CatLABS X FILM 320 Pro now available in 35mm and 120

Sal Santamaura

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
7,533
Location
San Clemente, California
Format
Multi Format
faberryman said:
...Why do kids love ISO 8 and 12 black and white cine films?...
Click to expand...

Because they do. And they represent the lion's share of the film market today, as opposed to curmudgeons at PHOTRIO who'd rather complain about not being given a technical data sheet.

Manufacturers who give markets what markets want thrive. Those who cater to niche-within-a-niche-within-a-niche curmudgeons might not do as well.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,106
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
paulbarden said:
I can't speak to the veracity of this blog post, but take a look: Is it double X? (referring to the previous version of X Film 320)
Click to expand...
You are right and Evensteve of Figital revolution even showed the Double X along the previous version's edges. However what does the new film, the Pro version, show along the edges?

Anyone here know?

Thanks

pentaxuser
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Sal Santamaura said:
Manufacturers who give markets what markets want thrive. Those who cater to niche-within-a-niche-within-a-niche curmudgeons might not do as well.
Click to expand...

But why then entered Catlabs our, the Photrio, market by means of starting this thread and do not give this market, thus us, what we want?


And to keep further to your wording:
Manufacturers who alienate the market will not thrive.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,195
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format

You can say that another million times. It still won't make Lomo ISO 8 film sell anywhere near the worst selling film from Kodak, Fuji or Ilford.
 

mshchem

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
14,992
Location
Iowa City, Iowa USA
Format
Medium Format
Camera films (cine) are typically NOT coated on PET base. Everything Kodak makes, color, is acetate. Why Double X is on PET I suspect is for cost, I don't know. I don't fiddle with stuff like this. 99% of what I shoot is Kodak and Ilford, and a tiny bit of Foma.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,600
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

There is a worldwide shortage of cellulose tri-acetate base. Kodak and others are having trouble sourcing it, and the available stocks have become very expensive.
On the other hand, Eastman Kodak manufactures its own Estar (PET) base for itself and others, and that business is growing for them.
Expect to see more and more films on PET rather than acetate - the new Kodak Gold 200 in 120 is on Estar base.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,600
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
brbo said:
?! Where did you get information that 5222 is now on PET base?
Click to expand...

The datasheet for 5222 on Eastman Kodak's site still has it on acetate.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
MattKing said:
There is a worldwide shortage of cellulose tri-acetate base. Kodak and others are having trouble sourcing it, and the available stocks have become very expensive.
Click to expand...

In the past nearly all major manufacturers, and for sure the three top ones, made TAC base themselves.
Meanwhile, with the exception of Fuji, they lost one way or the other their TAC plants...
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,982
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
PET withstands stress better, far as I know. So good for motion picture cameras.

AgX said:
But why then entered Catlabs our, the Photrio, market by means of starting this thread and do not give this market, thus us, what we want?


And to keep further to your wording:
Manufacturers who alienate the market will not thrive.
Click to expand...

Obviously, they wanted to sell film to the people here who would try it. That they're not prepared to provide information that would definitely be provided to them by the manufacturer of the film is their choice. It doesn't alienate their market, because their market don't want that information. Their market wants to get "cool photos".

Anybody who knows anything about the state of current film manufacturing knows that Catlabs and Japan Camera Hunter and Kosmo Photo don't make any film. There is absolutely zero reason to expect a spectacular new product from any of them. Why bother acting like there should be?
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
The market is the place a vendor approaches to sell his products.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,195
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
Don Heisz said:
PET withstands stress better, far as I know. So good for motion picture cameras.
Click to expand...

That's obviously also a new information. Before, movie people would rather have cheap film torn than an expensive camera damaged.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Whe had many discussions here on this topic and I remember only one first hand report of something broken by PET film. And this even was no camera...
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,195
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
But there were a lot of first hand reports of using PET based film in cine cameras in those discussions?

What was the reason to move all other film used in the industry (print, duplicate...) to PET but leave all original camera negative films on triacetate base?
 
Last edited:

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
For many years PET based cine camera film was used in dedicated amateur film cameras.

As far as I know there never was a 35mm or 16mm cine camera film on PET base commercialized. But it was used. Also I myself was involved with such and possible camera harm was no issue for none of the potential users.

Do not overlook that PET based film is used in a great variety of photographic devices. Including the movie industry, there even in more devices than 35mm movie cameras exist.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,195
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format

Ok, let's try it again... What was the reason to move all other film used in the industry (print, duplicate...) to PET but leave all original camera negative (and positive) films that would be shot in expensive cameras on triacetate base?

You've already answered the question that users that didn't care about possible damage to their cameras used PET based films. I can see why. I shoot PET based films without thinking twice, too.
 

mshchem

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
14,992
Location
Iowa City, Iowa USA
Format
Medium Format
Yes, cameras, motion picture cameras would rather strip the acetate film rather than have PET break the camera
 

mshchem

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
14,992
Location
Iowa City, Iowa USA
Format
Medium Format
Eastman Kodak developed Estar branded PET for sheet film. Eastman Chemical is a Global leader in polyester and acetate resins. Eastman Kodak sold off the plastics division, it was considered a commodity, couldn't generate profits that film could.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,106
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
I have just had a look at the 2019 thread on CatLABS then 320 film which took to page 6 or so for someone to even report that its edge markings said Eastman Double X. CatLABS itself had made no mention of it having any connection to Double XX and yet the reaction by quite a few members was "So what, CatLABS has brought us a new film so congratulations to it

Others had some concern about what they perceived as a lack of transparency. Those 2 groups then have remained largely unaltered. in other words we are having a rerun of the 2019 thread and to all intents and purposes nothing has changed. The only real difference I can see was that CatLABS itself participated hardly at all in comparison with this current thread

pentaxuser
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…