A little off topic, but have you received your film? I ordered a roll of UN54 on 8/12 from OrwoNA and it still shows as awaiting fulfillment. When I ordered, it was shown as being in stock.
A little off topic, but have you received your film? I ordered a roll of UN54 on 8/12 from OrwoNA and it still shows as awaiting fulfillment. When I ordered, it was shown as being in stock.I just went to orwona.com and bought 100 ft, because I think this looks like a great film for some of the stuff I like to do. Maybe not a fully rational move for a film I've never used, but I only have to shoot less than half of it to break even with the Lomography price, and I've shot enough Fuji Eterna ERS at ~ISO 3 to know that my part of NC provides plenty of light for the slow stuff. Thanks Huss for bringing this stuff to my attention, looking forward to seeing more.
A little off topic, but have you received your film? I ordered a roll of UN54 on 8/12 from OrwoNA and it still shows as awaiting fulfillment. When I ordered, it was shown as being in stock.
My order just went to shipped. Don't know if it helped, but I sent them a message from the website yesterday inquiring about the ship date.Mine too -- ordered 8/16, "Awaiting Fulfillment." I'd have hoped it was at least in a box by now, but it's free shipping, and I don't need it fast.
A other more recent idea for rebranding is upgrading, giving the buyer the impression to buy something niche, exotic, or even higher quality.
Something else then is rebranding at products that not exist originally in that form. For instance Maco converting Agfa films that do not exist as e.g. type 135 to this format and branding it under Rollei for which use they got a licence.
Not to mention GM with Cadillac, Ford with Lincoln, Honda with Accura, etc., etc.Toyota has been doing that with the Lexus line for decades now!
My roll of DN21 arrived today, with a hand written label on the can and a handwritten note attached to the printed packing slip -- saying it's hand spooled, seemingly by whoever runs ORWOna. Also gave an email address for processing information. I'll get it in the loader tonight and load up a cassette, then see if I can find a 35mm camera with a fairly fast lens that hasn't already got film in it...
Is it saying, don't use in a motorized camera like my EOS 3?
This is about the actual or imaginative danger of spoiling a still camera when using PET-based film, as such cannot be torn by a camera, the fail-safe feature of torn perforations as with TAC-based films is lacking here.
Whether a motor-wind camera really could be spoiled depends whether a motor could deliver the needed torque in first place and then on other automated-stop features missing.
Basically such warning may apply on hand-winding cameras too.
But Maco for instance has been offering PET-based type 135 films for more than ten years (thus the internet days) and I do not know of one report of a spoiled camera.
I've had good results in general with finding another film that has times for both my chosen developer and one the film manufacturer gives data for, and assume the ratio will be the same. At the least, that will give a good starting point (which is all manufacturer times are anyway). So, say, my "Europan 200" doesn't give an Xtol time, but it does give time for ID-11 -- well, I just look around and find a similar film that has times for both developers, and do a little arithmetic to get an Xtol time the same percentage longer or shorter than the ID-11 time as the one for, say, Fomapan 200.
DN21 is a duplicating negative film, so shouldn't have a silver antihalation layer (as is sometimes the case with B&W reversal films). Might be worth giving it a short bath in Farmer's Reducer to see if that will cut down the fog or whatever layer might be present. Rodinal isn't a particularly low-fog developer -- or at least Parodinal isn't, and it's said to work the same. When I first experimented with it, I had to add a good bit of potassium bromide chasing fog levels. Also, what temperature were you at? I've seen suggestions that the same temp-corrected time (i.e. same total development) will still produce more fog when warmer.
When I get home, I'll check my email to see if ORWOna has replied on processing recommendations. High fog levels would be unacceptable in cine prints that will be projected, so unless they're selling old film there should be a way around this.
Wow! Those are going to be better than mine... Based on the images above, though, I think I'm going to enjoy it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?