Film from Italy -- Ferrania starting production 2014

[Photo Engineer]

At one time, Kodak had at least 10 machines coating just color paper. These ran continuously around the clock. In Rochester there were 6 with 2 down for maintenance every month. IDK the schedules elsewhere. Film coating was in another building quite a good walk away. (at least it seemed so in winter)

There is a very good manufacturer of Estar support in England, but Ilford does not seem to use them (AFAIK). All of Jim Browning's Matrix film was coated on this support from (I believe) ICI.

As for thinking through, some of the costs and timelines seem optimistic to me, but then they know much more than I do about what is going on. But then, they only have about 2.5 months at this writing to complete their "promise".

PE

 

[ME Super]

To answer your question #3, they do have access to the recipes to make the emulsions. They are starting with a reengineered version of one of the most recent products manufactured, Scotch chrome 100. They have the recipes and the technical know-how, the Kickstarter campaign is to get them the money they need to save the rest of the equipment they need to be able to make film at a price that we, their potential customers, are willing to pay. They can make film now, but not in a big enough batch for the market.

 

[Nzoomed]

I believe Ferrania has one big thing that other businesses do not have and that is going to boost their E-6 sales as well: promise of commitment to film and the kind of "from film user to film user". Even if their chrome isn't as good as Fuji's many are going to buy from them. The movement to build a film factory "for the next 100 years" might even bring some new people to shoot color reversal. After all, now it's a "new thing" and for many people it really could be that they haven't shot slide film.

Not to mention that for color reversal motion picture film users there are no real options left. As for the number of those people, it has been interesting to note that there are people who say that they haven't ever shot super-8 or 16mm but now might try it.

It's almost like a revival sort of thing, brought about by new hope and enthusiasm.

Most people i know who are in their 30's dont even know what super8 film is!
I seem to be one of the few exceptions, but that was only because my father used to shoot the stuff, and even back then, most people were starting to use camcorders well and truly by the early 90's!

Anyway, my friends thought that my super8 camera was pretty cool!
We want to use it for filming snowboarding movies etc, should be a bit of fun.

On another sad note though, i gave my film camera (Olympus XA3) to a younger cousin of mine to take a photo of me, and he did not even know how to use it! He said he had never seen a camera like this before and didnt realise it was not digital! I had to explain to him how to wind it and press the red button to take the shot etc! lol

Hopefully this young generation will eventually pick up these old cameras and start using them as a novelty if nothing else, otherwise, film will die a slow death.

All i know is i had wiped film off the slate, and the media attention that Kodachrome received is what has got me into shooting film, ive missed out on Kodachrome, but at least i havnt missed out on E6, and im enjoying shooting it, im getting amazing photos that i never got from C41 film.
Although all i ever shot on my Nikon f401 was kodak MAX 400! lol It took good photos, but personally for me, i dont feel that shooting digital is alot different than most C41 print films (with the exception of portra and ektar perhaps)

 

[Roger Cole]

"Most C41 print films with the exception of Portra and Ektar???"

Ok, ok, Fuji makes Pro 400H and both Fuji and Kodak make consumer films, but I haven't shot any (newly made) color neg EXCEPT Portra or Ektar in many, many years - probably not since the 90s. I haven't shot any since getting back into photography in 2010. Oh, there was some frozen Optima 100 and Superia 120 in a batch of film I got off eBay and I shot it, and it works fine in spite of age (always frozen) but I've only bought Portra and Ektar as fresh film. They are pretty much are THE C41 films now.

On the other topics, it's sad to me how quickly people forget. A friend in her early 40s asked if I'd be making tintypes (well, not opposed to it, but that's what she thought as soon as I said film.) Even people plenty old enough to remember film seem to think it's gone and in some cases to have almost forgotten about it.

I certainly remember Super 8, but in this case I'm more on the other side of the fence. Given the low quality of that tiny frame and the cost of the films currently available I don't see any reason I'd want to get into that unless a) for a lark, AND b) the price of film came down a LOT. The current B&W films are cost prohibitive AND the quality is poor. It's an interesting flash back to yesteryear and I'm glad some people do it, ESPECIALLY if it means FF start making E6, but I admit to kind of scratching my head over the appeal.

 

[RattyMouse]

but personally for me, i dont feel that shooting digital is alot different than most C41 print films (with the exception of portra and ektar perhaps)

There's a lot to disagree with about this statement. You REALLY should get a hold of some Fuji 400H. It is an amazing film and one that I would put at the front of the line when it comes to beautiful, beautiful color.

 

[Nzoomed]

"Most C41 print films with the exception of Portra and Ektar???"

Ok, ok, Fuji makes Pro 400H and both Fuji and Kodak make consumer films, but I haven't shot any (newly made) color neg EXCEPT Portra or Ektar in many, many years - probably not since the 90s. I haven't shot any since getting back into photography in 2010. Oh, there was some frozen Optima 100 and Superia 120 in a batch of film I got off eBay and I shot it, and it works fine in spite of age (always frozen) but I've only bought Portra and Ektar as fresh film. They are pretty much are THE C41 films now.

On the other topics, it's sad to me how quickly people forget. A friend in her early 40s asked if I'd be making tintypes (well, not opposed to it, but that's what she thought as soon as I said film.) Even people plenty old enough to remember film seem to think it's gone and in some cases to have almost forgotten about it.

I certainly remember Super 8, but in this case I'm more on the other side of the fence. Given the low quality of that tiny frame and the cost of the films currently available I don't see any reason I'd want to get into that unless a) for a lark, AND b) the price of film came down a LOT. The current B&W films are cost prohibitive AND the quality is poor. It's an interesting flash back to yesteryear and I'm glad some people do it, ESPECIALLY if it means FF start making E6, but I admit to kind of scratching my head over the appeal.

Well im thinking of getting into shooting 16mm if i can find an affordable camera and i can find affordable processing. It certanly has better image quality over 8mm.

As far as what i said about C41 films, ive only ever shot consumer level films in the past, such as Kodak Gold or Kodak MAX and perhaps the odd bit of fuji, i may shoot some portra when i get a chance, but for me, they dont quite give the effect i would like. A few photographers seem to feel that shooting negative is similar to digital, probably mainly because of its qualities for making prints i expect.

 

[cmacd123]

To answer your question #3, they do have access to the recipes to make the emulsions.

In fact in one of their posts they even showed a notebook page with the formulas for preparing P30 B&W negative. not quite large enough to read of course. P30 is apparently an Iconic Product that was used in the great movies of the Italian Cinema. The ones with the likes of Sofia Loren. Ferrannia even sold it in Still rolls the 50s as "the same film used by Fellini".

 

[cmacd123]

How does the sprocket holes affect price? All film has them, 35mm has even larger ones.

you have to put them in. That takes a machine that punches 4 to 6 holes at a time, advances the film, and punches 4-6 more holes. ADOX.DE posted a video of their 35mm punch running. but there is a lot more punching in 50 feet of film than in the 5.5 feet of a 35mm roll.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo4piI1JaWA

To be fair, I understand that typically super 8 is made as Double super 8 out of 16mm sock and is slit later.

The super 8 cartridges are also a bit tricky to make, and many of the film re-perforating folks still buy them from Kodak. I don't know if our Italian friends have found the tooling to make super 8 cartridges in the ferrania plastics shop, and if they can get that to work. In fact they may have to find a lot of such hardware to make packaging for various formats if they don't want to depend on outside suppliers.

 

[cmacd123]

Ferrania have publicly stated that not only is their first product to be an ISO100 E-6 film, they also hope to follow that up within the first year of production with both a second ISO400 E-6 and a third ISO800-3200 E-6 films. This is undoubtedly a multimillion USD/GBP/EUR operation.
Why would they knowingly go down such a road if there was no market for E-6?

Remember that started this project because of the demise of 5285/7285.

That was a stock that Kodak started to provide to folks that were missing VNF. VNF (Video News Film) disappeared because its last major users - the automobile crash test folks were forced to go to digital.

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/TI2496.pdf

7285 then became the last standing movie film that you could shoot and show in a projector. It is/was also popular in shooting Music videos as the colours were more intense when scanned to video. And in super 8 it was used by Snowboarders and skateborders to shoot videos as the cameras were simpler to use than a video camera.

The current alternatives are to re-format some fuji slide film, or to use AVIPHOT CR200 which is on a polyester base and so cannot be edited easily.

The new Ferrania film was chosen to be as close to 7285 as practicle under the circumstance. and it makes sense for a small maker to also provide it fro still cameras while they are at it.

 

[AgX]

How does the sprocket holes affect price? All film has them, 35mm has even larger ones.
I thought the price would be affected by the total area of the film itself?

you have to put them in. That takes a machine that punches 4 to 6 holes at a time, advances the film, and punches 4-6 more holes.

Yes, and no.

The materials and labour used to make the area that covers the holes, the labour to punch them and the cost of handling the residues, minus the recycling gain, are all costs that are calculated into the basic cost of the film sold.

But once a customer is used to a certain price level a change in format with less holes yields a bit less costs for the manufacturer and thus a bit higher profits.



Nevertheless I do not understand this holes-discussion.

 

[spatz]

I just have one question for this discussion. On the old scotchchrome datasheet it says that the diffuse granularity of the film is rms13. I use Wittnerchrome 200d which is a stop faster and has an rms of 12. For 35mm this is quite grainy already and bordering on acceptable for me. Does anyone think that by re-engineering the film they will make it less grainy. Ive shot a fair bit of provia and astia (the latter having the finest grain at rms 7 i believe) and for me astia was the go to film because of its smooth and grain free tones. Perhaps people more knowledgeable then myself can shed light on the possibility of improving the granularity?

 

[madgardener]

It would all depend on how "true" they are to the original formula. If they totally re-engineered the film,I would thing that it would be reasonable to assume that the granularity would have been reduced, if they are trying toi stay with the original formula as much as possible, then I doubt that granularity would be reduced. It could also be the case that we will have to "put up" with something less than perfect, especially with this first run, and will get better stuff later as the kinks get worked out and they start making money and can improve their processes.

I would suggest contacting them directly and asking them. Ferrania seems to be really good about answering questions.

 

[ericdan]

Hopefully we'll reach the 250,000!

 

[pentaxuser]

I think if I were a slide film user and had got used to Fuji's resolution then while I might try Ferrania for a while, quality would draw me back to Fuji.

If Ferrania were the only slide film producer then maybe the "die-hards" would put up with the granularity but I suspect over the long term even they might graduate to colour neg

This then leaves the question of whether the hardcore slide film users would then represent a big enough market.

Certainly as long as Fuji make slide film then I feel Ferrania only has a very limited period to get the granularity down to Fuji levels.

pentaxuser

 

[Photo Engineer]

Did y'all forget sharpness? How about dye stability? Reciprocity? Keeping on dealer shelves? They may re-engineer, but all of these have to be checked out and some take a year or more of tests such as image stability and raw stock keeping. This would mean that a salable coating would have had to been made at least a year ago for proper testing before going out to be sold.

PE

 

[ericdan]

Gotta start somewhere.

 

[pdeeh]

Did y'all forget sharpness? How about dye stability? Reciprocity? Keeping on dealer shelves? They may re-engineer, but all of these have to be checked out and some take a year or more of tests such as image stability and raw stock keeping. This would mean that a salable coating would have had to been made at least a year ago for proper testing before going out to be sold.

PE

Stop cluttering up the thread with facts and manufacturing experience please Mr. M

 

[ME Super]

Stop cluttering up the thread with facts and manufacturing experience please Mr. M

I assume you're being scarcastic, pdeeh...

 

[Photo Engineer]

My statements were intended to be realistic comments about a product (or series of products) that are due to be in customer hands by the end of Dec. You will be paying for the evaluations if they have not been done already. Kind of like TIP.

And nothing bad is meant here. These are neutral comments as I have no information other than what you all have!

PE

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Nobody should be expecting Fuji-like quality out of the gate.

As I said somewhere else, Scotty is initially going to be beaming us back to the photographic 70s regarding E-6. Now I exposed lots of transparency film back in the 70s and I recall enjoying that experience immensely. So there's no reason not to expect a similarly enjoyable experience today.

If one is looking only for ultra-smooth, ultra-clinical perfection, then film in general is likely not for you. Film photographers revel in different palettes, renditions, and appearances. If one desires only clinical, there are other mature technologies at one's disposal. Or one can simply step up in format. Grain at 35mm largely becomes a non-issue at 6x7.

Do not make the mistake of allowing the perfect to become the enemy of the good.



Ken

 

[Xmas]

Nobody should be expecting Fuji-like quality out of the gate.

As I said somewhere else, Scotty is initially going to be beaming us back to the photographic 70s regarding E-6. Now I exposed lots of transparency film back in the 70s and I recall enjoying that experience immensely. So there's no reason not to expect a similarly enjoyable experience today.

If one is looking only for ultra-smooth, ultra-clinical perfection, then film in general is likely not for you. Film photographers revel in different palettes, renditions, and appearances. If one desires only clinical, there are other mature technologies at one's disposal. Or one can simply step up in format. Grain at 35mm largely becomes a non-issue at 6x7.

Do not make the mistake of allowing the perfect to become the enemy of the good.



Ken

2005 rather then 70s?

 

[pdeeh]

I assume you're being scarcastic, pdeeh...

perhaps a little gently irony was intended ... there is quite an excess of speculation (much of it uninformed by anything beyond hope and belief) in this thread - so a dose of reality from someone who actually knows what it takes to make film is rather welcome

As I said in another post, I hope they do well. But anyone who thinks that FF are going to be churning out dozens of different films to meet every broken-hearted yearning for things ending in -chrome in every format under the sun, and all by the new year, is likely riding for a fall.

 

[Xmas]

I think if I were a slide film user and had got used to Fuji's resolution then while I might try Ferrania for a while, quality would draw me back to Fuji.

If Ferrania were the only slide film producer then maybe the "die-hards" would put up with the granularity but I suspect over the long term even they might graduate to colour neg

This then leaves the question of whether the hardcore slide film users would then represent a big enough market.

Certainly as long as Fuji make slide film then I feel Ferrania only has a very limited period to get the granularity down to Fuji levels.

pentaxuser

well if you like Fuji that much all you need is fridge space for a life time supply.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

2005 rather then 70s?

If they can actually make it to market with THAT, I'll be doing backflips. Make no mistake, the odds are still heavily against this attempt coming to full fruition. There probably aren't enough zeros on the calculator to keep track of all of the obstacles they face.

But instead of just simply sitting on the sidelines and pissing and moaning about the end of E-6, they are actually trying to do something about it. For all of us. And that effort in itself, regardless of the final outcome, is worthy of praise and encouragement. And in my book a few dollars of support.

Ken

 

[Roger Cole]

Those of us shooting transparency for projection can tolerate a bit more graininess than if we intended to scan and print. If prints are the desired final product, I'll shoot C41.