Cinema Film and Chemistry... Need help :)

[Gerald C Koch]

But Gerald, this is the internet; what somebody else says somewhere else always trumps anything anybody says on the current forum.

Were it just an average APUG poster I might agree but PE knows what he is talking about since he was an engineer with Kodak for many years. He has said on more than one occasion that the results will not be good with cross processing ECN films in C-41. Do a search using "ECN C-41" for the other threads on processing ECN film in C-41.

 

[pdeeh]

You may have missed my point, which was a (failed) attempt at humour ... I too trust what PE says, and indeed one only needs to look up the ECN specs to see that the developer uses CD3

 

[Gerald C Koch]

You may have missed my point, which was a (failed) attempt at humour ... I too trust what PE says, and indeed one only needs to look up the ECN specs to see that the developer uses CD3

Sorry. One of the limitations of text messages is that such things as satire often do not make it. Thanks for explaining and I did chuckle when I reread your post. I agree completely.

 

[VPooler]

I have experience with ECN film and I can say that removing the remjet prior to processing is the wisest. Cinestill looks good but the lack of antihalation layer can lead to unwanted results + the negatives ARE THIN when processed in C41 since C41 is done at significantly lower temperature and CD4 is slower acting. The negatives can be nice but do no justice to the film. But back to removing the remjet as cross-processing is doable...you need a large machine to do that as the solution gets saturated with remjet pretty quickly - trust me! Old film washing machines can be found but are a pain to run. And if you plan to sell it, it is best to leave the emulsion dry to avoid rogue remjet particles drying in there and the rather alkaline prewash solution can alter the qualities of film. So - you need to construct a machine that gently wets the remjet and scrubs it off.

Also, you have to think about spooling the film and marketing it. I doubt that your personal expenses can be covered with the price. Hate to burst your bubble but it is better to leave the mass production to professionals, meanwhile - feel free to either sell it with processing kits as suggested or shoot it yourself. You can even make dry ECN2 processing kits from powders, CD3 is sold in 25kg buckets. And the film looks just stellar when processed right.

 

[Athiril]

There is no ECN 70mm film. The camera negative for that process is 60mm. Only the ECP (print) film comes in 70mm, with the extra width being for the sound tracks.

Of course, if you're willing to order a master roll, they'll probably slice and perforate it any way you like.

65mm, you need to trim off 4mm for 120/220 assuming it's exactly 65mm. I'd also be down for Vision Print/Premier Print in 70mm though.

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Production/index.htm?CID=go&idhbx=vision3

50D, 200T, 250D, 500T stocks available.


Latest price catalog
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/QA_MotionPictureCatalog_February7_2014.pdf

 

[engineerchris]

FWIW my understanding with the existing commercially available product is that a dry process is used (and patented, or at least pending) like an air knife. I have tons of stock in the freezer of different speeds including some 400ft reels of Fuji 64T and 500D I am playing with. I have about 10 rolls I am scanning right now. The 5219 (V3 500T) and 5201 (V2 50D) have turned out Ok on home souped c-41 Flexicolor chemicals.

 

[Roger Cole]

Never heard of Cinestill but I stand by my comments. Since the ECN-2 and C-41 processes use different color developing agents there will be color shifts and possible crossover. This was discussed on a previous thread.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/800135-cinestill-800-iso-tungsten-xpro-c-41-film

 

[Xmas]

Hi

Id wish you well on the venture.

but

Kodaks REMJET removal specification is a wet film then waterjet or wet sponge roller followed by carryover remove step... you sure about an air jet REMJET dust is a problem...

your market may be small you are competing against Fuji dumping 200ISO off brand at 1/3 of normal C41...

People who are interested may prefer ECN with REMJET for home processing in ECN chemicals or E6 the REMJET is only a mini lab problem - it makes the ECN better than C41.

Yes I know about the cine still cassettes but has any one bought them.

People buy short ends and recans cause they are cheap and give away reloaded cassettes or 100 foot reels.

All my CC filters are out on loan to people who use T balance cine.

 

[jsmithphoto1]

Ok. Its been almost a year and a half since my reply, my apologies. I have found a simple way of removing the remjet with a borax solution (which wipes it right of!) and a sponge. Cinestill has become VERY popular since our last conversation. I have also removed the remjet from some Vision2 and loaded it into 36exp rolls and supply a local analog store and they have been selling fairly well! It is affordable LOMO style film. I would love to get my hands on some E6 chemicals and try that!!!

 

[Xmas]

I thought the mask would be a problem for normal ECN in E6?

 

[jsmithphoto1]

I don't know, but it would be interesting to experiment with! Maybe like cross processing C-41 in E6.

 

[analoguey]

Ok. Its been almost a year and a half since my reply, my apologies. I have found a simple way of removing the remjet with a borax solution (which wipes it right of!) and a sponge. Cinestill has become VERY popular since our last conversation. I have also removed the remjet from some Vision2 and loaded it into 36exp rolls and supply a local analog store and they have been selling fairly well! It is affordable LOMO style film. I would love to get my hands on some E6 chemicals and try that!!!

I have used Baking soda solution to remove the remjet layer - most of it is washed off, with temp closer to 40C. and remaining can be wiped off.
I remember reading somewhere - either here or on fb that Cinestill has mroe of a flaring issue and that any Cine film with removed remjet will also have the same issues with flares.
Have you experienced that yourself?

 

[jsmithphoto1]

The flare results as there is no antihalation once the remjet is removed. You will mostly only see it in the brighter areas of the photo. Cine film is a little thinner than C-41. If you use a solution of borax, you will notice the remjet wipes right off with no trouble at all and all you need is lukewarm to warm water. There is a difference in what you remove it with. Ive tried sodium carbonate as well and noticed it was MUCH harder to.remove than with borax.

 

[analoguey]

Maybe you missed it - but with baking soda I used, it almost always washed off - with very very little left post a couple of swirls/rotation with the baking soda solution.
Yes, flare is something I would not want to have. One of the reasons I didnt remove the remjet initially before use the film.

 

[Rudeofus]

If you wash and wipe off the remjet layer, I would assume that the film strip is soaking wet after the procedure. How do you get it onto the spindle for processing then?

 

[mweintraub]

If you wash and wipe off the remjet layer, I would assume that the film strip is soaking wet after the procedure. How do you get it onto the spindle for processing then?

I use the baking soda mix after the processing, so I squeegee the film with my fingers as I take it off the reels.

 

[jsmithphoto1]

When i remove the remjet before loading into a cassette, i wet a sponge (with the green scour on the back) with borax solution, but the sponge scour side down on a towel placed on the seat of a kitchen chair or the like... just something to keep the towel in place... and rub the film back and forth a couple times remjet side down on the sponge to remove it. It does not get the emusion wet this way as the extra towel that is left over is used to dry the risidual dampness as you pass the film back and forth. That is my primitive way. I am wanting to make a more automatic contraption, but hey, it gets me time alone

 

[fdonadio]

I've heard that one can reel* wet film under water. I mean, just stick your hands in a bucket of water.

(*) Is this term proper English?


Sent with Tapatalk. Please, forgive autocorrect and my fat fingers.

 

[jsmithphoto1]

That is true and correct English . However, the goal is to keep it dry. Reeling wet gelatin increases the risk of damage tremendously, though, especially in plastic reels. Not to mention if the water you use is less than clean, it could damage the developers. Such as if there were chemicals and such on your hands when you reeled underwater. Too many variables. Its a good idea, though!

 

[fdonadio]

I like stainless steel reels better, even if I take half an hour to successfully reel the film! I think it would be easier to reel under water with a SS reel, but never tried it.


(Edited: a typo and a wrong word.)

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have good Fuji 250D from APUG member and I have very old Kodak 50D from crappy e-bay seller.
Soaking and shaking like crazy of 250D in washing soda (before developer) removes black thing completely enough.
Very old 50D is different story. Even with very hot water, even with cleaning it by my mighty fingers after fixing is done doesn't removes black crap.
You know what does it for final clean up? Reading glasses cleaning tissue. I do it after film is dry. I was using this magic Ilford cleaning tissue, but regular cheap one works as well.
And no scratches.

And since I'm incapable for magician act (steel reel loading) I have dedicated Patteson tank and two plastic reels for ECN-2.

 

[Rudeofus]

You know what does it for final clean up? Reading glasses cleaning tissue. I do it after film is dry. I was using this magic Ilford cleaning tissue, but regular cheap one works as well.

Very interesting. If we can remove the remjet with a liquid which evaporates within minutes, not hours, then this could suddenly become feasible for me. I love Cinestill 800 very much, but also love shooting directly into highlights very much, and Cinestill won't handle this very well.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Very interesting. If we can remove the remjet with a liquid which evaporates within minutes, not hours, then this could suddenly become feasible for me. I love Cinestill 800 very much, but also love shooting directly into highlights very much, and Cinestill won't handle this very well.

Cinestill is for sissy people who don't want to deal with the black remjet spill on the white bathroom sink. While tacky guys like me have no issues by removing it with exactly the same washing soda and some toilet brush.

 

[jsmithphoto1]

Dude my wife has spent countless nag-hours over the remjet everywhere... on the towels, in the sink, some even got on the wall haha. Im telling you though, it comes off MUCH more easier with borax rather than washing soda! I would love to get my hands on a 1k ft roll of 5219!

 

[pbromaghin]

Cinestill is for sissy people who don't want to deal with the black remjet spill on the white bathroom sink. While tacky guys like me have no issues by removing it with exactly the same washing soda and some toilet brush.

You're my hero.