color surveillance film

[AgX]

The term `surveillance film´ is not well defined. If at all.
To my understanding it means an emulsion of wide exposure range, coated on a PET base, sold bulk only and often some extended red sensitivity. (I’m speaking of B&W.)

Now, what is that “FUJI Color Surveillance Film ISO400 TAC 130µ” about?

Just their Superia 400 emulsion coated on a slightly thicker acetate base? Their common base is acetate of 122µ.

 

[Ryuji]

Fujifilm and Konica Minolta are two of the major TAC manufacturers of the world and TAC manufacturing cost is very low for them. TAC still has a lot of demand for LCD panels and other components.

TAC has much less curling problems than PET so TAC is more common for anything rolled. Exception is microfilm and other films for long term record.

 

[AgX]

So far about triacetate, Ryuji. But what is special about that film? And why this very slight increase (7%) in base thickness?

 

[Ryuji]

According to Fujifilm, the current version uses PET 0.100mm and it is shipped in 150ft rolls. I have no info about the details of the emulsion, though, if there is no special requirement, it seems more logical to use general purpose emulsions that are made for other products.

 

[AgX]

Well, I learned about that film just yesterday by coincidence, it was filed on Fuji's `global´ website under microfilms...
I checked it there today via the search function and still get the same result. Assuming you were looking at their japanese edition, I leave it there assuming that the idea behind this film is just the base. (Perhaps the former TAC version had some different poperty in contrast to their standard one.)

Thanks.

 

[Ryuji]

Yes I looked at their fujifilm.jp site as this has more info most of the time. I didn't find much more info, tho. Found a Japanese material safety data for the film but of course it's very uninformative for your questions.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I have some Ilford 400 P4 surveillance film. It interestingly is on a thicker base as well, I know I can only load about 28 frames before the film cassette is full.

The film base is I think Estar and it cannot be torn, one has to cut it.

I'm assuming that the base of these films are made tough because their intended working environment is tough. They are usually in a metal box sitting in either boiling sun or snow covered and freezing cold.

By the way this film appears to be HP5+, I used my same developer/time combination for HP5+ and it worked out virtually perfectly. It is a great film to give to students as I bought it in 30m rolls for $5.00 AUD a roll.

Mick.

 

[Ryuji]

If it's polyester (Estar is a Kodak trademark) film, do you experience curling problem? That is, when you flatten film does it have some spring recoil from previous rolling shape?

 

[Mick Fagan]

Ryuji, I just went into the darkroom for a squiz, the film is flat.

I know when processing this film it feels thick and stiff when putting into the reels.

It doesn't seem to have a memory problem from what I can recall. I haven't used it since last October with some learner photographers!

As I dry by hanging in room temperature I don't know whether it would have an inward curl. As this film would more than likely be R/T processed, I think it would be designed to stay as flat as possible.

I forgot Estar is a Kodak name. )

Mick.

 

[AgX]

Mick,

Ilford Harmann has got several surveillance films in offer. The “Traffic Surveillance” is most probably the same emulsion as their SFX200 but coated on a 75µ PET base instead of 125µ acetate. Further there are two “Surveillance 400 P” films. The current P4 and the selling out P3. No further information is given on them. Perhaps it is HP5Plus and HP5 on PET, with the latter perhaps on a thikker base

 

[Brac]

I recall reading somewhere years ago that Ilford's SFX200 was based on a traffic surveillance film.

 

[bcostin]

Interesting thread. I have two bulk rolls of "Kodak Traffic Control Film Color S0-077" that I got very cheap. I understand the SO indicates a special order film. The base is definitely thicker than usual.

These rolls both expired in 2001 and Kodak's web site contains no trace of it, as far as I can tell. I developed my first test roll at home in B&W just for kicks. Edge markings indicate "K'ODAK SO077 1454-815-02". Anyone ever run into this stuff?

 

[wiggy]

Just done a search and came across this reference to KODAK SO077 1454-815-02.

I picked up a few bulk rolls from a guy in Canada via Ebay a couple of months ago. I ran a 120 or so frames through the camera and finally got round to processing them tonight after two months sitting in the freezer. I've no idea if it is negative or transparency film so I cooked it with some EPP100 I've got in a Tetenol 3 bath kit. Came out very dark compared to the EPP100 and the base layer is orange as opposed to clear like the EPP100. I'm guessing from this that it's a negative film and either underexposed or underdeveloped due to the cross process effect.

Any suggestions/advice would be gratefully received

 

[jd callow]

C41 exposed normally will often look underexposed when developed in e6 chems. I'd soup some in c41 chems before adjusting your EI.

 

[wiggy]

Here's a low res (300dpi) scan of one of the frames. This is about as good as I can pull off the film with the scanning software. I've absolutely no hope of projecting any of the frames and won't know if I can print anything as my enlarger doesn't arrive until the weekend (don't tell the wife she doesn't know I've got it yet!! )

Surprisingly the colour balance and saturation don't look too bad considering. If I can get the EI right it might turn out to be a decent slide film!!