Re: [APML] Bad E6 processing

[Craig Utter <cmutter@bellatlantic.net>]

I've been reading this thread and first Sean's idea of the film being flashed
before it enters the processor doesn't work since any film that was flashed
would turn pure white (clear).
 I've been doing my own E-6 at home lately (picked up a Jobo CPE-2
processor on E-bay) so I went thru the troubleshooting section for the
chemistry I use and they do mention that maximum densities that appear
green is usually caused by stabilizer contaminating either the first developer
or the color developer. But the only way I could see this happening the
way you describe is if the film were hand processed on a reel and the lab
person accidentally started to pour in the stabilizer and then relized
their mistake and quickly poured it out before every thing on the reel
was contaminated. Any way this sounds like a very weird processing error.

Craig Michael Utter

Chris & Jennifer Cook wrote:

The emerald green color starts at the beginning of the roll after the clear
yellowish part, lasts around 5 frames, skips 4-6 frames, ruins another 2
frames, then the rest of the roll is fine.  Roll is 36exp.

Chris

==================
Chris Cook
Astronomical Photography
www.abmedia.com/astro

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Walker <swalker@SkyandTelescope.com>
To: astro-photo@seds.org <astro-photo@seds.org>
Date: Saturday, October 05, 2002 7:02 PM
Subject: RE: [APML] Bad E6 processing

>I used to do E-6 and C-41 processing at a quickie photo store in Cambridge.
>what would happen is occasionally at the end of the day, someone manually
>loads a card with slide film into the processor, and forgets to check if a
>card is already in the machine, it usually flashes (but not completely
>obliterates) between 4 and 10 frames on the roll that was in the machine.
>the reason it doesn't kill it all is because some of the film was already
>curled down into the first bath, and some of it was still in the film
>canister. the part that was yellowish was just entering the bath. does it
>look like a sharp/sudden difference on the end that seems to be unaffected?
>that would be the clincher of my theory. mailed in film to Kodak uses the
>roller machines.
>
>Sean Walker