Does anyone remember the name?

[Changeling1]

Does anyone remember the name of the company sold (IIRC) 35mm rolls of 5247 film to photographers in which the cost included processing that produced both slide transparencies and color prints? The big selling point of this film was its low price and dual capacity as both a slide and color print film.

 

[Gerald Koch]

Dale, and they were located in Seattle, I believe.

 

[Wally H]

Seattle Film Works

 

[tim elder]

RGB Labs in Los Angeles, CA and Seattle Film Works used to process bulk-loaded Kodak and Fuji motion picture film. RBG Labs included positives in the processing cost but charged extra for prints. RGB lost their lease and had to close that part of their facility. I believe that Dale Labs in Florida still does ECN-2 processing but I'm not sure. Rocky Mountain runs an ECN-2 line very, very rarely.

Tim

 

[htmlguru4242]

Yep, Dale, Seattle film and some smaller labs here and there (I have one from a place called Red Tag Photo in NY)

 

[Changeling1]

Yep, Dale, Seattle film and some smaller labs here and there (I have one from a place called Red Tag Photo in NY)

Thanks guys! Red Tag Photo and RGB were the ones I saw being used (about 20 years ago). I'll run a Google on them for more information. It's good to know that a couple of the labs are still standing!

 

[srs5694]

I know of several, some of which have already been mentioned:

• Dale Laboratories in Florida, still in operation and reportedly still processing ECN-2 film.
• Seattle FilmWorks (in Seattle, Washington, of course), now known as PhotoWorks, no longer processes ECN-2 film, AFAIK. They still return film with every order, but it's rebadged Ferrania C-41 film.
• Signature Color in Texas, with much the same comments as PhotoWorks. They used to be associated with Skrudland Photo, and I believe the whole operation (and both names) were bought out by one of the big photofinishing companies a while ago.
• AFAIK, Rocky Mountain Film Laboratory never operated under the business model described in the first post, but as noted above, they do occasionally run an ECN-2 batch.

In the past, I've used all of these except Rocky Mountain Film Laboratory. Dale is probably the best of the lot in terms of quality. Signature/Skrudland used to be pretty decent for a consumer-grade photofinisher, but I had serious problems a couple of years ago when I tried them again.

 

[Paul Howell]

Just last night I was sorting 35mm slides from the mid 70s and found 4 or 5 rolls of 5247 that were processed by Seattle Film works, all have faded to point where I would need have them "Photo Shopped" to get decent prints.

 

[benjiboy]

I had forgotten about Kodak 5247 until I read your post Changeling1 it was on sale in the U.K. but it must have been at least twenty years ago.

 

[removed account4]

looks like seattle film works has changed their name to photoworks.
http://www.photoworks.com/

doesn't look like it is the same place though ...

 

[srs5694]

Just last night I was sorting 35mm slides from the mid 70s and found 4 or 5 rolls of 5247 that were processed by Seattle Film works, all have faded to point where I would need have them "Photo Shopped" to get decent prints.

If you're saying that the slides made from the negatives were faded, then that has to do with the copy film, not the 5247 per se. I've heard the same thing about slides from ECN-2 films made in the 1970s; however, I've got a few rolls of ECN-2 film for which I had slides made in the mid-1980s, and those slides are fine (or were a few months ago, when I last examined them). My understanding is that there were massive improvements in the copy film made sometime in the late 1970s or early 1980s, but I don't remember the details. I hope you've still got the original negatives; those would produce better prints than the slides, anyhow, since the slides are copies. (At least, assuming you don't want a special "look," such as that produced by Ilfochrome.)

 

[srs5694]

looks like seattle film works has changed their name to photoworks.
http://www.photoworks.com/

doesn't look like it is the same place though ...

My understanding is that it is the same place; they just changed their name (presumably because of the rise of digital; they didn't want "film" in their name any more) and their product line and services have evolved over time. They quietly dropped the ECN-2 film in the mid-1990s, but they labelled their C-41 cassettes "process SFW-XL" or some such in an attempt to "lock in" the business. I believe they've stopped that little bit of misdirection.

 

[bdial]

FWIW, it is a motion picture film. I recall that there were several places offering the film and process/copy service.

 

[Helen B]

As already mentioned, Dale in Hollywood, Florida still process ECN-2 colour movie film regularly. It costs $4 per roll for processing. They no longer provide the film though. If you wanted to use movie film try The Film Emporium http://www.filmemporium.com/ for 'short ends'. There are other places that sell short ends of movie film. Short ends of 35 mm film around 100 ft long (ie about a minute) aren't much use, so they sell cheaply. Something like 14¢ or 15¢ a foot.

There was a class action lawsuit against SFW "claiming the photo processor misled consumers by indicating its film could only be processed by the company. The suit... asserts that most of the film distributed by Seattle FilmWorks in recent years was ordinary film that did not require special handling and might have been processed more quickly and cheaply by others." Maybe that had something to do with why they changed their name? The lawsuit and the name change happened at about the same time: early 2000.

Best,
Helen

 

[Paul Howell]

If you're saying that the slides made from the negatives were faded, then that has to do with the copy film, not the 5247 per se. I've heard the same thing about slides from ECN-2 films made in the 1970s; however, I've got a few rolls of ECN-2 film for which I had slides made in the mid-1980s, and those slides are fine (or were a few months ago, when I last examined them). My understanding is that there were massive improvements in the copy film made sometime in the late 1970s or early 1980s, but I don't remember the details. I hope you've still got the original negatives; those would produce better prints than the slides, anyhow, since the slides are copies. (At least, assuming you don't want a special "look," such as that produced by Ilfochrome.)

Good point, I think I have the original negatives stored in another file, I will see if can dig up them up and have them reprinted.

 

[ZorkiKat]

If you're saying that the slides made from the negatives were faded, then that has to do with the copy film, not the 5247 per se. I've heard the same thing about slides from ECN-2 films made in the 1970s; however, I've got a few rolls of ECN-2 film for which I had slides made in the mid-1980s, and those slides are fine (or were a few months ago, when I last examined them). My understanding is that there were massive improvements in the copy film made sometime in the late 1970s or early 1980s, but I don't remember the details. I hope you've still got the original negatives; those would produce better prints than the slides, anyhow, since the slides are copies. (At least, assuming you don't want a special "look," such as that produced by Ilfochrome.)

I think that those slides were printed on motion picture colour print stock, the material which runs in projectors in cinemas-not (colour) copy film- so they are more of prints than copies of slides. I have some of those too, dating from around 1972-74, from my granduncle's old slide boxes. These were pictures made during his US visits. Those slides (prints) look faded in the way that old release colour prints from that time are seen now. Mostly magenta mush.

The prints (on colour positive stock) you had made in the 1980s may look better because by then, colour release materials would have improved in terms of stability- or perhaps simply because the prints are younger.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

It is true that color release print stock for movies went through a drastic redesign to enhance its "fade resistance" by Kodak, resulting in "Low Fade Stock". IIRC, this occured in the early 1980's. So prints from negatives made before this time will exhibit major fade, prints (slides) made after this change should be much more stable.

PHOTOTONE