Hi Mark, I was experimenting with cross processing a while ago and tried Elitechrome 200, Ektachrome 160T, 320T and 100 Plus. All rated two stops over. Elitechrome didn't yield very pleasing results with a loud green hue. From other accounts, I've heard 160T should produce a pinkish hue (which I didn't want) so I made a request at the lab that they reduce magenta, and the results I didn't mind too much. My results with 320T produced significantly different results in different lighting conditions. Bright subjects taken from the shade had a slight pinkish tone and had an aged newspaper look, while in bright sun, metal looked chromy and radiant and skies became noticeably bluer (similar to when using a polariser). 100 Plus gave pleasing results (if you're into the somewhat stereotyped high saturation, high contrast, deep shadows, fashion mag type shots) although in quite a few shots where there was strong contrast between colours, a purplish/magenta ink seemed to leak across (halation? Well you can see what I mean in my first example, between his sleeve and skin. There's an out of place purple splotch).
Oh the site is: http://home.iprimus.com.au/heygoose/xp/xproc.htm I put it together just now in PSCS (automated galleries.. handy) specially to reply to this email! I don't think there is a particular 'expected result' of a tungsten balanced film, but you could say there's an expected result of a specific film. For example Elitechrome would always give you that green hue (though you can choose to get them to colour balance it, which some might say moots the x-processing exercise) and you wouldn't expect to get the results EPP or Velvia give (similar results when crossed.. I like). Also unless someone here has specifically tried crossing out of date ISO 60 daylight film (results very manufacturer to manufacturer too because of different emulsions used), I don't think you'll get a straight answer. Perhaps shoot some then show and tell! Anyway, I hope some of this is useful to ya :-) Cheers, Ryan PS. Expired in 1988??? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Cassino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 12:16 PM Subject: Cross Processing Q > I went out shooting yesterday, and on impulse took a couple of rolls of > Kodak E160-T, tungsten balanced slide film. I found this at my father's > house last summer - it had expired in 1988. I assume it was not good for > it's intended purpose, so I thought I'd shoot it and have it cross > processed as standard negative film. > > The results - well, when scanned as a negative it looks a lot like a > regular color photo. A bit grainy and some subtle changes in the colors, > but nothing outlandish. the film looks a lot like a color negative - even > has an orange cast to the blank areas. > > Is this expected result with a tungsten balanced film? I have a few > similarly out of date rolls of an ISO 60 daylight balanced film - what will > that do if cross processed? > > TIA - > > MCC > ----- > > Mark Cassino Photography > > Kalamazoo, MI > > http://www.markcassino.com > > ----- > > >
