Film Ferrania p30

[Ces1um]

Both terms refer to a given standard. A film contained in a box with such designation has to qualify to this.
This is a legal matter, not a historic one.

The ASA standard no longer exists. It became ANSI, was revised several times, and then eventually became iso. Essentially the box makes no claim of any currently enforced standard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#ASA

 

[faberryman]

The ASA standard no longer exists. It became ANSI, was revised several times, and then eventually became iso. Essentially the box makes no claim of any currently enforced standard.

As intended.

 

[Ces1um]

As intended.

For certain.

 

[AgX]

The ASA standard no longer exists.

If you refer to it, then the film must comply to that standard.

It does not matter if it still exists as prescribed standard.

The ISO standard for b&w film was even built 1974 upon the ASA standard.

 

[Ces1um]

The box doesn't, but the Ferrania website does. They probably should have just said EI80 instead of ISO. Not that it really matters.

Dead Link Removed

yeah- I see that on their website now. That should probably be changed to asa 80 or as you've suggested.

 

[Ces1um]

If you refer to it, then the film must comply to that standard.
It does not matter if it still exists as prescribed standard.
The ISO standard for b&w film was even built 1974 upon the ASA standard.

Are you sure of that legally? I'm just wondering where you got your facts from or if you have a background in these things? I don't ask this to be combative, but my wife often can get me to believe her side of an argument because she argues with such conviction. It's only later that I found out she was spouting nonsense. I've gotten into the habit of asking for proof. I realize I haven't offered any for my own position however. Still, I would think if the standard no longer exists, and the asa standard doesn't, then saying your product complies to such is meaningless. I understand that the asa became ansi and then rolled into iso, but they aren't claiming iso (at least not on their box. As Michael_r just pointed out though, they do on their website).

 

[AgX]

There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.

 

[Ces1um]

There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.

My point is it's not a standard anymore. It hasn't been since the 70's. The organization itself no longer exists but has become ANSI and ASA certifications are defunct. Saying you meet a criteria to a standard that is no longer enforced means nothing. It's like claiming you obey a law that no longer exists or that you're a resident of a country that no longer exists. Now their website clearly states 80 ISO- that's a whole other story. With that I agree with you.

 

[warden]

There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.

Is there an ISO standard for alpha and beta products in regards to black and white film speed determination? I would be surprised if there were. Does anyone here actually know, or are we just having fun making complaining noises? What does ISO 6:1993 say about alpha release products?

In the meantime Ferrania needs to test film and communicate its probable speed to the test market, and it seems utterly harmless to use "ISO80" as a guide for photographers analyzing and labs developing their pre-production film.

 

[Ces1um]

Is there an ISO standard for alpha and beta products in regards to black and white film speed determination? I would be surprised if there were. Does anyone here actually know, or are we just having fun making complaining noises? What does ISO 6:1993 say about alpha release products?

In the meantime Ferrania needs to test film and communicate its probable speed to the test market, and it seems utterly harmless to use "ISO80" as a guide for photographers analyzing and labs developing their pre-production film.

Probably having fun making complaining noises. I was.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.

As we have stated about 1000 times - and as anyone can see if they look at our Instagram, Facebook or website - nearly everyone is shooting the film at 80 ISO and loving their results.

Considering that most films listed as 400 ISO (for example) are actually somewhere between 320-360 ISO, I'm guessing that the regulations are not as stringent as you suggest.

If printing 80 ASA on our box lands us in EU court, I guess that will be just one more problem to add on to the already very large pile.

 

[trendland]

As we have stated about 1000 times - and as anyone can see if they look at our Instagram, Facebook or website - nearly everyone is shooting the film at 80 ISO and loving their results.

Considering that most films listed as 400 ISO (for example) are actually somewhere between 320-360 ISO, I'm guessing that the regulations are not as stringent as you suggest.

If printing 80 ASA on our box lands us in EU court, I guess that will be just one more problem to add on to the already very large pile.

You got it Film Ferrania many 400 ISO rated films actually have ISO 320 - 360.
SO I WOULD NOT CARE ABOUT IF I WOULD FIND OUT ISO 65 with your film.
And that's ok - I have no real messurements to do this ....
By the way I personally know two ISO 3200 films with a little more of actually
ISO 2000 - one of this films is discontinued. more than 1000 ISO
"points" behind the truth
So please don't be angry now.
I would like to see ASA standard again. ....by the way

with regards

 

[peter k.]

Hmmm.. you have to excuse me, ISO, Mice 0, ASO, so what!
Thank you Film Ferrania for a great .. ALPHA .. film, and giving us something to start with. Two thumbs up!
Like the film, and waiting to order some more as we only got three to start with.

 

[trendland]

Just a correction on this. The ISO criteria for determining emulsion speed are quite stringent. If a film is listed as ISO 400, it is ISO 400, not somewhere between 320-360. The fact some people find their personal EIs to be lower than 400 has nothing to do with the ISO speed being wrong or inaccurate. They are just targeting different criteria than the ISO standard specifies, and/or using different test methodologies. If a film has not been tested as set out in the standard, the speed should really be given the designation EI (exposure index).

Just trying to clarify what is meant by "ISO" for film speed from a sensitometric perspective. I'm definitely not a lawyer .

Just to make it clear : ISO is nothing different than ASA or DIN - perhaps I have missed some urgend infos years ago ?
ASA 50 films are "still" ASA 50 films to me - IF I remember 18 DIN. they still have 18DIN - and my camera allways call me : "feed me with 18DIN. I am hungry - nevertheless they are rated with ISO 50 that's it. ISO give both classifications in one formula from my example with Pan F : ISO 50/18 ..... so ISO is not the biggest "deal" am I correct or am I correct?

with regards

PS : Hope I give not "oil" in this fire now

 

[trendland]

Sorry but this statement makes no sense if you understand how film speed is determined. It's a non sequitur.

....don't be particulary confused from this statement - because I am ALLWAYS
"non sequitur" ....what ever this means

with regards
PS : Volkswagen's "clean diesel" are still clean today because volkswagen rated them as clean under control of official authoritys from your logic.
Since officials find out they are liars it isn't rated as clean. After so many years!!
Produktion tollerances of less % are total normal. But not in case of volkswagen as we all find out.

 

[trendland]

Hmmm.. you have to excuse me, ISO, Mice 0, ASO, so what!
Thank you Film Ferrania for a great .. ALPHA .. film, and giving us something to start with. Two thumbs up!
Like the film, and waiting to order some more as we only got three to start with.

+ 1
what has the rated filmspeed to say IF my camera adjustments are "wrong" to 5 stops".....many times this has happened to me in the very past

with regards

 

[Ces1um]

The ISO arithmetic speed is determined from:

S=0.8lx⋅sHm

This value is then rounded to the nearest standard speed in Table 1 of ISO 6:1993.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Current_system:_ISO

So this means that all films that say they are a specific iso are not in the strictest sense their specified iso. The iso that they are labelled is simply the closest standard number to the actual value obtained from the calculation. Since the next slowest standard iso is 64 and higher is 100, then p30 may be allowed to be anywhere between 72 iso and 90 iso and still be in full compliance with the strict letter of the law.

All this is meaningless really though and I really don't care. I just like the film a lot. I think it produces beautiful results. It processes fine in my dental xray chemicals using my xray processor when shot at box speed where the entire cycle from development through fixing, washing and drying only takes 4 minutes. In my unique situation all is good.

 

[Scott Micciche]

This next roll recipe comes from Tom Sebastiano and his use of Tetenal's Paranol S. 1:50 14 minutes @ 20C, 30s initial agitation, 10s/minute thereafter.

These were shot with a recently-serviced 1971 Nikon F2 with various Nikkor lenses in a combination of soft light and direct sunlight. Scanned in a Pakon F135 to linear and inverted using colorperfect. No contrast, brightness, etc. adjustments have been made. Box speed.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/thekurgan/albums/72157663799161567

Sorry for the link, images seem too large to upload here.

 

[Ces1um]

This next roll recipe comes from Tom Sebastiano and his use of Tetenal's Paranol S. 1:50 14 minutes @ 20C, 30s initial agitation, 10s/minute thereafter.

These were shot with a recently-serviced 1971 Nikon F2 with various Nikkor lenses in a combination of soft light and direct sunlight. Scanned in a Pakon F135 to linear and inverted using colorperfect. No contrast, brightness, etc. adjustments have been made. Box speed.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/thekurgan/albums/72157663799161567

Sorry for the link, images seem too large to upload here.

They look great! I especially like the shot of the open/close toggle switches.

 

[Scott Micciche]

They look great! I especially like the shot of the open/close toggle switches.

Thank you. I'm really impressed with this developer. I've never used Paranol S, which has some similarity to Rodinal. I plan to use it with some Rollei Retro 80s as well.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Just to make it clear : ISO is nothing different than ASA or DIN - perhaps I have missed some urgend infos years ago ?
ASA 50 films are "still" ASA 50 films to me - IF I remember 18 DIN. they still have 18DIN - and my camera allways call me : "feed me with 18DIN. I am hungry - nevertheless they are rated with ISO 50 that's it. ISO give both classifications in one formula from my example with Pan F : ISO 50/18 ..... so ISO is not the biggest "deal" am I correct or am I correct?

with regards

PS : Hope I give not "oil" in this fire now

There is an important difference between the ISO standard and the ASA and DIN standards. The latter two methods require that speed be determined using a spcific developer while the ISO method allows the manufacrurer to use any developer.

 

[Don Harpold]

Hello
Here are a few from the latest roll, these shot in a Canon P with a 50mm 1.8 Canon lens and developed in PyrocatHD
Half were shot at 80 and the other half 40.
I have ordered some Paranol S to try as I liked the results shown, I will also try a stand develop with Rodinal as well

Here is a link to the album on Flickr for all the photos from this roll.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmfESMDR

Ore cart at 40iso

Old church building at 40iso

Market at 80iso

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Hello
Here are a few from the latest roll, these shot in a Canon P with a 50mm 1.8 Canon lens and developed in PyrocatHD
Half were shot at 80 and the other half 40.
I have ordered some Paranol S to try as I liked the results shown, I will also try a stand develop with Rodinal as well

Here is a link to the album on Flickr for all the photos from this roll.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmfESMDR

Ore cart at 40iso
View attachment 195720

Old church building at 40iso
View attachment 195721

Market at 80iso
View attachment 195722

These all look great to my eye, Don! Further support of the notion that processing matters more than the ISO used to shoot them.

 

[faberryman]

Further support of the notion that processing matters more than the ISO used to shoot them.

One is not more important than another. ISO speed is dependent on, indeed determined by, the processing. That's why the manufacturer is allowed to chooses the developer and processing parameters to ascertain ISO. You would think a film manufacturer would understand that.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Sorry but this statement makes no sense if you understand how film speed is determined. It's a non sequitur.

Fair enough Michael. I do not pretend to be a scientist. Those folks are employed in the factory.

I was restating anecdotal information I've read many times from many different sources, which I should know by now is silly to do in this forum.

This entire debate of the "actual" ISO of P30 film, is, however, quite ridiculous in light of the many thousands of photos we have seen shot at 80.