This is not new and creative? I kind of like it, and I'm curious to see how the colour shift occurs over different scenes and light temperatures -- tungsten light may go one way while daylight gets moved in a slightly different direction.

Looking forward to seeing more.

i'm with JH on this one, once you get past your expectations of what would happen, i think you'll see that this is quite nice, and that you've got more experimenting to do (as mentioned, different lighting situations, etc.). You might want to put a roll of it in one of your lesser used cameras (the Yashica?) and every once in a while shoot a couple of shots in different situationss (no need to rush right!)

Colour is great, no? Remember to think in layers of film, some layers degrade differently than others. I shot some 5 year old Astia recently and it was a bit more red than it should have been.

Definitely try the lighting suggestion, especially neon, or use coloured filters.

Sorry one more thing: on reflection, maybe you should just stop trying to control the film or to make some sense out of what happened to it, or what the results may be. Who knows, it may all be completely random.

i didn't it want to come off as false modesty but I guess it did. there are things that attracted me to this photo or else i would not have posted it at all.

Kurt, I have a roll in my yashica right now so we will see what happens. i've still got 8 roll left so lots of room for experimenting. Thanks to everyone for their comments and advice.

oh i think its beautiful and interested now in shooting that roll you gave me. a lavender veil -- lavender, a word meaning washer woman, from the lavender scented soaps used for laundry. which really reminds me of the famous william blake quote - " If the doors of perception were cleansed everything
would appear to man as it is: Infinite" -- a stretch for sure. but that's how it can be beautiful.

its all just tools right? our eyes, our brains, or consciousness has limits too like the film, the processing, the time and age. we are always setting the baseline for photography on how things look to our eyes, as if this will lead to some sort of truth. but other disciplines don't fall for this trap. scientists are good example of finding insight in indexical facts, without visual realism.

for a while, when i was young, a friend and i printed all our pictures as negatives. we figured they were more true, more honest. more real and perfect. because the positive, the effects we we see are the reflected light: those particles of light that are not absorbed by the people and things around us. a red sweater isn't really red... it just reflects red. its really all the other colors it absorbed. we are all masters of illusion.