Cross processing-why do this?

[Tom Hildreth]

On pnet I keep seeing talk about cross processing. My take on this is that the shooter has a film type that they want developed in some manner that is not the norm. Like processing slides as B&W, for example.

Help enlighten me as to what is going on here. I have questions:
Why would a person need to cross process film?
 
What is to be gained?

I thought photoshop and other image editing programs enabled most people to get any effect they wanted from an image derived from normal development. Does cross processing give you something these programs cannot?
 
Is it done to compensate for a screw up in film selection?

Is it done to compensate for a screw up in film exposure?

Are requests like, "Where's a good lab on the west coast for cross processing"? really disguised promos for processing labs?

How am I  going to use up my Kodak push-processing coupons before they stop developing slide film?  (Oops, wrong thread, sorry-just checking!)

[KirkT]

It looks cool.  The color is off and the contrast is heavy.  That's it.

[sandeha]

Color transparency film dev'd in color neg chemistry creates randomised color stresses.  Can be funky.

[Don Day]

Like any effect that is promoted as a breakthrough for creativity, cross-processing should be used in moderation. The level of attention given to it at PN causes me to regard it as a fad.  Personally, I would not count on mastery of this technique for my bread-and-butter income--working on my composing and standard processing are challenges enough!  The examples I have seen all remind me of other fads that have had their extremes: the continued overuse of Cokin filters to produce skies that Nature never intended, finger manipulation of Polaroid color layers, ravings about "bokeh in my lens," tilted and bouncing video technique, and so forth.  Nice the first few times, then dull and annoying long thereafter.

[ImageMaker]

FWIW, you can get a non-color-distorted negative from E-6 films by skipping the first dev and reversal baths (as long as you have an E-6 kit with separate reversing bath), starting right off with color dev (though you'll likely lose some speed doing this).  Or you can get orange masked color positives from C-41 by doing a first dev in any B&W developer (though quality would be better by using an E-6 first dev), giving a light exposure to reverse or using an E-6 reversal bath, and then processing in normal C-41.  Neither is as "interesting" as cross-processing E-6 in C-41, because the dyes are a bit different and produce color crossovers, a jump in film speed, etc.

However, not many labs like to do E-6 as C-41, because E-6 doesn't like the high temperature of C-41 much and E-6 films have been known to shed their emulsion entirely in a C-41 process -- which pisses off the lab operator, as they have to do a shutdown, cooldown, full machine clean, and replace all chemicals to avoid screwing up someone else's negatives, and will lose 2-3 hours of production time.

[Tom Hildreth]

Don: Gotcha covered, it does sound faddish, though I don't think I have seen any of the finished products myself.  Can anyone post a shot or two here as good examples of cross-processed work?

Imagemaker-You are enjoying this chemistry thing way too much!

So in summary, it's oddball colors for the creative photographer. Worth investigating as an alternative approach for some folks, I suspect. I'm still rooting around in the basics of photography. Computers too, for that matter. I think I only use about 10% of the capabilities of most software programs I have. Often though, the other 90% seems to be fluff. Time consuming fluff at that.

[humor] And this is film photography only, right?  I mean, are next year's DSLRs going to have a menu for cross processing effects?  Might kill the nascent cross-processing market for the film labs.  Guess I won't invest.[/humor].

[nelsonfoto]

Definitely a fad, and Kodak seems to be behind it? Local lab has a basket of Ektochrome with an image of an old car, cross-processed, urging others to know that 'this lab can cross-process!', etc.

[Glenn Thoreson]

Is that anything like cross dressing?

[nelsonfoto]

I dunno...can you fill us in about it?

 :twisted:

[Tom Hildreth]

I think cross-processing you are more or less on your own. If you're into Cross-dressing I think you have certain legal rights and protections.

[ImageMaker]

Tom, if you think I'm enjoying the chemistry stuff too much, then don't look at the thread I'm going to start in a few minutes -- tentative title, "how to undo a big mistake with chemistry".

Hint: how much film speed do you lose exposing through the back of a sheet?

[LarryD]

Cross Processing is as my ex said "Shit baby anything for art except using a computer."