Film Ferrania p30

[MattKing]

"Cinema quality" may very well refer to predictability and consistency.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I took "cinema quality" to mean rendition of tones and contrast. Since seeing "Otto e Mezzo", I've tried to get the tonal qualities of the motion picture film in the P30 still film.

 

[JWMster]

Some very fine shots on the F'n film, Scott. Nice work. I'd sure love to give it a whirl. Feel like this is the longest, most extended "tease" ever. FWIW, it's working... and yet... it's definitely time to put up or shut up.... i.e. make with the film. "Soon" after months is like well.... waiting for the paint to dry.

One thing I'm not hearing much about is the extent to which the caution against motor film drives has been tested. Anyone with experience?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I took "cinema quality" to mean rendition of tones and contrast. Since seeing "Otto e Mezzo", I've tried to get the tonal qualities of the motion picture film in the P30 still film.

When you look at a motion picture you are looking a a positive print. So the 'look' is created by the positive stock and not the negative film.In other words the gamma of the negative must be matched to the H&D curve of the positive medium whether it be film or paper. AA in The Print discusses what is involved in the process.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

That's probably why Ferrania p30 is a high contrast film

Actually no. If you were to shoot P30 to print on high contrast positive stock (to make a film) then the P30 would be developed to a lower gamma than if you were using it as a still film. It is the positive stock that is controlling things.

 

[MattKing]

That's probably why Ferrania p30 is a high contrast film

More likely that it would be a lower contrast film (in a motion picture developer).
Because cinema films are (were) designed to be printed on to film, not paper.

 

[Scott Micciche]

When you look at a motion picture you are looking a a positive print. So the 'look' is created by the positive stock and not the negative film.In other words the gamma of the negative must be matched to the H&D curve of the positive medium whether it be film or paper. AA in The Print discusses what is involved in the process.

It looks nice printed on grade 2 paper, but yes I see what you mean regarding the positive.

 

[afriman]

Cinema "look" or "quality" is a rather vague term. Various cinematographers and directors developed their own "look" in terms of qualities like grain, contrast and tonality. I take "cinema quality" to be more of a marketing gimmick than anything else, the implication being because it was the choice of some big names in the movie industry, it must be good.

 

[JWMster]

Agree with the nebulosity (is that a word?) of the term "cinema quality"... and the fact that in fact it implies the film may be missing something for "stills". Suggest that as a complimentary term, perhaps the intention is to imply that it is being used by photographers more attuned to the lighting of their subjects.... in complimentary ways... than those shots that are not described in this way. Cinema to me implies a whole set full of lighting folks who really know their business and can get it right... a studio quality... often not found in naturally lit scenes EXCEPT for the keen eyed.

 

[DaveTheWalker]

In this case, I think all that Film Ferrania mean is that they are aiming to produce film of a standard (consistency, quality, manufacturing tolerances) that would allow it to be used in cinema work. The limiting factor at the moment is, I believe, the perforation and slitting tolerances.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Some very fine shots on the F'n film, Scott. Nice work. I'd sure love to give it a whirl. Feel like this is the longest, most extended "tease" ever. FWIW, it's working... and yet... it's definitely time to put up or shut up.... i.e. make with the film. "Soon" after months is like well.... waiting for the paint to dry.

One thing I'm not hearing much about is the extent to which the caution against motor film drives has been tested. Anyone with experience?

I usually use my F2 but it was sent to Sover Wong for CLA and enhancements, so I've been using the F6. I've not experienced anything related to the motor drive in 5 rolls, but I wouldn't in a pro-level camera. Some of the older point and shoot cameras can be abusive on the rewind so maybe there were some negative effects using those.

 

[tih]

Agree with the nebulosity (is that a word?)

Has been at least since 1761, according to Webster.

 

[JWMster]

Scott: That's encouraging. With a Leica M4-2 or Contax S2 - no problem. I'm a tad concerned about 120 film (when and if that ever happens) in my Rollei SLX.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Seeing this adjective fills me with an irrational desire to buy this product, or find some other product that fits this description. Yet I am not even sure what it means...is this essentially just a marketing term, or are there specific characterics you look for? Are there any black and white films on the market which are not sold to the motion picture industry, yet exhibit "cinema-quality"? Apologies if this was addressed earlier in the thread, but it is very long.

It's not a marketing term. "Cinema-quality" means that we can take essentially the same film we make for stills, slit it to cinema formats and run it through a movie camera at speed. Many of the requirements for cinema-grade film (at least in our factory) are higher than those for still films - but we really cannot think about making the "same" film twice. If we coat a miniJumbo of film, we want to know that we can slit it for stills OR cinema. Of course, not all speeds of film are suitable for cinema, and that may affect the production in minor ways. But if our entire workflow is set up to produce cinema-grade films, it does make it easier to take film that would normally be waste and produce 16mm or Super 8 products.

 

[JWMster]

Jack: Thanks! Any chance we might see Ferrania available in 1st or 2nd quarter 2018? 35mm AND 120?

 

[FILM Ferrania]

You'd think that if it was an impressive number, they would want to let their backers know how well they are doing. Their secrecy, however, leads me to believe that their success was quite modest, and they want to keep that information from their backers for fear of loss of support.

We've given up trying to control what people lead themselves to believe.
People who for whatever reason want to see us as "The Bad Guy" seem to come up with all manner of nefarious reasons for what we do or don't do - none of which have any relationship with reality.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

One thing I'm not hearing much about is the extent to which the caution against motor film drives has been tested. Anyone with experience?

We opted to be overly cautious and suggest that people do not use motor-driven cameras if possible.

Our earliest testers in Italy had a few minor issues with film breakage in motor-driven point-and-shoot cameras. One or two people (as best I know) have reported that their motor-driven pro SLRs have broken the film.

At best, this is an outlier of a problem. But with people only being allowed to purchase 5 rolls at a time, we thought it was best to say no motor-driven cameras - just to be safe.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Cinema "look" or "quality" is a rather vague term. Various cinematographers and directors developed their own "look" in terms of qualities like grain, contrast and tonality. I take "cinema quality" to be more of a marketing gimmick than anything else, the implication being because it was the choice of some big names in the movie industry, it must be good.

In terms of our founders and factory team, "cinema-quality" is a single term that defines a series of specifications concerning our ability to produce ONE coated miniJumbo that can be cut for both still and cinema use.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

That's probably why Ferrania p30 is a high contrast film

P30 is not inherently a high contrast film. However, many developers and techniques produce a high contrast result. Dip-and-dunk machine processing, especially, tends to produce a higher contrast image than in small-tank processors.

I have been working closely with Scott Micciche to hammer out some repeatable small-tank techniques using just a few select developers that yield what we at FILM Ferrania agree to be an "ideal" P30 image.

That said, many people actually like the high contrast images produced in other developers, so we're going to speak to this as well.

We will address this in our next version of the Best Practices document.

 

[jack straw]

It's not a marketing term. "Cinema-quality" means that we can take essentially the same film we make for stills, slit it to cinema formats and run it through a movie camera at speed. Many of the requirements for cinema-grade film (at least in our factory) are higher than those for still films - but we really cannot think about making the "same" film twice. If we coat a miniJumbo of film, we want to know that we can slit it for stills OR cinema. Of course, not all speeds of film are suitable for cinema, and that may affect the production in minor ways. But if our entire workflow is set up to produce cinema-grade films, it does make it easier to take film that would normally be waste and produce 16mm or Super 8 products.

Interesting—thank you! Unfortunately, this does nothing to quash the image in my head that all my photos will look like Chinatown or Citizen Kane.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Interesting—thank you! Unfortunately, this does nothing to quash the image in my head that all my photos will look like Chinatown or Citizen Kane.

+1000

 

[jonasfj]

P30 is not inherently a high contrast film. However, many developers and techniques produce a high contrast result. Dip-and-dunk machine processing, especially, tends to produce a higher contrast image than in small-tank processors.

I have been working closely with Scott Micciche to hammer out some repeatable small-tank techniques using just a few select developers that yield what we at FILM Ferrania agree to be an "ideal" P30 image.

That said, many people actually like the high contrast images produced in other developers, so we're going to speak to this as well.

We will address this in our next version of the Best Practices document.

There is no such thing as a high or low contrast film. The contrast is controlled by exposure and development. The characteristic curve can be tailored to have different slopes and different width.

 

[jonasfj]

Problem is, for a film to be succesful, that the film can be developed with satisfaction in all developers available. That is, I doubt Ferrania P3' will be succesful if it doens't yield good results in Kodak X-Tol, Hc110, DD-X or Ilford equivalents.

I do not see any reason why the P30 could not be developed in any of the developers you mention. It is just a matter of finding the right combination of exposure and development, i.e. ISO and development time/temperature/procedure.

All black and white film works by the same principle (with the obvious exception of Ilford XP2 Super).

The emulsion contain crystalline grains of Silverhalide salt. These grains are sensitive to light and with the right exposure you can create a latent image on the film. The developer reduced the Silverhalide to Silver. The grains hit by light are reduced more rapidly than the unaffected grains. By finding a certain combination of time, temperature, concentration, agitation etc. you will only (or mostly) reduce the Silverhalide hit by light. The fixer finally dissolves all Silverhalides, leaving only Silver on the film.

The Silverhalides can be sensitized, i.e. coated by dies (you may compare to putting a colored filter on your lens), to make them react differently to light of different colors.

During crystallization, the Silverhalides can be doped so that the grains grow in to tabular grains instead of equiaxed grains, to save cost by reducing the Silver required.

The manufacturer can labor with the grain sizes, grain density, coating, sensitizing etc. to give the film different characteristics, i.e. different speed and appearance of grain.

The user can modify the characteristic curve to a certain extent by exposure and developent. Thus, you can make the negative flat or contrasty. It has nothing to do with choice of film.

The goal, as any zone system man knows, is to fit the dynamic range of the subject onto you negative, to get the maximum amount of detail in both shadows and highlights. The artistic choice of contrast is done during printing.

To summarize, anything that can reduce the Silverhalides into Silver will work for P30 as for any other film.

Cheers,

Jonsa

 

[jonasfj]

As a customer, If I'm forced to buy another developer on the list just because Ferrania P30 can be satisfacto


With this in mind try to develop CMS20 with Kodak d76 and then tell me if you succeed in doing a good job.

Ok, Ilford XP2 Super and CMS20 (and probably some other Adox films) are working according to a different principle. Thank you for pointing this out!

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Problem is, for a film to be succesful, that the film can be developed with satisfaction in all developers available. That is, I doubt Ferrania P3' will be succesful if it doens't yield good results in Kodak X-Tol, Hc110, DD-X or Ilford equivalents.

"Successful" is an open-ended and subjective term. For us, success for any individual product has a much lower bar than for larger manufacturers. If we sell 200K rolls of P30 in a given year, that would be a solid success for us, but an utter failure for larger manufacturers.

We do not expect that P30 will ever be ideal for ALL developers, and we do not agree that success is determined by the number of developers you can use to process the film.

If this proves to be a hinderance to sales - so be it, but most people are willing to follow our Best Practices, even if we do not recommend their favorite developer.

Where possible, we are working with labs to "dial in" a technique that works with their equipment and chemistry of choice. For example, The Darkroom uses DD-X exclusively and they have arrived at a good set of parameters for P30. We have worked with Richard Photo Lab to develop a technique for their customized dip-and-dunk machine using XTOL. I've been speaking with a lab in Australia that uses T-Max and I'm hoping that soon we can work out a good technique for that chemistry as well. And many other labs have simply taken our Best Practices and adapted the provided information to their environment with great success.

And like I've said, we are working with Scott Micciche to nail down a few specific developers (HC-110 and Ilfosol 3 included) that yield what we consider to be "ideal" P30 results in small tanks. We are nearly done and I'll be publishing an updated Best Practices document very soon.

The real truth in all of this is that people have processed the film in nearly every available chemistry and lab environment and the vast majority really love the images, regardless of the contrast level. Some like them extremely contrasty, as we see when the film is processed in "rapid" (our team calls them "aggressive") developers or developers designed to enhance contrast. Others follow our suggestions and get images with the wide gamut we consider to be "correct" for P30.

And P30 is not the end of the road for us. It's just the beginning - and still in ALPHA, I'll remind you. We are not banking the future of our company on such a "specialty" film.

We are also working on a 320 ASA film (P36 was the historical name) that we hope to be more of a "general purpose" film that works well in a wider variety of photographic and lab situations.

In the end, we are simply not willing to bend the product so much that the character is lost - even if that means that someone's favorite B&W developer concoction doesn't work as well as others.