Sup /p/, dipped a 35mm film in a caffenol developed and bath

File: 1423207211844.jpg (147KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 600x450px

>>2999250
It's probably trashed. Although, i could be wrong since my photo classes were all digital.

>>2999250
I think i understand what the fuck you are trying to say. Lets just see it.

>>2999255
kek just reread it, i meant I bath in it salt water and that it's finally out.
it's always good to proofread

>>2999250
Is there a point to doing this? or is it just to see what happens when you stick film in salt water for a year?

Show more pics of it please

also interested

bump for interest

post pics already nigga

its cucked.

File: File_000 (1).jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2999260
film is out and drying at the moment, I see the images yet there deeply rich in the caffenol color. Images might have a brass look. Interesting.

>>2999250
It's going to be black. Print it, mount it on white posterboard, and call it art. Or use it to frame something.

File: File_001.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2999276
finally dried, they actually came out pretty nice. Might send it to the Darkroom to scan.

>>2999336
But why didn't you do that before making this thread?

desu why didn't you just develop and scan then apply a cheap filter/aftereffect?

>>2999337
>But why didn't you do that before making this thread?
This

>>2999336
Get your shit together m8

>>2999336

Lets see this shit nigger

post scans

I found a disposable at the beach once which had obviously been in the water for quite some time.
I developed it but there were no photos. Just "runny" images.
I'm not going to derail your thread by posting the pics. Just felt like mentioning it.

I have used saline as fixer for b&w before actually, gave it 48 hours and it still could have used a lot more.

Sodium chloride in water is an extremely weak fixer. Suitable for at most plate collodion work, modern gelatin emulsions just won't fix all the way down regardless of how the process happens.

So, congrats, OP: you've soaked a film for no reason for half a year. Now put it in some real fixer and clear that shit right up.

>>2999250
>caffenol
Does it smell like coffee?
(could you drink it and absorb the congealed photographic essence?)

>>2999417
aeropress caffenol is top tier ive heard.

File: File_000 (2).jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>2999417
The scanners can't accept the photos I have, pretty sure its the caffenol layer that's doing that. In that case, Imma send my shots over at The Darkroom for now and see what's up.

>>2999373
kek, it's alway good to experiment and see what comes out. That way if it doesn't work, then you don't have to try it out of curiosity because I've done it already.

>>2999504
I hate to break it to you m80 but I don't think you're going to get those scanned :/ The caffeine has been absorbed into the gelatin layer and when the scanner light hits those caffeines embedded in the gelatin it's going to bounce back and don't even get me started on the salt!!
You are so screwed
So screwed
You should've just used a baking soda developing solution part a and b can be made by simple things around the house better luck next time!

>>2999504
just use your a7r2 + 90mm macro you dork.

>>2999504
You should put that film is a proper fixer instead. That's the problem here.

File: 27561316170_7d05609d5e_z.jpg (71KB, 640x608px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x608px

>>2999510
Like your statement and reason but I think it can still be pulled. I've grab film out of a week long caf and salt solution and it came out fine. I've also added a special request to the darkroom about how it was made so they know what's up. This image was made after a 10-seconds exposure on my Canon T5i.