Does anyone know the speed of these films?

[cinejerk]

Does anyone know the speed ratings of these 2 really old motion films? I can find any info on the web. Interesting that the negative version has mag stripe.

 

[nickandre]

you mean what it is now or what it was in 1953?

 

[cinejerk]

"you mean what it is now or what it was in 1953?"

Oh, both if you know them ;-)

 

[nickandre]

At this point you should do a clip test. Try everything from ASA 12, 25, 50, 100, to 200. Then develop it for a reasonable average amount of time. Look for good density and go with that speed.

 

[cinejerk]

I guess no one knows any more than I do.


Does anyone know what the original speed rating was for these 2 films?

I know their older than me ;-)

 

[cinejerk]

Not even a guess? No where I can look? hello?

 

[wogster]

Not even a guess? No where I can look? hello?

The problem is that high speed has meant different things at different times, for example at one time 50ASA would have been considered extremely fast, now it's considered very slow. What was considered fast or slow may have been different between still and motion picture film. Your looking at film that was made over a half century ago.

There are actually 2 issues here, first is the original box speed, which should be on the box somewhere. Before the ASA took over the rating of film speed there were several other systems which could also be different between still and motion picture films.

Second is how has over 50 years of unknown storage affected the film. The original speed matters little now, determining it's current speed would be done by experimentation. Even someone who has another sample of this film and has tested it, may not yield the same speed if it was stored differently.

 

[cinejerk]

Thanks wogster. Most of these cans don't have their original boxes. I do have a box from the 933A and don't see anything resembling a speed rating. Mostly the same info as on the label.
I have been trying some similar dupont film (930A) And it has a data sheet with a rating of 32. It seems to be pretty close. I think the 930A is probably similar in age.

 

[wogster]

Thanks wogster. Most of these cans don't have their original boxes. I do have a box from the 933A and don't see anything resembling a speed rating. Mostly the same info as on the label.
I have been trying some similar dupont film (930A) And it has a data sheet with a rating of 32. It seems to be pretty close. I think the 930A is probably similar in age.

Another thing you could try, is George Eastman house, they are a museum, even though they are part of Kodak, they may know some of the history of some non-Kodak film. You might also try duPont even though they got out of the film business a long time ago, they may have retained some historical information.

 

[clayne]

I was able to find this:

http://books.google.com/books?q=dupont+933a+film&btnG=Search+Books

Which has a book stating 933A was 500ASA (Independent filmmaking‎ - Page 352 - although it does say "rated at")

http://books.google.com/books?q=+937a+film&btnG=Search+Books

Which has a book stating 937A was 125ASA (American cinematographer‎ - Page 710)

I take it you bought it from this guy?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160324377095

 

[Rick A]

The closest I can find for info on DuPont 16mm film is from a 1976 Photo Lab index. It does not list your particular films, however you might try these numbers: type 931A High Speed Rapid Reversal EI: Reversal 160 daylight, 125 tungsten ; Negative 80 Daylight, 64 tungsten. Type 932A Ultra Speed Rapid Reversal speed rating for reversal: daylight 320, tungsten 250. Speed for negative processing: daylight 160, tungsten 125. As mentioned before, clip some test pieces, and experiment. I hope this is helpful, and good shooting.
Rick

 

[cinejerk]

Thanks for the info clayne. Yes I think it was that guy. But he was using a different name when I won it.
I didn't realize they even made films with that speed back then. I was going to try them at 25-32. I think even at that age they would have been grossly over exposed.
Thanks ralnphot. At least I have some Idea of where to begin now.

 

[cmacd123]

I was going to try them at 25-32. /QUOTE]

sounds good to me, and lots of anti-fog