Another new film from Lomo - Babylon 13

[Kino]

It actually does have a anti halation layer, but it's designed for a printer lamp bulb, not camera shooting, so it doesn't work as well.

"Product description: ORWO DN21 (Duplicating Negative) is a low-speed, black and white film,
specifically designed for the production of black & white duplicate negatives from master positives,
or internegatives from reversal negatives. DN21 has panchromatic sensitivity, high sharpness,
and produces well-balanced grey values. There is a new AHU-Layer (Anti Halation Under-Layer)
between the emulsion layer and the clear base which will be uncolored during the processing.

Compare to: Eastman Fine Grain Duplicating Panchromatic

 

[AgX]

It actually does have a anti halation layer, but it's designed for a printer lamp bulb, not camera shooting, so it doesn't work as well.

It is not a matter of the lamp, but a matter of subject brightness range, which is less in copying than it can be in taking.

 

[Huss]

It actually does have a anti halation layer, but it's designed for a printer lamp bulb, not camera shooting, so it doesn't work as well.

... There is a new AHU-Layer (Anti Halation Under-Layer)
between the emulsion layer and the clear base which will be uncolored during the processing.

Does this suggest that there is DN21 film out there w/o the AHU? Is it possible that Lomography's stock is from an old batch?
Either way, I'm loving the effect!

 

[Agulliver]

Yeah I've bitten the bullet and added one roll of Babylon to my latest film order. I don't technically need any more film but I've run out of 100 ISO B&W film in 120 so bought a brick of Fomapan and a 135 cassette of Babylon. No idea when I'll shoot it but it is sure to have a long shelf life.

 

[pentaxuser]

Yeah I've bitten the bullet and added one roll of Babylon to my latest film order. I don't technically need any more film but I've run out of 100 ISO B&W film in 120 so bought a brick of Fomapan and a 135 cassette of Babylon. No idea when I'll shoot it but it is sure to have a long shelf life.

While I have no proof of this and despise the snake oil salesman approach to the name and description, there would seem to be good evidence that this film does have a long life and is one of the plus points, given that it is old stock cine film.

pentaxuser

 

[Kino]

It is not a matter of the lamp, but a matter of subject brightness range, which is less in copying than it can be in taking.

Yes, that's what I meant

 

[Kino]

While I have no proof of this and despise the snake oil salesman approach to the name and description, there would seem to be good evidence that this film does have a long life and is one of the plus points, given that it is old stock cine film.

pentaxuser

It's not old stock. They still manufacture it currently.

 

[Kino]

Does this suggest that there is DN21 film out there w/o the AHU? Is it possible that Lomography's stock is from an old batch?
Either way, I'm loving the effect!

Yes, there was a DN 2 w/out the AHU but that was discontinued about a decade ago.

 

[pentaxuser]

It's not old stock. They still manufacture it currently.

Thanks. So that destroys my point about there being some proof that this film has at least evidence of great longevity based on it already been very old stock. I had no idea that b&w movie film was made anymore. So who makes this and what is the market? Are there enough feature length b&w movies being commissioned and is this stock simply left-over footage from films that were commissioned by movie makers for recent films or has Lomo actually commissioned the making of these two apparently different films ( Fantome and Babylon) If it is the latter then any idea about the minimum order quantities the maker requires the buyer to order?

pentaxuser

 

[Henning Serger]

Does this suggest that there is DN21 film out there w/o the AHU? Is it possible that Lomography's stock is from an old batch?
Either way, I'm loving the effect!

Hello Huss,
when Lomography introduced the Lomo Kino Berlin (first batch), they said that it is from old, expired film ( = FilmoTec N74+). Looks like the current batch is from fresh film (FilmoTec N75).
The current batch of Lomo Kino Potsdam is also officially from old, expired film.
Therefore it would at least not be a surprise if they had bought long expired film as well for the Babylon film at cheap prices.
Selling long expired film at high prices has been part of Lomography's business model since they started selling film under their brand.
And you can never really be sure that you have consistency with the films, as they also have changed suppliers and emulsions of film types under the same film name over the years.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

I had no idea that b&w movie film was made anymore.

Looks like you've had a very good and long forum sleep......
We've had countles threads here on apug/photrio about using current 35mm BW movie film for photography (Kodak Double-X, FilmoTec N74+, N75 and UN54).

So who makes this and what is the market?

Kodak and FilmoTec have produced BW movie film over all the years without interruption. Nothing has changed so far: Both continue production. For FilmoTec BW movie film has been their most important product category since their start:
http://www.filmotec.de/?page_id=148&lang=en
The market: Movie film makers who prefer real BW film for their movies. Mostly smaller and independent productions.
But also bigger productions have been (partly) shot on real BW film, like e.g.:
Raging Bull (1980), Schindler's List (1993), Stranger Than Paradise (1984), Memento (2000), Kafka (1991), Casino Royale (2006), I'm Not There (2007), Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003), Manhattan (1979), Cinderella Man (2005), Aferim! (2015), Frantz (2016), American Horror Story (2011-2017) and some more.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Kino]

Our application is film to film preservation; traditional photo chemical work.

We use DP3, PF2 and DN21; Interpositive, Print and Dupe Negative stocks. All are lab-grade stocks which are not, as per tradition, given ISO/ASA ratings. FilmoTec also makes traditional camera stocks, both negative and reversal in 16mm and 35mm.

Availability can be unpredictable, as they only coat when the demand reaches a certain level and/or there is a paid order on the table. While this can be frustrating for the casual user, it certainly makes business sense, so plan ahead if you want a particular stock at a particular time and communicate to your local representative your wishes.

http://www.filmotec.de/?lang=en

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Kino and Henning. So it is clear that Lomo uses stock movie film and does not commission its own fresh film which is what I had suspected.

Henning, on your point of b&w movie films I do recognise most of the film titles you mention but surely these alone cannot sustain the kind of stock needed to keep Filmtec viable so presumably the smaller and independent companies 'are its mainstay customer.

It might be that the U.K. is the equivalent of a desert for b&w films to show to the paying public but I cannot recall anywhere in my area of the U.K. that might show such films to a paying public and this would seem to accord with Kino's point about availability being unpredictable. If the b&w commercial movie market was really that healthy then I'd have thought that such movie film like that of Kodak and Ilford would be in constant predictable supply

I don't have to stock up on HP5+ because I cannot be sure of whether it will be available 6 months or a year from now

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

Some of you may have noticed that I mention the Playboy mansion from time to time.

I’d definitely try this fim at the playboy mansion, if I had access.

 

[Kino]

Pentaxuser, I would like to emphasize that FilmoTec, although it uses the old ORWO brand name, it did not reconstitute itself along the same product lines as the ORWO of old, but instead concentrated on producing motion picture stock. So, as far as I know, it has never made claim to offer general purpose still photographic materials for the entire industry, but has instead carved-out a niche for itself in the rarefied atmosphere of strictly monochrome moving image film. FilmoTec occupies an ever-so-tiny fraction of the total real estate that used to comprise the gigantic Wolfen plant and is not equipped to produce and confection film for still photographic uses.

Also, as it was explained to me by the management of FilmoTec, they are essentially emulsion makers; they don't even make their own base, but order it as needed from a company that also occupies a small location on the old Wolfen plant site.

As they state on their webpage;
"FilmoTec’s business is focused upon the policy of concentrating its powerful technical resources into important black and white motion picture niche markets under the ORWO brand, and in being the most excellent and innovative manufacturer in this area to serve the demanding specialized needs of its true professionals. Products are particularly aimed towards the technical needs of the world’s Archive Industry, Motion Picture Industry, and Holographic Industry."

I am sure whatever small income they make from others purchasing and repackaging their product for a market they never overtly intended to service, is welcome to their bottom line, it can hardly be grounds to criticize their ongoing production of film for moving image production and preservation. As budgets in archives shrink, and native production on motion picture film is increasingly rare, they have been remarkably resilient in that they are still in business, let alone expanding to ancillary markets.

The market for monochrome motion picture film stock is probably, at best, stable to slightly declining, but it is a viable boutique market IF they stick to their production methods that have proven resilient over the last few decades. Who knows, it may turn out that they will eventually either have to adapt or disappear if the market continues to deteriorate, but for now they seem fairly stable.

EDIT: Oh, and Illford has not made motion picture film since the late 1990's as far as I recall and they have repeatedly said they have no interest in resuming such production when pressed in the past...

 

[Huss]

Looks like you've had a very good and long forum sleep......
We've had countles threads here on apug/photrio about using current 35mm BW movie film for photography (Kodak Double-X, FilmoTec N74+, N75 and UN54).



Kodak and FilmoTec have produced BW movie film over all the years without interruption. Nothing has changed so far: Both continue production. For FilmoTec BW movie film has been their most important product category since their start:
http://www.filmotec.de/?page_id=148&lang=en
The market: Movie film makers who prefer real BW film for their movies. Mostly smaller and independent productions.
But also bigger productions have been (partly) shot on real BW film, like e.g.:
Raging Bull (1980), Schindler's List (1993), Stranger Than Paradise (1984), Memento (2000), Kafka (1991), Casino Royale (2006), I'm Not There (2007), Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003), Manhattan (1979), Cinderella Man (2005), Aferim! (2015), Frantz (2016), American Horror Story (2011-2017) and some more.

Best regards,
Henning

Dunkirk, Hateful 8 etc etc

 

[Huss]

Thanks Kino and Henning. So it is clear that Lomo uses stock movie film and does not commission its own fresh film which is what I had suspected.

Lomography Metropolis is its own unique commissioned film. Offered in 135, 120 and 110.

 

[Huss]

2nd roll of Babylon 13 loaded! This time using a CV 50 2.5 lens. Going to take advantage of this blazing sunlight.

 

[pentaxuser]

It might be that the U.K. is the equivalent of a desert for b&w films to show to the paying public but I cannot recall anywhere in my area of the U.K. that might show such films to a paying public and this would seem to accord with Kino's point about availability being unpredictable. If the b&w commercial movie market was really that healthy then I'd have thought that such movie film like that of Kodak and Ilford would be in constant predictable supply

I don't have to stock up on HP5+ because I cannot be sure of whether it will be available 6 months or a year from now

pentaxuser

Thanks Kino for your explanation. I read my post above again and realise why second sentence in the first paragraph above looks strange. The such movie film was a reference to that made by FilmoTec and I should have added still films made by Kodak and Ilford. What I was trying to say what that if the FilmoTec movie film was in the same constant demand as the films of Kodak and Ilford then it too i.e. FilmoTec would be in a constant predictable supply which as you said is not the case in anything like the way that Kodak and Ilford are in constant supply. Hence my comment on why I have no need to question whether it will be available 6 months or a year from now

I was aware that Ilford has not been on the business of making movie film for a long time and has no intention of re-starting that business.

Some of the illustrations of b&w films given by Henning are in fact, as he alluded to, only b&w in part and in many cases mentioned not on a large part in most of those titles.

I use b&w film almost exclusively v colour neg and do not use digital at all. Neither am I a hybrid person but do all my own process and printing in a darkroom so need both film and silver gelatin paper, Thus I believe I have as big a vested interest in b&w continuing as anyone as I have nothing to fall back on

However I see no point in not being realistic about the size of the market nor seeing "sunny uplands " in the b&w film market at every turn

pentaxuser

 

[Kino]

Pentaxuser
Thanks for clarifying your position. I wasn't my intent to paint a sunny portrait of the market; almost the opposite but with a bit of optimism it could continue if things don't get worse!
Film is expensive. I wish there was a path back to cheaper days, but it hasn't presented itself as of yet, so we are a bit stuck at the moment. I know there will be people who will defend the price of a roll of film, all with perfectly valid reasons for their income level, but it HAS become more expensive and/or less available for some people in various circumstances and that can be discouraging.
Wish I could recommend a fix.

 

[Henning Serger]

Thanks Kino and Henning. So it is clear that Lomo uses stock movie film and does not commission its own fresh film which is what I had suspected.
Henning, on your point of b&w movie films I do recognise most of the film titles you mention but surely these alone cannot sustain the kind of stock needed to keep Filmtec viable so presumably the smaller and independent companies 'are its mainstay customer.

The several movie film types - from camera films to duplication films to leader films to sound film - are their main product category, but not their only one. For example they have increased their R&D efforts in archiving / micro films. Because of increasing demand from government institutions and banks for extremely safe and low-cost data archiving.
They are also active in the OEM production of photography films for other companies (real OEM with specific product characteristics, not repackaging. And we are not talking about the Lomo films here).

It might be that the U.K. is the equivalent of a desert for b&w films to show to the paying public but I cannot recall anywhere in my area of the U.K. that might show such films to a paying public and this would seem to accord with Kino's point about availability being unpredictable. If the b&w commercial movie market was really that healthy then I'd have thought that such movie film like that of Kodak and Ilford would be in constant predictable supply

Looks like you have again misunderstood something: The Kodak and FilmoTec camera movie films like Double-X, N74+, UN54, which can be used as photo films without problems (which is done by thousands of photographers for years) have always been in constant supply.
Member Kino was referring to his business of producing copies / dupes, and that the FilmoTec film types for that application are produced on demand.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

FilmoTec occupies an ever-so-tiny fraction of the total real estate that used to comprise the gigantic Wolfen plant and is not equipped to produce and confection film for still photographic uses.
Also, as it was explained to me by the management of FilmoTec, they are essentially emulsion makers; they don't even make their own base, but order it as needed from a company that also occupies a small location on the old Wolfen plant site.

That is correct. They are a niche manufacturer, and that is exactly what they want to be. About 20 employees. And FilmoTec has always been very honest about their capabilities. Long ago in a very detailed interview in one of the leading German economy newspapers (Handelsblatt) they explanied that they (only) make the film emulsions by themselves, but cooperate with others for the coating process (they don't have an own coating line for bigger volumes). When FilmoTec was founded, the coating partner was Forte. After Forte's closing FilmoTec changed to Ilford. And there is some evidence that they have changed again lately.
The converting for movie film applications is done by themselves in-house.

The manufacturer of triacetate film base (TAC), which arose from the former big ORWO plant, is the IPI GmbH in Wolfen, Germany. They are also the supplier for other photo film manufacturers:
https://www.islandpolymer.com/products

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

Lomography Metropolis is its own unique commissioned film. Offered in 135, 120 and 110.

The specialist for designing, emulsion making and coating of all these "strange color" films is InovisCoat in Germany.
If you put enough money on the table, they could make a "Huss Hardan Special" for you........

Best regards,
Henning

 

[wyofilm]

The specialist for designing, emulsion making and coating of all these "strange color" films is InovisCoat in Germany.
If you put enough money on the table, they could make a "Huss Hardan Special" for you........

Best regards,
Henning

In the interest of Sunday morning fantasies, just what would it take for Huss to get his 'Huss Hardan Special' and how many rolls of 120, for example, would he get it out of it? (Huss, you don't mind me spending your money do you?) $50,000, $250,000, $1,000,000? I really have NO idea.

Thanks.

 

[Lachlan Young]

In the interest of Sunday morning fantasies, just what would it take for Huss to get his 'Huss Hardan Special' and how many rolls of 120, for example, would he get it out of it? (Huss, you don't mind me spending your money do you?) $50,000, $250,000, $1,000,000? I really have NO idea.

Thanks.

A minimum coating batch usually works out in the order of about 40,000 rolls of 135/36 or 120 if coated at the normal width of Ilford/ Kodak/ Inoviscoat (the new Adox coater/ old Swiss Ilford lab coater will have a minimum quantity about half that or less owing to its narrower web width). And the coating is only a part of it - the core, the backing paper, the converting, the packaging etc of a roll of 120 or the canister etc for 135 may cost more than the coating job.