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

[BrianShaw]

This I don't get. They say they "engineered" the film in-house. I am not exactly an expert, but don't you kind of sort of have to have some technical information to "engineer" a film?

It depends on definition of the term “engineered”. It’s quite valid for a project engineer to take credit for, as an example, conceptualize a product AND assemble a group of more specialized subject-matter experts/engineers or consultants to do the technical engineering AND coordinate manufacturing/distribution AND legitimately claim to have engineered a product. It conceivably could all be done using a phone/computer from a rather humble remote location. One does not have to use a slide rule or wear a white lab coat or have a big complex to perform within the breadth of “engineering” activities. In this scenario, the analyses and intermediate/documentation products available would likely be limited to whatever was purchased under the contract(s). Analysis and documentation are extremely costly parts of product engineering so short-cuts in those areas to meet a price-point are quite logical.

 

[BrianShaw]

Come out with a statement about what they can`t or won`t share, and we can decide from there.

Read between the lines. The statement of what can’t or won’t be shared is completely obvious and has be restated consistently and repeatedly. The basis of the 320 or the 200 speed rating is to be taken as an act of faith as a starting point.

The 25 rating is based in an experimental analysis and has been disputed. The 80 is conjecture. All worth considering yet none so definitive that the others can be excluded.

Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?

It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.

 

[pentaxuser]

CatLABS, as it has 320 in its name is this film an ISO of 320? With its unique emulsion is this an emulsion of your devising that you have contracted out to another film maker to make for you

pentaxuser

The above was my original question on page 1 to which CatLABS replied with one word "Yes" so one might have assumed that the word "Yes" applied to the whole question. If so it presumably had a team of photo engineers for at least part of the "4 years in the making" of this new film which is an expensive outlay. An alternative explanation is that one or more Catlabs employees had an idea to make a new film, approached one or more film makers and one of those thought Catlabs idea for a new film was good enough to spend 4 years of its R&D team's time to bring the film to fruition which now includes its production

That has to be quite an expensive undertaking for a film maker who now is relying on CatLABS sales alone to cover the whole cost of making the film and return a profit

Here's your quote below that prompted me to quote (1) my original question, (2) CatLABS' response and what I think its "yes" covers. The "yes" of course, may only have covered the first part of my question about the film's speed in which case the second part of the question was not answered and I remain in the dark about whether the R&D team of photo engineers belong to CatLABs or the film maker

This I don't get. They say they "engineered" the film in-house. I am not exactly an expert, but don't you kind of sort of have to have some technical information to "engineer" a film? Is the technical information so super secret that they torched it in a burn bag or something? Did Agent K drop by their office and use his neuralyzer on the engineering team? How are they going to be able to do a second run? Or, is this it? One and done. Limited edition. Get it while it lasts. When it's gone it's gone.

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?

It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.

I'm not embarrassed.
And guess where CatLabs is trying to market this - here.
In other words I'm saying to CatLabs - read the room.

 

[BrianShaw]

That has to be quite an expensive undertaking for a film maker who now is relying on CatLABS sales alone to cover the whole cost of making the film and return a profit

Yes, by Jove. And don’t omit the possibility that there might be investors in this project. Not our business, of course, but a likely possibility.

 

[faberryman]

It depends on definition of the term “engineered”. It’s quite valid for a project engineer to take credit for, as an example, conceptualize a product AND assemble a group of more specialized subject-matter experts/engineers or consultants to do the technical engineering AND coordinate manufacturing/distribution AND legitimately claim to have engineered a product. It conceivably could all be done using a phone/computer from a rather humble remote location. One does not have to use a slide rule or wear a white lab coat or have a big complex to perform within the breadth of “engineering” activities. In this scenario, the analyses and intermediate/documentation products available would likely be limited to whatever was purchased under the contract(s). Analysis and documentation are extremely costly parts of product engineering so short-cuts in those areas to meet a price-point are quite logical.

I have no idea what CatLABS means when they say they "engineered" it. It's another in a long line of secrets.

 

[MattKing]

The above was my original question on page 1 to which CatLABS replied with one word "Yes" so one might have assumed that the word "Yes" applied to the whole question.

Generally speaking, when people reply to multiple questions with a single answer, the answer is unclear, but most likely only applies to the last question in the list.

 

[FotoD]

Last film I remember that was marketed at a fake ISO which gave poor shadow detail, was made in the EU and had a weird spectral sensitivity was Ferrania. Is that what this film is?

Sorry if that's already been debunked, I read the thread from the start but it's so long I have forgotten the first half already. Got distracted by the Pop Tarts. Haven't had those in years, I would probably just stick with cinnamon if they didn't tell you what the new taste was.

 

[faberryman]

Yes, by Jove. And don’t omit the possibility that there might be investors in this project. Not our business, of course, but a likely possibility.

Why is that likely? Maybe he borrowed the money from his mother. That's possible.

 

[BrianShaw]

I'm not embarrassed.
And guess where CatLabs is trying to market this - here.

Obviously, Matt.

Photrio appears to be one of many places CatLab has been to market the product. Personally… I would have abandon this venue for that goal a long time ago if I were them.

 

[BrianShaw]

bbb

I have no idea what CatLABS means when they say they "engineered". It's another in a long line of secrets.

It doesn’t matter. Really. Marketing talk. Interpretation of the definition of “engineering”. The product either has legs or it doesn’t. For some in this thread it might and for others it doesn’t. Why sweat the irrelevant details beyond deciding if it’s worth a try or not.

 

[BrianShaw]

Why is that likely? Maybe he borrowed the money from his mother. That's possible.

Have you ever funded a product development effort? Mom would be an investor but why use that analogy as a back-handed insult? If Mom loaned money for a new film we should kiss her on both cheeks!

 

[faberryman]

Have you ever funded a product development effort? Mom would be an investor but why use that analogy as a back-handed insult? If Mom loaned money for a new film we should kiss her on both cheeks!

So I'll ask again, why is it likely that investors are involved in bringing the new CatLABS film to market?

 

[faberryman]

It doesn’t matter. Really. Marketing talk.

I think marketing is psyops, and I am interested in psyops, so my interest extends beyond the film itself.

 

[aparat]

Read between the lines. The statement of what can’t or won’t be shared is completely obvious and has be restated consistently and repeatedly. The basis of the 320 or the 200 speed rating is to be taken as an act of faith as a starting point.

The 25 rating is based in an experimental analysis and has been disputed. The 80 is conjecture. All worth considering yet none so definitive that the others can be excluded.

Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?

It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.

Yes, I even disputed my own results after I got them back the first time. This is why, I bought more film and ran the test again. The results were nearly identical, well within the margin of error. I actually, ran the test the third time. I would gladly continue testing and sharing my results but the OP made it clear that they are not taking this thread seriously, so I will no longer post in this thread. It's a waste of time.

If I had to give you my conclusion, I would say that the Catlabs film is technically slower than the advertised ISO 320 and, not even close to being capable of reaching ISO 1600 (Catlabs recommends "pushing" the film to ISO 1600 on their website). Even if you don't put faith in the actual ISO number my analysis produced, you can see that the film is about three stops slower than 400TX under experimental conditions. In the "real-world," one should expect similar results, subject, of course, to the usual variability inherent in film (and hybrid) photography.

As to why the film turns out slower than advertised, I would hazard an (educated) guess that the film, in addition to being inherently slower than mainstream medium-speed films (e.g., 400TX, HP5+), is not quite panchromatic, and has a significant dip(s) in sensitivity along its spectral response curve. I started testing its spectral response, but I can see that it is a waste of effort so I will not conclude the test. The OP does not care, and it's absolutely their prerogative. I have no intention of telling them how to run their business. Bringing a film to market (whether new or re-badged) is a huge undertaking. Catlabs deserve sincere congratulations on succeeding. I am seriously impressed that they were able to offer this film in 135 and 120, and at competitive prices!

Nick

 

[BrianShaw]

I think marketing is psyops, and I am interested in psyops.

Yes, I find marketing fascinating as a study in how to lie and manipulate, hopefully without getting caught. I have great distain for that profession and find myself constantly analyzing situations so I either get sucked in by my own decision or at least have a better reaction to the manipulation. As I age I’m finding that an informed and stoic approach beats an angry and aggressive approach. My research is based in the tens of robo-dialed sales calls per day and the smaller number of doorbell ringing lead generators.

 

[BrianShaw]

So I'll ask again, why is it likely[/] that investors are involved in bringing the new CatLABS film to market?

As far as kissing mother on both cheeks, I'd say it turns on the quality of the film mother's money has produced.

Crikey… your very persistent but don’t seem to want to think at the moment. Here’s why: it costs a whole big big o’money to pull off something like this. Haven’t you ever watched Shark Tank?

 

[BrianShaw]

so I will no longer post in this thread. It's a waste of time.

I appreciate your entire reply and would only ask you to reconsider the part I have quoted, above. It is a WOT if the sole goal is to change the mind of the vendor or the product labeling/marketing. It is very valuable to most of the folks actively participating in this thread out of interest, especially those who are on the fence for whatever reason. I have other on-going activities that are financially-intensive so holding back on buying film right now but if you (or anyone else) has data, experiences, etc that can help others decide if the product is right for them or to better use it without having to do extensive testing... then that's a win for all in my book.

 

[faberryman]

Crikey… your very persistent but don’t seem to want to think at the moment. Here’s why: it costs a whole big big o’money to pull off something like this. Haven’t you ever watched Shark Tank?

I don't know what it costs to pull something like this off. I don't know what you consider "a whole big big o’money". I don't know CatLABS' financial position. And I don't know whether CatLABS is an attractive partner to invest in. I don't have nearly enough information to conclude that investors are likely to be involved.

I don't watch Shark Tank. I don't know if Shark Tank is a half hour show or an hour show, but either way I know I couldn't watch and listen to Mark Cuban that long. Sure, he's a billionaire, but that doesn't mean you can stand listening to the guy.

 

[BrianShaw]

Ya, Cuban can be quite obnoxious but so can all of the others. This season’s format is with live audience; the worst idea I’ve ever seen. They’ve all transitioned from obnoxious to that plus bad actors. But hearing some of the entrepreneurs stories helps understand some of the complexities of those kind of ventures.

 

[Oldwino]

From film to Pop Tarts to Shark Tank. This thread has broad appeal.

 

[pentaxuser]

Generally speaking, when people reply to multiple questions with a single answer, the answer is unclear, but most likely only applies to the last question in the list.

Possibly Matt but CatLABS didn't have to do much to make it clear whether it was replying to the first part or second part or to both

All some of want is information. If Catlabs can't or won't supply the information then as Brian Shaw seems to be saying, just tell us that all we have been told is all we are going to be told in plain language such as buy it and try it or ignore it but don't seek any further clarification.

In fact CatLABS needn't bother in my case, I have chosen to ignore it


pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

Post #66 said all I needed to read in order to understand their position… and in rather plain English.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?...

Who? Who??? Why, those who've been trying are PHOTRIO members, the most important (in their own opinion) film users on the planet!!

...It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.

In my opinion, the embarrassment belongs entirely to those PHOTRIO members, with none redounding to Omer.

...In other words I'm saying to CatLabs - read the room.

I suspect Omer read this room long ago. Which is why he markets elsewhere in places where the preponderance of film users can be found.

...Photrio appears to be one of many places CatLab has been to market the product. Personally… I would have abandon this venue for that goal a long time ago if I were them.

This thread appears to be evidence that, if Omer ever expected PHOTRIO would have any significant value as a place to market his product, he abandoned that idea soon after his original post.

...I couldn't watch and listen to Mark Cuban that long. Sure, he's a billionaire, but that doesn't mean you can stand listening to the guy.

Are you confusing Cuban with Musk?

 

[pbromaghin]

Last film I remember that was marketed at a fake ISO which gave poor shadow detail, was made in the EU and had a weird spectral sensitivity was Ferrania. Is that what this film is?

Sorry if that's already been debunked, I read the thread from the start but it's so long I have forgotten the first half already. Got distracted by the Pop Tarts. Haven't had those in years, I would probably just stick with cinnamon if they didn't tell you what the new taste was.

I thought of Ferrania a few weeks ago and was considering a little fun, speculative trolling but decided to check into it a bit first. It turns out P30 is on triacetate and this stuff is on Poly. Ruined the whole idea.