough to get a decent scan, but with no success. Had the fungus been on the base I imagine it could be removable, but on/in the emulsion it's a useless endeavour in my experience.
Gary
-
Yes, fungus in the film is terrible. I think iSRD Dust & Scratch removal is useless there because it is not ON the film, but IN the film. Not only Kodachromes but Ektachromes too.
I am happy to learn why the slides are red. And learned so much more as well.
I have not found any film cleaner that works well or even at all. My Dad had a bottle of a Kodak product that got banned for toxicity. Maybe shelf life is way gone but all it would do is give me a headache. If there is food like stuff the cleaners just smear it around.
-
I went though my dad's whole *stash of Kodachromes in 2013 and didn't see any evidence of fungus. But they've been kept all along in a dry & dark place (assuming this helps). The oldest boxes date to 1956: ASA 12, or a whopping 16 for Type A!
-Dave-
*Not counting those in the possession of a cousin in Scotland…my dad took 'em along on his final visit, in the late '80s, and left 'em there.
-
Hi Gary,
Yes, I think the problem was that some/many labs paid lip service to Quality Control and did not run QC correctly. That is it seemed to me that they missed the whole point of QC being to identify processing trends heading towards Action Limits and then taking measures to stop the process before it became noticeable and going out of Control limits.
Instead what seemed to happen is they only looked properly when a system was out of control and obviously having a noticeable affect on image quality i.e. trying to bolt the stable door after the horse has bolted. The consequences of this type of reaction was at best to cost a lot of time trying to bring a system back into control at worst, financially at least, having to dump chemistry and start afresh.
Kodak had a good idea promoting Q labs however what they actually did was no different to what most pro labs were doing maintaining proper control of the various processes by a proper QC system in place and that system being used on a daily (several times) basis to identify system anomolies and to take corrective action before problems seen in the process run. Basically being proactive rather than reactive.
Never used Fujichrome back in the day it was always Ektachrome 5x4 usually but occassionally Full Plate or even 10"x8" - never 35mm. If memory serves Fuji did 'improve' the chromes by increasing D-Max in the Red and Green areas, thereby eliminating the poor response of earlier film?
As to fungus with Kodachrome I agree it does/did seem to be more of a problem than E6 processed film. Seems the little blighters find the gelatin in Kodachrome to be much more flavoursome than other brands - that of course is my highly scientific theory without any real evidence to corroborate ;).
One last nagging issue with Kodachrome I've had concerning its early application in the '30's & '40's when the government sent out photographers to shoot rural and working class America now seen in large format Kodachromes on Shorpy is... who was meant to see and enjoy these images if it was so expensive and complicated to implement?
I mean if it weren't for the internet and Shorpy and Library Of Congress I would never have seen this high quality of Kodachromes outside the typical low quality family photos I've seen from amateurs and hobbyists.
I believe some of the images were meant to be seen by the public and sold for advertising etc. Ansel Adams for instance was commissioned for commercial assignments for the national parks and while he did extensive B&W work also often took pictures in colour. I understand (although never seen them - before my time!) that Standard Oil (Esso) purchased rights to some of them to promote driving in America.
Grand Central terminal featured some of his colour work in huge transparancies although I am not clear on the actual process I assume Kodachrome
https://www.npr.org/sections/pictureshow/2010/07/28/128831822/colorama
Yes, fungus in the film is terrible. I think iSRD Dust & Scratch removal is useless there because it is not ON the film, but IN the film. Not only Kodachromes but Ektachromes too.
I am happy to learn why the slides are red. And learned so much more as well.
I have not found any film cleaner that works well or even at all. My Dad had a bottle of a Kodak product that got banned for toxicity. Maybe shelf life is way gone but all it would do is give me a headache. If there is food like stuff the cleaners just smear it around.
Yes, if the fungus has eaten its way into the film then there is little you can do to clean it off and any dirt and scratch removal will not really offer much help and in that case you will have to resort to Photoshop magic to obliterate the offending marks and replace with friendly pixels
Kodachrome film contains silver like conventional B&W film. Silver reflects infrared light therefore ICE, iSRD not suitable for dust and scratch removal.
Digital ICE Professional however is claimed to overcome the limitations of these two forms of dust and scratch removal. I believe Silverfast is able to handle dust and scratch removal with its own system depending on the scanner being able to support the features.
If you have not already tried PEC solution and PEC 12 pads may help in cleaning.
See Gary you are not the only one that can get carried away :)
-
First time trying to send a photo attachment. Hope it works.
The attachment shows what the "red" cast is, namely:
This is early "EktaChrome" or off-brand comparable slide/transparency film that was developed in older EktaChrome processes like E1-E4, and it is exhibiting severe heat-induced (thermal) fading of the dyes, which often manifests as a severe color shift towards reddish colorcast. The thermal stability of the cyan dye in dark storage (i.e., not exposed to light) was far worse than the magenta and yellow dyes in these early EktaChrome-class materials. Hence, slides and transparencies processed with the early Ektrachrome processing chemistry "dark fade" towards a strong red color cast whereas slides suffering from too much light exposure caused by frequent projection fade towards a cyanish-green color cast because the magenta and yellow dyes, while having superior dark stability compared to the cyan dye, had less light fastness. More modern E6 EktaChrome-class materials exhibit much better dark fade and light fade resistance than earlier EktaChrome type films, albeit their dark storage stability is still not as good as Kodachrome. Off-brands sold and often used to make vacation souvenirs for purchase by the public typically show even worse fading in amateur film collections because both off-brand film quality and the development process control quality suffered more.
Best practice for long term storage for all film types still requires cold and moderately dry storage conditions (ideally freezer storage), not only to slow dye fading but also to prevent acetate film base decay (i.e. the so-called vinegar syndrome). Because many amateur film collections have been kept for decades at typical ambient room temperature or higher, or in cooler but damp basements where mould can grow and eat into the emulsion layers, folks attempting to digitize these older materials often run into images that exhibit severe color casts from dye fading, acetate base deterioration (where film base smells awful and is often no longer flat), or worse yet, mould damage to the emulsion layer making the image more difficult to digitally restore compared to films showing moderate to severe color casts but no mould damage.
Kodachrome has a deserved reputation for much superior long term storage at ambient temperatures because Kodachrome dyes were not formed during processing like EktaChrome type films. Kodachrome dyes were added to the emulsion in a much more complex processing process that only large scale labs designated by Eastman Kodak could undertake. Kodachrome slides have excellent thermal stability but less light fade resistance than Ektachrome. However, most amateur slides only see brief exposure to the light of a slide projector. Hence, early Kodachrome slides are as a general rule in much better overall condition than early Ektachrome films.
Hence, your reddish slide is going to need digital restoration techniques to try to re-establish both proper color balance and image contrast. There are any number of articles on the internet on the topic of "restoring faded color slides", and some scanner software has some of the color and contrast balancing methodologies built in. That said, at the end of the day, a severely faded slide may just have to be scanned and digitally converted to a B&W image with the contrast boosted to extract the original tonality, then hand colored if need be after that.
cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
Mark, The photos on your web site are stunning. I hope many viewers can benefit from your expert post.
Many of the reddish slides were shot in India in the 50's & 60's. They would have been stored there in high heat, high humidity conditions, more or less dependent on where in the country they were kept. They were gifted to my friend for whom I am scanning them now probably 1980 about. Since then kept in St. Louis MO. USA in dark room temperature.
They are plastered with mold/fungus or whatever it is. Think I just try to clean up sky areas and obvious blobs where it really jumps out at you. If some important shot he wants printed, you know the hours it would take to try to get something decent.
It's a great work you are doing,
-
....
They are plastered with mold/fungus or whatever it is. Think I just try to clean up sky areas and obvious blobs where it really jumps out at you. If some important shot he wants printed, you know the hours it would take to try to get something decent.
...
Not too clear why you think it may take hours to get a decent result. It will depend on how much clean up of fungus but as far as colour goes and IF there remains at least some dye structure in the film then restoration during scanning of this aspect should not take long at all.
Quick and dirty example Gevacolor transparancy (nearly 60 years old) processing similar to early Ektachrome (I think) this film process paid like Kodachrome. Epson scan with tweaks to the histogram after preview and prior to the scan and auto color restoration applied yielding a good start for any clean up work in PS. Silverfast may offer you even greater advantages