Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

[Nzoomed]

If you read the data sheets for the currently available movie films for Black and white they tend to have an antistatic /lubrication layer on the back. But that is clear as B&W processes (as explained in Module 15 of the kodak manuals) don't have the spray arms and such that REM-JET would require. " BASE EASTMAN DOUBLE-X Negative Film has a gray acetate safety base. The backside of the base contains an anti-static layer with lubricant. " and "The N 74 plus is a marked advance over its predecessor, thanks to improved slippage,extremely low shedding and excellent antistatic qualities. {antistatic back layer}

"

OK, so i assume then that Kodak only considered the need for rem-jet by the time they were introducing colour films?
I guess that the motion picture labs would not have wanted the hassle of upgrading the machines for remjet removal, so Kodak never added it to B&W film?

 

[Berri]

Scotch chrome wasn't paticularly good, the dyes fade with time. David, can you tell us if the new film will have a better formulation with more stable dyes than the older one?

 

[FILM Ferrania]

The big coater ("big boy") was so huge, soooo huge (i guess Over 9000 square meters), that you would think that the head of the coater at the LRF should be designed in such a way to be identical to the one in the Big Boy, but with a far smaller width. I mean, the LRF coaters must have been built (1965?) with an intentional similarity to the Big Boy coater, in a way that an emulsion tested in the LRF is easy to be 'translated' to the Big Boy.

I mean, if an emulsion is tested to work great in the LRF, and then it can't be translated "as-is", or with predictable tweaks to the Big Boy, then the costs of final testing in Big Boy itself would be huge.

I will wait for Photo Engineer to enlighten us on this topic.

The LRF was designed and built by 3M to produce products that could be transferred as directly as possible to the big coater. And it's my understanding that Big Boy was changed slightly (in what way, I do not know) in the early 80s to facilitate this further.
This is the entire depth of my knowledge about this topic - but this info came from Marco, who knows more about the LRF, as a whole, than even some of our people who worked there for 20 years.

 

[Nzoomed]

My bad on the rem jet. I was extrapolating from Nicola telling me that P30 ALPHA 35mm is "not ready for cinema usage".

I'm prone to extrapolation from minimal input, and in the heat of a live video stream, I obviously said a few things that are not technically correct, even if they are correct "in spirit"...

Thats sweet, so now that its clarified that rem-jet is no issue for motion picture use, I expect it

Scotch chrome wasn't paticularly good, the dyes fade with time. David, can you tell us if the new film will have a better formulation with more stable dyes than the older one?

I think you are getting confused with the old scotchchrome of the 1970's. The modern stuff that was made in the 90's to early 2000's was great!

 

[cmacd123]

I did point out that D96 is much better. Marco has been insisting that it is THE chemistry that should be used to process P30. But that's because he can buy it with no problem through his cinema lab in Florence.

the formulas are related but slightly different:

INgredient D76 D96

Metol (Elon) 2g 1.5g
Sodium Sufite 100g 75g
Hydroquinone 5g 1.5g
Pot bromide 0g 0.4g
borax 2g 4.5g

(both given for 1 litre) The Photo chemists in the group can probably explain to us mere mortals the photgraphic effects of the differences. the 96 has less overall developing agent and more restrainer, But more Borax which I understand acts as both the alkali and a PH buffer.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

C41 is off the map at the moment and there was no talk about it. Solaris was the last Film Ferrania made (in the large coater) but perhaps the Scotchrome was the last that the LRF made, thus the formulation -> production differs. This was briefly talked about, how they have a book of products that were made in LRF.

I think the main reason that Scotchchrome was chosen was because there are already tons of negative C41 films on the market, but at the time Film Ferrania got started, Kodak had recently stopped production of Ektachrome and an E6 film was the logical choice, even with the return of Ektachrome, E6 film has the biggest gap in the market.

Both reasons are true. Scotchchrome was the last film produced in the LRF. Solaris was made only on the big coater for a few more years after the LRF was closed - primarily to fill existing contracts.
AND we chose to produce a new chrome because it is still the least-represented film in the market, especially in cinema.

 

[MattKing]

OK, so i assume then that Kodak only considered the need for rem-jet by the time they were introducing colour films?
I guess that the motion picture labs would not have wanted the hassle of upgrading the machines for remjet removal, so Kodak never added it to B&W film?

I think that it was sort of the other way around.
Rem-jet was necessary for the early movie films. It remains the most effective way to prevent halation and static build-up. It is a preferred choice for commercial movie film.
Replacing it with other options is a compromise.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Scotch chrome wasn't paticularly good, the dyes fade with time. David, can you tell us if the new film will have a better formulation with more stable dyes than the older one?

This is the first time I've seen anyone mention that Scotchchrome dyes fade... But it's somewhat irrelevant at this point. We are not making Scotchchrome. This was only possible during our narrow 2015 window. We are creating a new formula using Scotchchrome as a "basis of comparison" and to compress some of the R&D.

Everything we make will be tested for longevity (we have the proper equipment), but even these "rapid aging"/stress-test machines need time to yield proper results. Our focus at the moment is to simply understand shelf-life and then we can turn our attention to more long-term stability tests.

P30 ALPHA has certainly not undergone the full battery of testing. It would take a year or more to know every last tiny detail and we simply cannot wait another year. This is why we are releasing it as an ALPHA - and we are trying to be completely clear about this.

 

[Nzoomed]

This is the first time I've seen anyone mention that Scotchchrome dyes fade... But it's somewhat irrelevant at this point. We are not making Scotchchrome. This was only possible during our narrow 2015 window. We are creating a new formula using Scotchchrome as a "basis of comparison" and to compress some of the R&D.

I dont believe ScotchChrome had fading issues, I think the poster was getting confused with the 3M film of the 1970's.
As far as this film goes, I never actually even believed that the original Kickstarter batch was going to be the exact ScotchChrome formula either, It was quoted that it was going to be "based" on scotchchrome, and from what you say this still appears to be the case, albeit perhaps more slightly different than before, due to new sensitizers and the various chemistry currently being made, rather than the chemicals you had prepared earlier that expired.

 

[flavio81]

If there is a difference between coating machines, you can develop a scaling method to predict the changes needed to move products around. Most all of the time it works. One notable failure at EK was Kodachrome 25, where the initial transition did not work, but it was terminated before a final formula could be reached. There was not enough money to continue the work.

PE

Thanks Ron for the answer regarding scaling between 'research' and 'production' coater.
PS: Enjoy your forthcoming trip to Italy !

OK, so i assume then that Kodak only considered the need for rem-jet by the time they were introducing colour films?
I guess that the motion picture labs would not have wanted the hassle of upgrading the machines for remjet removal, so Kodak never added it to B&W film?

For what it's worth, PE has mentioned that Kodachrome required the rem-jet backing for working correctly. So perhaps the added mechanical resilience/smoothness/etc was just a nice side effect.

Scotch chrome wasn't paticularly good, the dyes fade with time. David, can you tell us if the new film will have a better formulation with more stable dyes than the older one?

There were many iterations of the 3M slide film, ScotchChrome was not the latest, the latest was named IMATION Chrome 100.

Also, there wasn't one "scotch chrome" product but many, from 100 speed to 1000 speed including also the coveted 640-Tungsten film that of course Dave will make sure it gets released in 220 format or else he'll have to shave his beard.

I feel this means that the film decline has halted and there is some resurgence, much like vinyl...

Off topic - Vinyl in fact has been in full resurgence the last 2 years. All record cutting and pressing plants around the world operate at full capacity, so much that if you want to cut a record, you'll be on a waiting list. Or so i've read (i'm very active on a forum dedicated to turntables)

 

[pbromaghin]

Dave, is the P30 Alpha as soft as the original 17 meters from which we have seen the sample photos? I'm asking about the scratches.


Edit: Duh... I just got to the part where you already answered that question.

 

[flavio81]

D76 is way different than D96

the formulas are related but slightly different:

INgredient D76 D96

Metol (Elon) 2g 1.5g
Sodium Sufite 100g 75g
Hydroquinone 5g 1.5g
Pot bromide 0g 0.4g
borax 2g 4.5g

So both D76 and D96 are developers made with MQ (metol & hydroquinone), with sulfite as grain dissolver, and borax. I think to say they are "similar in formulation" is correct. Of course this does not mean they will give similar results or that they have the same strength or that they give the same contrast.

 

[flavio81]

It's really funny that you say this because despite the volumes and volumes of text we have published on our site, the vast majority of people simply do not read. We know this because we are continually asked questions that we have already answered, often many times.

I feel your pain.

I recall one day that i spent like 4 hours writing extensive documentation on a software I wrote. Then I sent this documentation via email to a friend, also a software engineer and a close friend.

The next week, he asked me some technical question on the software and I told him "this exact question is answered on the document I sent you last week ". And he was "oh, I have a great idea -- i should read the documentation..."

As we engineers say: "RTFM!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, I don't plan on a trip to Italy. I don't speak Italian! So, there it is.

And, I can give technical help from my armchair, but I doubt if any of the good people from Ferrania need my very limited help. I might evaluate some images or something and give a private (and confidential) opinion, but that is about all.

As for rem jet, at the time of development of early Kodachrome, good anti static subbing could not be made. So, rem jet was used. Also, in 35mm cameras, the film moves much faster than in 8mm and so more antistat is needed, so Kodachrome was designed the way it was having been the earliest motion picture product and it just stayed that way. For those that know the expression - "It just growed that way" paraphrasing "Topsy".

PE

 

[ME Super]

Will the Ferrania P30 come in DX-coded cartridges? That would make it easier to shoot in my Pentax P30T.

Seconding this, for my Yashica T4. I'd have asked myself but I was out buying a projector!

Rest easy, all. This is a B&W negative film. Cameras that rely on the DX code to set the film speed usually set non-DX coded cartridges to ISO (ASA) 100. I used to have a P30T, and this was what it did.

ISO 80 is 1/3 stop slower than ISO 100, so in a camera that depends on the DX code to set film speed, you'll be 1/3 stop underexposed. You likely won't see much difference in the final print.

 

[RattyMouse]

Well, I don't plan on a trip to Italy. I don't speak Italian! So, there it is.

A poor reason not to visit Italy PE! I went there and don't speak any Italian and had a fantastic time. A truly wonderful country to visit, with food that simply cannot be described.

 

[Berri]

I don't plan on a trip to Italy. I don't speak Italian! So, there it is.

I'll be happy to be your personal interpreter if you come to visit Italy and the Ferrania plant.

 

[flavio81]

Well, I don't plan on a trip to Italy. I don't speak Italian! So, there it is.

Just make sure your words are always supported by energetic, evident hand gesticulation, and you will be understood. The more exaggerated, the better.

As for lab work in Ferrania, you can get by just fine, using the following phrases:

English ---------- polite Italian

This does not interest me, please let me work alone ------------ Vaffanculo!!
This emulsion does not satisfy my own standards ------------- questa emulsione mi fa cagare
I think you are not doing the correct thing, let me see... ------------ che cazzo stai faccendo!?
Our schedule is tight, we'll not gonna make the slide film if you don't hurry, come on! ------- dai cazzo!!

 

[Berri]

Just make sure your words are always supported by energetic, evident hand gesticulation, and you will be understood. The more exaggerated, the better.

As for lab work in Ferrania, you can get by the following phrases:

English ---------- polite Italian

This does not interest me, please let me work alone ------------ Vaffanculo!!
This emulsion does not satisfy my own standards ------------- questa emulsione mi fa cagare
I think you are not doing the correct thing, let me see... ------------ che cazzo stai faccendo!?
Our schedule is tight, we'll not gonna make the slide film if you don't hurry, come on! ------- dai cazzo!!

ahahahah!

 

[Nzoomed]

lol, anyway, here is some cheap solaris!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/112302793500?ul_noapp=true

 

[fdonadio]

questa emulsione mi fa cagare

Guess where I was when I read this?

 

[Photo Engineer]

With friends like you guys, I don't need enemies.

Tsk, tsk.

PE

 

[Prest_400]

With friends like you guys, I don't need enemies.

Tsk, tsk.

PE

May want to keep them away from Ezio's Negroni on a factory visit... Or things would get too funny!

***
OT: Was thinking about the box design Dave and found it has a certain Art Deco style (the square/tiling?), really nice.

Something Gimmicky, each line (BW, E6, C41) could get different touches. Like how you could play with the Logo design of each era.
Using Kodak as example, A classier design for TriX and something more modern with TMax. Well, both are "pro" but it would visually differentiate them.
Ektachrome is promoted with the classic 1980s yellow/blue but the rendered film box rather resembles the E100g box.
Would be nice if Alaris reincorporated the classic K.

Now, for the sake of branding and reviewing the above, I just thought that is not a brilliant idea.

 

[Toffle]

With friends like you guys, I don't need enemies.

Tsk, tsk.

PE

Pretty sure your chains won't stretch from the barn to the airport anyway, so Italy is pretty much out of the question.

 

[flavio81]

With friends like you guys, I don't need enemies.

Tsk, tsk.

PE

Consider it a token of our sincere, brotherly love.