Re: 7218 in E-6

From: Stephen Kent Jusick (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Feb 18 2007 - 18:26:11 PST

yes, this is what I thought, and what I was looking for.
thanks Ken!
Could you be any more specific about variations using the 6-step E-6 kit?
I'd love to try some of these!

And when you say processing 7218 in E-6 renders the
chemistry"unusable" for processing reversal stocks (say 7240, or the
new Ektachrome 64), I assume you mean that it own't yield
conventional results, but that it might create something interesting,

I'd love to have your updated article, if you care to send it.


>7218 in E-6
>Neither chemistry nor camerastock (neg/rev) determines whether a
>processed image ends up positive or negative. Rather it's the
>processing steps that are used. One may make a negative from
>reversal filmstock or make a positive image from negative stock. For
>example, if one is processing E6 reversal stock, one can skip from
>the first developer to the fix, and get a negative.
>That said, all 1-liter COLOR E6 home processing kits combine the
>bleach and fix into one step, thereby preventing one from making a
>neg, or skipping bleach. The TMAX b/w 1-liter b/w kit does not
>combine these steps, permitting you to make a negative or skip
>bleach. But I recently tried to skip bleach with that kit and it
>came out black, presumably because too much silver was left
>unremoved. If you obtain a 5-liter Fuji Hunt or Kodak E6 color kit,
>none of the chemistry steps are combined, thereby permitting one to
>make: a color reversal OR a (greenish) color neg OR a (sepia-ish)
>black and white neg (by skipping the color step) OR skipping bleach
>with all of these aformentioned possibilities.
>Processing Vision negative stocks in E6 chemistry will yield you a
>psychedelic mess of gleefully tortured pastels, but will exhaust the
>chemistry very quickly. 300 feet or so is all you'll manage. Of
>course 'exhaust' is relative. I find the older the chemistry, the
>more magical the mix. Also note that processing Vision stocks in
>chemistry for which it was not intended will render those solutions
>'unusable' with the stocks for which it was formulated.
>More details can be found in my article, 'Antidote for a Virtual
>World; Hand-processing Reversal Motion Picture Film', recently
>updated/amended for the imminent reprint of Helen Hills 'zine. In
>the meantime, I'd be happy to forward it to anyone that is

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.