Cinema film stills

[JohnRichard]

I saw over on another forum, that someone had shot still images with Vision 2 stock. I am VERY interested in this, but cant seem to find the ingredient or supply for ENC-2 chems. There could be a very good reason for that, like "your not suppose to do that", but I want to.

I have some short ends left over from a shoot, and would like to load it into my trusty Pentax.

Anyone know of a supply for chems? or a lab that will process 3-4 feet only, and not cost hundreds? I'm not scared a bit to do it myself, which is why I ask for chems...

Any thoughts?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I cannot give you a source for chems, but I can say that the negatives are low in conrast compared to Portra and Gold films. They use a special high contrast film for printing posiitive images. It is possible to scan Vision film and get good results by altering the scan parameters. However, Portra VC 160 and Ektar 100 are very similar in composition in many ways. Of course they differ but have much the same technology for reducing grain and increasing sharpness. There are lots of threads on this here and one is ongoing right now.

PE

 

[JohnRichard]

Sorry I opened a new thread. I guess I just wasn't searching for the right terms.

 

[nickandre]

I've heard results in RA4 chemistry at various temps. ECN-2 chemistry is sold only in quantities to process thousands of feet of film because that's what people do with it. You could always splice your roll onto the end of your next movie reel.

and BTW there is a very nasty backing to the film which must be removed before development. I just tried it today and it's very gross but possible. You have to submerge the film in a bath of sodium sulfite and water and then literally sponge it off. You get very gooey doing it. Then you have to re-load the film onto the reel and then go to the developer. Have fun with that...

I believe the last lab that processed small quantities bit the dust because of various reasons...you might be able to splice a bunch together or something like that. Or try calling labs. You never know.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Tiberius;

I have seen rem-jet removed in one swipe with a cellulose sponge wet with sodium carbonate. Dilute carbonate on the folded sponge run over the film as it hangs on a hanger and then a swipe with a second sponge wet with distilled water. That should do the trick. Then rinse in fresh water and thread onto the reel underwater and it will work out just fine.

Put the lid on the tank and turn on the lights and then clean up the goo!

PE

 

[removed account4]

call seattle film works and see who they recommend to process your film
they used to sell short ends and process the film as well.
maybe you can contact people that sell movie / commercial equipment
(lights cameras and stuff ) and see who the people who still shoot film
take their cans.

good luck
john

 

[John Shriver]

Dale Labs in Florida will still process ECN-2. Good consumer/professional lab.

Kodak has full formulas online for ECN-2. Or, you can buy the kits, but the developer comes in a cubetainer to make 66 liters!

But, with current Portra and Ektar films, there's not a lot to be gained from using the Vision 2 and 3 films in a still camera. Plus, you really don't want to leave Vision films sitting in the camera for months...

 

[aparat]

I believe A&I will process respooled ECN-2. It might be worth giving them a call.

 

[Photo Engineer]

It is interesting to note that the remjet removal pre-bath has no sodium sulfite in it.

PE

 

[Ektagraphic]

Dale Labs rolls Kodak vision up and calls it "Dale Film" and it is process ENC-2. I just shot a roll and got it back today. Not bad stuff.

 

[srs5694]

Ektagraphic, are you sure it's ECN-2 film? (Note it's ECN-2, not ENC-2; that could be the cause of some of JohnRichard's troubles finding information.) Dale Labs did indeed respool this film in the 1980s, but they switched to ordinary C-41 film in the early 1990s (definitely before 1994). I haven't used their services more recently than that, though. It's possible that they're selling small-roll ECN-2 films again, but I'm skeptical of that.

Concerning the development process, (there was a url link here which no longer exists) has a mix-it-yourself formula that's probably better than buying tens of gallons of the stuff ready-made.

FWIW, I used these films (or their predecessors) in the mid-1980s and eventually grew disillusioned with them, at least for still photography. I wouldn't discourage anybody from trying them if they're curious, but IMHO they are, at best, no better than common C-41 films for still photography -- at least, for typical purposes. I suppose if you're after a low-contrast print they might be just the thing.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Oopps Sorry. I just looked at a roll and it says Procss CNK-4/ECP-2. I thought it said ENC-2.

 

[srs5694]

A quick Google reveals that CNK-4 is/was Konica's name for C-41. Very nice of Dale to use an obscure name for the process rather than mark it as "C-41."

 

[Michael W]

I believe A&I will process respooled ECN-2. It might be worth giving them a call.

A&I stopped doing this over a year ago.

 

[Ektagraphic]

A quick google search also reveals that ECP-2 is a movie film process.

 

[Ektagraphic]

The film also looks like it has a rem-jet backing and I thought C-41 films (if the CNK-4 is C-41) could not have a rem-jet backing....

 

[srs5694]

Look at the sprocket holes and compare them to those of known C-41 (or B&W for still camera) film. Still camera film has rectangular sprockets with just a bit of rounding at the corners. ECN-2 film's sprockets are more curved along the two short edges (IIRC).

 

[benveniste]

"The Camera Shop," http://www.thecamerashop.com/, did a great job with my Fuji Eterna 500T.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I just called Dale and they told me that it was a movie film that they respool. What I find fishy is that the negs have frame numbers just like a regular roll of negative film. They told me that they apply them to the film themselves when they spool it. Does that sound possible?

 

[srs5694]

I just called Dale and they told me that it was a movie film that they respool. What I find fishy is that the negs have frame numbers just like a regular roll of negative film. They told me that they apply them to the film themselves when they spool it. Does that sound possible?/QUOTE]

Yes, that's possible. When I used SFW and Dale in the '80s, the rolls had frame numbers on them, and it definitely was movie film at that time. Kodak, Fuji, and even smaller/lower-tech manufacturers like Foma and Efke all manage to put frame numbers on their film. I'd guess they use some sort of cartridge-loading machine with a light source (LED displays, cutout numbers with a light bulb behind it, or whatnot). I can't imagine that would need to be very high-tech or expensive.

I'm still a little suspicious about the film being ECN-2, though. The process specification you reported on the cartridge is self-contradictory, and I know for a fact that Dale switched away from movie film in the early 1990s. I don't know about Dale, but SFW and at least one other outfit were very misleading about their changes at this time, presumably in an effort to bolster customer loyalty. What shape are the sprocket holes? As I mentioned earlier, ECN-2 films have two curved edges and two flat edges on their sprocket holes, vs. four flat edges for C-41 and B&W film sold for still cameras.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Dale can still process SFW film, so maybe this goes through the same line....

 

[Michael W]

I asked Dale Labs a question about ECN-2 & they just replied that they will cease this process on July 31. I'm sitting on a dozen or so roll that I got from A&I a couple of years ago but haven't exposed yet. Just sent an email to the Camera Shop to see if they will do it. I'm not going to expose the film until I find a place that intends to run it for the near future.