Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

[AgX]

Kodak made an ECP that was for theater projection...

Now, both Kodak and Fuji make 2 versions. One is for projection and one is archival.

Fuji cancelled all their cine colour films some years ago.

They only make one cine B&W film, intended for archiving colour-seperations.

 

[railwayman3]

No, the "AgfaPhoto" Version is made by Fuji.

And there still is the last stock of true Agfa reversal film.

You are correct, I should have said AgfaPhoto.

Presumably any remaining stock of the true Agfa (Leverkusen, Agfa-Gevaert?) reversal film will be well out of date by now ?

 

[MartinP]

There were two internegative films (in sheets), one for negatives from Kodachromes, and the other for negatives from all other types of slides/transparencies, as well as for use in copying flat art work. Both types required accurate colour balancing using off-easel densitometry, as well as accurate and stable C-41 processing. For slides from negatives, the film of choice was Vericolor Slide Film 5072, or the sheet film version. For slides from prints, the usual procedure in the labs I worked in was to copy them on Ektachrome EPN or sometimes Ektachrome Duplicating film, 35mm or sheets.

We also used to use internegs and RA4, rather than R-type or Ciba, as well. I don't recall many (any?) complaints about the results, so that route certainly worked and was a popular service. So far as I recall, it was mostly done by eye with standardised viewing and procedures. The C41 and E6 lines and the Colentas were very tightly controlled. It was always one of the best scores in the region in Q-Lab (or maybe the Kodak reps told that to every lab?). And I apologise for being imprecise; when I wrote slides from prints I meant slides from C41 negs.

Edit: This was back in the 1980s, in UK.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Fuji cancelled all their cine colour films some years ago.

They only make one cine B&W film, intended for archiving colour-seperations.

It was my understanding that they still made some of the archival color print film, but I may have mistaken that for the B&W film.

PE

 

[AgX]

Presumably any remaining stock of the true Agfa (Leverkusen, Agfa-Gevaert?) reversal film will be well out of date by now ?

It was coated in Mortsel. But Agfa stopped production some time ago. What is sold now is remaining stock out of their warehouse.

 

[cmacd123]

It was coated in Mortsel. But Agfa stopped production some time ago. What is sold now is remaining stock out of their warehouse.

The Agfa Aviphot 200d was made in Morsel Belgum. It is apparently discontinued from the AGFA materials site. . although the stock is still selling. Rollei / Maco said when they started selling it as "Digibase" that it was for scanning and many other folks have agreed. The Leverkusen plant is gone, gone, gone for years now. That is where slide film for still use would have come from in the old days. (indeed where any Agfa Made Film for still use would have come from, Morsel concentrating on Industrial applications.

The folks who now control the AgfaPhoto trademark sell a Japanese made transparency film these days but they are worlds away from the old AGFA empire.

 

[Nzoomed]

Kodak made an ECP that was for theater projection and which was intended for short term use only. It had a low level of dye stability technology for dark keeping and only some for light stability due to the need for projection.

Now, both Kodak and Fuji make 2 versions. One is for projection and one is archival.

PE

I didnt know that Kodak had an archival version.

All i do know is starting from 1980, Kodak "fixed" their eastmancolour film stock fading problem and all the films are marked as LPP from that date on, they dropped the LPP marking a few years ago now, but essentially is what kodak vision is based on and is all what i assume is "archival" and we are talking about films only for theatere use here too.

Ive got a few 16mm films marked lpp from around 1980 and the colour is perfect.

 

[cmacd123]

I didnt know that Kodak had an archival version.

All i do know is starting from 1980, Kodak "fixed" their eastmancolour film stock fading problem and all the films are marked as LPP from that date on, they dropped the LPP marking a few years ago now, but essentially is what kodak vision is based on and is all what i assume is "archival" .

The one remaining Kodak movie print film is 2383/3383. Quoting from the data sheet: ( http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motio...bition/Color_Print_Film_2383_3383/default.htm )

Storage of Processed Prints
KODAK VISION Color Print Film / 2383/3383 has excellent image stability characteristics, very similar to 2386, 3386 Film. While prints are not usually intended as permanent records, Kodak recognizes the importance of good image stability. (Pre-print materials are the primary films intended for long-term storage, since new prints or video transfers can be made from them.) Even though most theatrical release prints spend a relatively short time in release before being deliberately destroyed, some prints find use in other markets, or are re-released years later. Museums and film archives usually do not have access to pre-print materials, so prints constitute the bulk of their collections.

Predictive dark-keeping image stability testing using the Arrhenius method (accelerated fading at high temperatures, extrapolated to predict the rate of fading at lower temperatures) shows that even after several decades of storage at room temperature and 50% relative humidity, properly processed prints made on 2383/3383 Film will show less than 10 percent image dye density loss. Of course, actual image and support stability depend upon the processing conditions, storage conditions, and other factors beyond the control of Kodak. Since color dyes may change over time, color films will not be replaced for, or otherwise warranted against, any change in color.

Store processed prints according to the recommendations in standard ANSI IT9.11-1992. SMPTE Recommended Practice RP 131-1994 also contains recommendations for proper film storage. For short-term "active" storage and projection (e.g., commercial film exchanges and theatres), room temperature of 20 to 25°C (68 to 77°F) at 50 to 60 percent relative humidity is recommended. Avoid prolonged unconditioned storage at high temperatures or excessive humidity. For medium-term storage, store at 10°C (50°F) or lower, at a relative humidity of 20 to 30 percent. For extended-term storage (for preservation of material having permanent value), store at 2°C (36°F) or lower, at a relative humidity of 20 to 30 percent. Enclosed long-term storage (i.e., sealed cans) will benefit by the use of Molecular Sieves in the storage container. Molecular Sieves are available from FPC (A Kodak Company), 6677 Santa Monica Boulevard, Hollywood, CA, 90038, Telephone (213) 468-5774.

Additional information on the proper storage and handling of processed film is contained in KODAK Publication No.H-23, The Book of Film Care .

 

[Nzoomed]

The one remaining Kodak movie print film is 2383/3383. Quoting from the data sheet: ( http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motio...bition/Color_Print_Film_2383_3383/default.htm )

Yeah, that seems to be along the lines i was thinking.

I think thats why they fixed it around 1980. I dont think Kodak at the time were worring about image stability with colour print films and the movie studios at the time did not worry either, they just wanted something cheap for prints, and at the same time there was no effort to restore or preserve feature films until some decades later when the problems were apparent.

Thats why technicolor films are so much easier to restore.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak was always concerned about image stability in all of its aspects and each product kept charts of ongoing improvements in image stability. It is not until more recent years that technology in organic chemistry allowed significant advances in the stability of azomethine dyes, the kinds used in all color products that are on the market today.

PE

 

[kb3lms]

"..and projection stock - that Kodak still produces"

I thought we were told that virtually all projection is digital today. How much projection stock can they possibly still make?

 

[cmacd123]

"..and projection stock - that Kodak still produces"
How much projection stock can they possibly still make?

well there were 100 Road show 70mm prints of "The Hateful eight" Since that is 5 perf it takes 5/4 as much film length as a 35mm print, and of course twice the film width (ignoring perforation loss and the like)

 

[cmacd123]

It was my understanding that they still made some of the archival color print film, but I may have mistaken that for the B&W film.

I wonder if you are thinking of Kodak Asset protection film, supposed to be ultra stable, ECP2 process with BH1866 Perfs. Idea was to make a protection print on that film and sore it away, with th eintention of scanning the print if and when you could not use the digital file. Think it was only in the line for less than two or three years.

 

[RattyMouse]

Hard to believe that we are almost through the first quarter of 2016 and still nothing from Ferrania. Perhaps by end of Q 2?

 

[Prest_400]

Hard to believe that we are almost through the first quarter of 2016 and still nothing from Ferrania. Perhaps by end of Q 2?

I remember Dave holding on updates until it was something important. It's been a month since they fired up the factory and a bit more since the last update. I don't know how the production schedule takes.
I recall during some discussion about B38, PE mentioned that preparations took quite some time whereas coating was rather brief in comparison. Perhaps production will be at a late stage around May?

 

[Roger Cole]

Fundamental rule of thumb: everything takes longer and costs more than you expect at first, even when you take this rule into account in your initial estimate!

 

[kb3lms]

A friend of mine (RIP) used to say for any home project to figure out the amount of time you'd think it would take, then double that and add 3 days. He claimed the 3 days was a constant....

Maybe this is the same?

 

[Roger Cole]

Could be, dunno.

I backed the Travelwide and got my camera, glad I waited. It was only about two years overdue.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'm looking at some old projects of mine and I find that it took weeks for the prep (1 week for each emulsion, each dispersion and then the final prep took 4 hours in the AM and about 1 hour to coat 1000 feet in the PM. This 1 hour included filtration and vacuum treatment for bubbles. So, for production, all of the prep would be about the same due to having more than one worker on the job and the coating would coat 1000 feet in 1 minute.

But before you commit, a small sample is coated and tested, or analyses are made to check on performance.

Then a week for testing the final coating.

So, say a month from the day R&D or the Pilot group says "go" you can have the final coating. Now it goes to slitting, perfing and packaging!!!!

PE

 

[cmacd123]

But before you commit, a small sample is coated and tested, or analyses are made to check on perfoormanc.

So, say a month from the day R&D or the Pilot group says "go" you can have the final coating. Now it goes to slitting, perfing and packaging!!!!
PE

here of course they are doing the coating on the same machine as the final, so they may be doing the same thing twice, once in a small batch and then making a bigger batch for the actual "first run"

recall too that before the asbestos, they had found that many of their ingredients were past date and they had been doing lab grade batches of upgrading and purifying the good stuff from the broken down stuff. to make fresh ingredients. Being shut down for an extended time, that work will likely have to be repeated 100% before they can even think of getting out the emulsion kettles.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I was commenting only from my POV and my experience, not theirs.

However, yes, you are right. Most organic chemicals deteriorate over time. So, they may have quite a few of these pilot runs ahead of them before they do the final one. BTDT.

PE

 

[cmacd123]

Anyway, I found a Ferrania Core, now I just need the film to go with it.

Antique 16mm Ferrania Core. SAM_2114CROP

• cmacd123
• Mar 21, 2016

waiting for film to go with this...

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, don't hold your breath, and that is not a comment on them, it is a comment on the complexity of the issues they face.

PE

 

[alanrockwood]

I had a friend who used to manage projects, and he would use the theory of pi. You make your best estimate of how long a project will take. Then you multiply by pi (approximately 3.14). According to him the result is usually pretty close to the actual time required for the project.

 

[Prest_400]

Well, don't hold your breath, and that is not a comment on them, it is a comment on the complexity of the issues they face.

PE

You often kept a reality check about it back when there were proposals of Kodachrome manufacturing in barns.
I Keep positive. Slow, but progressing, is quite good.