E-6 processing for the rest of us...

[barry_sanford]

<p>I, like many photographers, live in an area that is a far distance (200 miles) from any major city with a pro lab. So several years ago I decided to do my own E-6 with a Jobo ATL-1000 and Kodak/Tetenal 5-liter kits. I eventually became seduced by the dark side, and spent the past few years in the digital desert. Now I'm largely back to film (E-6 in particular), and find that things have greatly changed since 2001. My only source for Jobo supplies is eBay, Tetenal has stopped with U.S. distribution of kits all together, and the Kodak kits are are more difficult to come by. For those like me who live in fly-over country, it's simply too expensive to FedEx/UPS a handful of 220 rolls to a distant lab for processing. With careful mixing and dosing I can process 20 rolls of 220 from a $71 (delivered price) 5-liter kit. That's $3.55 per roll plus some hobby time.</p>

<p>So my question is this: For those of you still seriously doing home lab E-6, what do you see as the current state of affairs? Can home lab E-6 realistically continue for some time into the future? When my ATL-1000 needs parts am I dead in the water?</p>

[RobertChura]

<p>Old processing never dies.....it just becomes more expensive. (a McArthur misquote)</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Barry, I was a full-on E-6'r for many years, and I just felt the quality control was superior and less expensive through a lab using a Refrema processor. I use a lab 200 miles away, and it costs just a tad more than I could do it, if you include shipping. Have you checked out FreestylePhoto.biz? They ship country wide and carry kits from a couple of manufacturers (I think 2, though they had 3 just a few months ago). I also believe the formulas are well known by now, and could be reproduced pretty easily either by another manufacturer (or boutique maker), or at home. The problem is it will only continue to get more expensive.</p>

[rossb]

<p> I have never processed E-6 at home. I did give up E-6 because of the cost to shoot it. Roughly $17.00 a roll total cost (film+processing+mail order costs). I am shooting C41 currently. I am ok with that but it's up there in cost also but I plan on shooting less as the costs increase. </p>

[john_shriver]

<p>At least at Adorama, Kodak E-6 chemistry is 25 liter (and larger) sizes only. Sizes suitable only for labs.<br>

Freestyle sells E-6 kits (probably Tetenal) under a house brand in sizes to 1 gallon. The 1 gallon kit is $76 plus ground shipping.<br>

E-6 film and processing is getting to be very "niche" market.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>Unlike the usa we cannot even get the kodak flexicolor. </p>

<p>i jiust ship my film maybe 100km outside to process for maybe $9us equiv .. if i am in a rush i use a local pro lab which charge approx $14us for a 3 day service or a bit more for a 2hr service provided you drop it off in the morning or it be a overnight night service. </p>

<p>i import film from the usa b/c they cost us maybe $15us for a roll of 135.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>I liked using them, but I had some failures with the kits; I brought a couple of my flunked rolls down to a local dip and dunk place; the guy took one look at them and said, "Your Pre-Bleach is bad. They sent out a notice that a bunch of those expired." He went on to tell me something about a discontinuance of the kits; I was surprised to hear this, as I had bought mine just that year; but, he said, this occurred near 2005. Well, I was out of the country then. So, I am not too sure.</p>

<p>As the conversation about it wore on, the message I got was that someone had sold me a kit which had been sitting around for a while. Well, after I got home I looked the kits over, and could not notice any good indicator of age or expiration; so, I was never able to determine anything about the age of the solutions sold to me, for sure. [if it's there on the labels somewhere, I do not know where to see it. There are some numbers printed on the bottles; but what those codes are, I have no idea; so, hypothesis unconfirmed.]</p>

<p>His processing of my rolls turned out great; a roll done by me with the kit, I would flunk it; his were great. [if I mix up some of the rolls and give him one chosen at random, he'll kick my butt with processing it.] So, he gets my stuff now. I liked using the kits; but, I was failing a lot; if what he said about the pre-bleach is true, then I never had a chance.</p>

<p>I remember thinking afterwards, "I never had a chance."</p>

<p>If I was sold expired solutions, without knowing that was what I was receiving, then there's no way I could have achieved normal results, no matter how hard I tried. I feel I put an honest effort into it, but I never did achieve beyond a marginal level of success. Really, I failed, and I think that maybe I didn't have a chance.</p>

<p>I am not sophisticated enough over here to whip up my own batch of pre-bleach; so, I am reliant upon a results comparison; his were great and mine weren't. So, I send the films to the lab. I tried a fair amount. There was a lot of failure.</p>

<p>My gut feeling guess from all of this was that I did not have a reliable source of supply in small batches; while I was doing my best to follow the directions, I had no way of knowing whether my stuff was good or not; also, it's just unreasonable for me to switch over to a chem supply at a greater cost than the single use kit; so, I had no way of generating a comparable test; like, could I get another bottle of pre-bleach packaged differently; and, how, and so on. Well, I send my stuff to him; he does better than I did.</p>

<p>I sincerely tried, and would like to do better with the E-6 at home; but, that was the best I could do. I was clearly trumped by my local dip and dunk lab.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>It got to the point that I was burning a lot of time and film, failing. Then I get the news about the pre-bleach. And, at the same time, good looking rolls come back from the lab. The difference was significant; the lab's processing was much better. I had to concede.</p>

<p>One of the tipping points for me in it was also when, after he mentioned the pre-bleach; I realized that my success rate in color E-6 was comparable to my haphazard exposure rate; every so often I'll flub a frame and way over-expose; then, I got to thinking; okay, so maybe what's been passing for success in my processing would have been what should have been a blown-out frame under regular processing. If the pre-bleach is ineffective, then the successful frames are the ones with way too much light exposure coming out normal to make up for the lack of chemical exposure.</p>

<p>Point is, check that pre-bleach. I think we're dropping below a good strong level of demand for the products. They are as good as they always were; but they are only as good in color as they are supported.</p>

<p>Know your stuff. I didn't, and couldn't break out of a cycle of failure because of it.</p>

<p>Hopefully the next guy will have a better answer for you. In truth, as embarrassing as this sounds, that's what happened to me. I tried and failed. I liked doing the kits, though; but, never succeeded as I apparently should have been.</p>

<p>I have a modest amount of lab time. Really, I have a good feel for my procedure; I know where I'm messing up. I still have a strong gut feeling that it wasn't procedure. As soon as he said pre-bleach, I knew he was dead on.</p>

<p>There was a slight trace of cardboard dust on the shoulders of the bottles as I opened those boxes. I thought about that as I thought over the pre-bleach, on the way back home from the dip-n-dunk. I felt like an idiot. It's like, I knew it. But, I had never run the kits under any other conditions besides the ones I had.</p>

<p>My gut feeling is, now, that if it was me and my lab procedure, then, during one of the variations I used (I tried some longer and shorter, little or no difference) I should have broken out of my cycle of poor results. Never did.</p>

<p>Some of those trials I had with reversal, I never could break out of my same results, significantly. I really think with the E-6 my local lab might have been correct about the bad pre-bleach.</p>

<p>I know I have gone on and on about this; but, it wasn't one afternoon of flunking. It was over and over and over again. 20 iterations; more than one box of chem, easy; no breakout of the cycle of failure.</p>

<p>So, some kind of way, I would suggest some information on solution quality; but, I never did figure out the "how" of that; so, I can't offer much constructive advice there beyond the caution about the pre-bleach.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Of course, we'll now hear from someone about their awesome pre-bleach experience in some kind of way that outlines that I am a clod and my lab procedure has about the same sophistication as the LOLCatz.</p>

[barry_sanford]

<p>Thanks, everyone, for your responses. I've never had a failure doing home E-6, but I've always done it in a processor rather than by hand. With careful control, I might even argue that home E-6 (6-bath) with single use kits is of higher quality than a lab who might not be running enough to keep their chemicals replenished correctly or who may have an underpaid flunky handling my film and operating the processor. I also agree that E-6 is becoming a niche market. But I'm in hopes that this market will have enough of a resurgence to generate some niche suppliers that can be profitable enough to keep us going well into the future.</p>

<p>I've started digging around through all my drawers, bags, and film backs looking for unprocessed rolls. Having found several, I've restarted my Jobo processing with some spectacular results. This is just a feeling that digital could never deliver.</p>