Issues with C-41 Development

[reellifeross]

Hey,

I tried to develop my first roll of colour film over the weekend but ended up with some strange issues where the edges of the frames are lighter than the middle.
I usually shoot B&W film and havent had any issues like this before (I have shot 30+ rolls of B&W film (developed and scanned it myself) on this camera in the last 6 months) so I don't think its light leaks but quite possibly and issue with the development? 

Here are the details of the film and development. Any suggestions or help would be amazing.

FILM: Kodak Ektar 100
SIZE: 120
CAMERA: Yashica D

DEVELOPER: TETENAL Colortec C41 (1L Kit) - Freshly mixed full batch
TEMPERATURE: 39°C (using CineStill Temperature Control System)
TANK: Paterson Tank (Tank remained in water bath to keep consistent temp.)
AGITATION: Constant (using rotary agitation)

TIMES: 
PREHEAT: 5min
DEVELOPER: 3min 15sec
BLIX: 4mins
WASH: 3mins
STABILIZER: 1min

SCANNER: Epson V600

The only other thing that might be relevant is that I shot the film more than a mont ago and its just been sitting in the fridge. The C-41 chemistry doesn't have the longest shelf life so I was just waiting till I had enough rolls.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be amazing.

[conrad_hoffman]

Sure looks like light leaks from the film being loose on the spool or being handled in bright light.

[reellifeross]

Ok well as long as that is the issue I can avoid that.

Any suggestions for storing the film in the fridge more a few months?

[kmac]

5 hours ago, reellifeross said:

The only other thing that might be relevant is that I shot the film more than a mont ago and its just been sitting in the fridge. The C-41 chemistry doesn't have the longest shelf life so I was just waiting till I had enough rolls.

 

The film needs to be tightly wound on the spool and wrapped in aluminum foil, and then sealed in a zip bag before refrigeration.

C41 mixed chemicals will last up to 12 months if kept in cool dark storage. The trick is to keep oxygen out of the bottles. If you can obtain three squeezable bottles, you can gentle squeeze them till the chemicals are a millimeter from the top, then screw the caps on.

[reellifeross]

So much to learn! 

I will start doing that is I am going to store my film in the fridge again.

I have those bottles so my chemicals should last a while.

[kmac]

17 hours ago, reellifeross said:

The only other thing that might be relevant is that I shot the film more than a mont ago and its just been sitting in the fridge.

A month is not that long. Provided that the film is properly wrapped and stored, it will stay good for some years in a fridge.

With color film, the emulsion needs a minimum of three days to fully react to the light that exposed it. The emulsion isn't instantly ready for processing after the shutter is fired, so storing the exposed film before processing will do it more good than harm. Light, heat, and moisture are the three main enemies of stored film, you can't over-do-it when protecting the films from those adversaries, the more protection, the better. Then when you're ready to develop them, make sure they are thawed for 12-24 hours.

Edited April 11, 2023 by kmac

[James G. Dainis]

"With color film, the emulsion needs a minimum of three days to fully react to the light that exposed it. "

That is the first time I have ever heard that. Is it true?

[AJG]

46 minutes ago, James G. Dainis said:

"With color film, the emulsion needs a minimum of three days to fully react to the light that exposed it. "

That is the first time I have ever heard that. Is it true?

In all of my years of shooting professional color film (both negative and transparency) I never waited any longer than I had to to get it processed. And in all of the sources of information that I found reliable none of them ever suggested that waiting any longer than necessary was a good idea. I guess I was just lucky that the 4x5 transparencies and 35 mm slides that I got processed the same day that I shot them came out  well enough for clients to be willing to pay me!

[conrad_hoffman]

Yeah, never heard that before. Any references?

[Bill C]

Regarding "holding time" for a film before processing: I spent a lot of years with a large chain studio outfit, and this is something we specifically tested for when evaluating a new film under consideration for use.

We used only professional portrait films, almost exclusively the low speed Kodak films of the day. (These were, over many years: VPSII, VPSIII, PORTRA 160NC, and PORTRA 160.) In those days studio film was shipped back to the processing lab, and the exposures might typically be somewhere between a day up to about a week old before processing. Occasionally film might be temporarily "lost" in shipping, or whatever, and go a couple of weeks. So we wanted to know how the film would behave in these situations.

Additionally, when we did in-house testing, we wanted to know how long the film should be held before processing. 

With these specific films, being held at room temperature, something on the order of about 4 hours hold time was generally sufficient. Going from a long-ago shaky memory, the difference between this and overnight holding might have been around 0.01 to 0.02 density loss on a photographed grey card. To put this density shift into perspective, it would be a very rare photographer or lab who could see this kind of difference; even "process control strips" will vary that much. 

In case I'm not being clear, there is not much point in holding these particular films beyond 4 or 5 hours, or something along that order. Other films - I really don't know for sure, but would guess that high-quality films are gonna behave similarly. But this is strictly a guess.

 

[kmac]

18 hours ago, James G. Dainis said:

"With color film, the emulsion needs a minimum of three days to fully react to the light that exposed it. "

That is the first time I have ever heard that. Is it true?

Alan Marcus explained it a while ago. From memory, the several layers in emulsions need time to finish reacting after the light has done it's job of triggering the reaction.

I suppose a rough analogy would be a match lighting a sheet of paper, and after the match flame exhausts, the paper keeps burning.

I think I even questioned Alan at the time ... he indicated 72 hours minimum before processing ... theoretical of course. But I now put it into practice by storing my color films for at least that minimum. Before I knew about it, I had an exposed film hidden away in my fridge for 12 months. When I finally developed it, the colors were surprisingly strong and accurate. Not that the film needs 12 months, but I was quite taken aback by the sharpness of the images and saturation of the colors. I only used a Franka Solida 111 to expose the film which was Kodak Pro 160.

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by kmac

[Bill C]

1 hour ago, kmac said:

I think I even questioned Alan at the time ... he indicated 72 hours minimum before processing ... theoretical of course.

I think you may have misunderstood what he was saying. Perhaps he was speaking of self-made "process control strips," or something of that order. In such a case it's considered "safe" to wait that long to ensure that there's  no more "latent image shift" in the material. The idea is that there's no need to specifically KNOW the latent image characteristics of the specific material if you just give it an excessively long time (several days) to stabilize.

As I mentioned we specifically tested for latent image shift before doing serious testing on a new film. Since we were doing critical color testing on these films we wanted to be sure the latent image was in a very stable condition before beginning. And we didn't want to wait an excessive time. So we ran "sensitometric testing" with expose-to-process times running from about an hour, then two hours, then three hours, etc., then getting into larger Intervals of a day or two, up to about 2 weeks. 

With the specific films I mentioned they had reached a very stable condition in perhaps 4 to 5 hours at room temperature, so there is really no reason to wait longer. So for critical color testing we'd make sure to use this process delay. 

You might think that, since we did such testing, it's important for individual photographers to also do so. Probably not. We used literally millions and millions of US dollars worth of photo materials per year. This sort of volume required contractual agreements and delivery schedules, so once committed it's hard to change. Consequently we wanted no chance of unforseen future problems to show up. Thus the extensive testing ahead of time. And locking down test variables as much as possible. When we actually got to shooting tests we would use perhaps a half-dozen models spanning the range of complexions and hair color, along with an extreme exposure bracketing range. Everything was then printed, hand-balancing for critical color matching of skin tones, then evaluated in color booths. So you can probably see why we didn't want a possible issue of latent image shift to enter into this. Likewise we did not test with out-of-spec developer temperatures, nor even slightly off-center "process control" conditions, etc.

FWIW I doubt that a typical professional photographer would be able to see any effect (with these specific films) due to a reasonable variation in time from expose-to-process, say between 1 hour vs 2 weeks. 

 

[glen_h]

You have to be careful with cold film and condensation.

One that has happened, though maybe not here, is moisture getting in, and the film sticking to the backing paper.

I usually trust film in the original sealed package to stay dry.

Opened film is much harder to keep dry.