Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

[railwayman3]

Bad results from an 8x10 negative? I'm shocked, I say, shocked! Oh yeah, they were 8x10mm, not inches.

LOL . OTOH, the disc negs were only approximately one-third the size of a standard 35mm neg (8mm compared with 24mm)....if my maths are correct, that's about one-ninth the area ? Yet, many of us regularly make very big enlargements successfully from 35mm and keep the grain under control.

A fellow Photo Club member once showed me some 20x16 prints from Minox sub-min negs, taken in a jazz club under available light, so presumably with fast film. There was certainly *big* grain, but the finished results were amazing, capturing the smoky atmosphere and the performers' faces and features while they were playing; I've always regretted not begging one of the prints to frame on my study wall.

 

[Brady Eklund]

Did they ever make disc film ? I don't remember seeing any under the Ferrania name, though, IIRC, there may have been films under own-brand names ?

That suggestion was tongue-in-cheek, but apparently 3M did make disc film. Not sure whether that would have been made at Ferrania or not.

 

[Agulliver]

I gather that disc film was supposed to be printed using a special enlarger lens and that many labs simply didn't bother. That said, I never once saw a decent photo from a disc camera. The negative was significantly smaller than 110, and even the cheapest 110 camera was just about capable of producing a 4" print. I never saw anything remotely acceptable from a disc camera, and several friends/family had one. Surely at some point one of them used a lab with the correct equipment? I think with such a small neg, the grain was always going to be unacceptable for colour print film. Maybe a low speed B&W film might have worked.

As for Ferrania...they might have the ability to produce unusual formats. They were the last to do 126 for example. Whether they could do disc.....did they do disc back in the day? Can anyone develop it now? Would anyone want it?

 

[flavio81]

I remember also being surprised by how bad the VR Disc results were, even compared with the tiny negs from the sub-min Minox which I had at that time.

Was the comparison done with the same film and with the same enlarging lens? That would be a fair comparison.

The lens on the good Disc cameras was a novel aspheric lens of supposedly very high resolution. The disc film itself was thicker than other film which contributes to film flatness. So, in my view, any defects on the prints can be traced to film that was not suited to such a small format, and bad enlarging process.

Minox users usually take pictures using fine grain black & white film, which has -in general- higher sharpness and resolution than color negative film.

 

[Brady Eklund]

I gather that disc film was supposed to be printed using a special enlarger lens and that many labs simply didn't bother. That said, I never once saw a decent photo from a disc camera. The negative was significantly smaller than 110, and even the cheapest 110 camera was just about capable of producing a 4" print. I never saw anything remotely acceptable from a disc camera, and several friends/family had one. Surely at some point one of them used a lab with the correct equipment? I think with such a small neg, the grain was always going to be unacceptable for colour print film. Maybe a low speed B&W film might have worked.

As for Ferrania...they might have the ability to produce unusual formats. They were the last to do 126 for example. Whether they could do disc.....did they do disc back in the day? Can anyone develop it now? Would anyone want it?

I believe Rocky Mountain will still process disc film. Dave said at some point that they wanted to bring back as many formats as they could. I think they're capable of producing 126. I have never had a customer inquire about getting disc film, though I have had several bring in old discs to get scanned(all we could do is flatbed scan them). And yes they looked pretty awful.

 

[MattKing]

I've seen a poster (something like 3x4 feet) sized print from disc film that was spectacularly good.
It was, however, printed specially for a retirement celebration for an almost 50 year employee of Canadian Kodak, and the best resources of Eastman Kodak's facilities in Rochester were used.
The shot was a fun shot of that employee (known in his time as "Mr. Kodak" in Western Canada) taken at the top of a long hike. He was wearing a Kodak hat and a bunch of Kodak paraphernalia and was pretending to salute a Kodak flag. A mid-level Kodak disc camera was used. The preparation of the print, and the really large party itself, were all arranged as a surprise.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

I remember the Disc cameras, and not in a good way !

It's a good example illustrating how difficult it can be to scale up an emulsion from lab scale coatings to production coatings. I was involved in testing the system performance of the DISC system and all our testing was done on lab scale coatings which had acceptable blue granularity. Unfortunately, when production started, they couldn't match the lab coatings with their production coatings. (About the time the product was canceled they produced satisfactory coatings.)

 

[Prof_Pixel]

I've seen a poster (something like 3x4 feet) sized print from disc film that was spectacularly good.

The last product was pretty good (and of course, the print might have been digitally 'improved'.)

 

[BAC1967]

I believe Rocky Mountain will still process disc film. Dave said at some point that they wanted to bring back as many formats as they could. I think they're capable of producing 126. I have never had a customer inquire about getting disc film, though I have had several bring in old discs to get scanned(all we could do is flatbed scan them). And yes they looked pretty awful.

Rocky Mountain film lab has been out of business for years. I think they will still take your money on the web site but don't expect anything in return.

 

[railwayman3]

Was the comparison done with the same film and with the same enlarging lens? That would be a fair comparison.

The lens on the good Disc cameras was a novel aspheric lens of supposedly very high resolution. The disc film itself was thicker than other film which contributes to film flatness. So, in my view, any defects on the prints can be traced to film that was not suited to such a small format, and bad enlarging process.

Minox users usually take pictures using fine grain black & white film, which has -in general- higher sharpness and resolution than color negative film.

I agree, although I wasn't suggesting any scientific comparison between disc and Minox formats. Just that, with skill and good technique, some amazing results could be obtained with the Minox format. OTOH, Minox has always been something for the specialist, whereas disc was intended for a mass-market system for the family and snap-shot user which failed through unacceptable quality, whether it be the fault of the film, the labs, or the user. 126 size was a much better and successful system....easy to use, inexpensive processable in 35mm lines, and with well-made cameras. I still have quite a lot of excellent Kodachrome and Ektachrome slides shot on the simplest Kodak 126 cameras...just a matter of reading the instructions properly, noting the limitations, and keeping to the "sunny days, with light over your shoulder" rule.

 

[MattKing]

The last product was pretty good (and of course, the print might have been digitally 'improved'.)

This was in the very early years - right after introduction.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

This was in the very early years - right after introduction.

Then it was probably from a research lab coating used in testing

 

[railwayman3]

Rocky Mountain film lab has been out of business for years. I think they will still take your money on the web site but don't expect anything in return.

Yes, please be careful....this business appears to have been closed for several years, and a quick "Google" will show numerous complaints dating back to about 2007 on several web review sites. Many people seem to have lost both money and valuable films. (I believe that I read some years ago that someone (in Canada?) was intending to buy the equipment, but I've not seen any more recent references to that.)

 

[MattKing]

Then it was probably from a research lab coating used in testing

Only if that was what they gave to the sales people - "Mr. Kodak" had been a Kodak sales rep since he was the only Canadian Kodak employee west of Toronto.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Only if that was what they gave to the sales people

Probably. There was a lot of in-company testing of the system prior to actual sales.

 

[rbultman]

Hey Dave,

Can we get an update on when the P30 pre-orders might resume shipping? Just curious if anything new has come up since the Dead Link Removed entry from April 20.

Regards,
Rob

 

[twelvetone12]

A nice review from Emulsive of the P30:
http://emulsive.org/reviews/film-re...rrania-p30alpha-guest-post-by-philip-harrison

Even if an 80ISO film is not generally my choice, I can't wait to test some!

 

[RattyMouse]

Anyone get their P30 film yet?

 

[fdonadio]

Anyone get their P30 film yet?

I must be pretty far behind in the queue. My order has not been shipped yet!

 

[cmacd123]

well some progress, the folks have published a "suggested practices" sheet at

Dead Link Removed

they have times listed for d76, D96 rodinal and XTOL. I don't quite understand the times given for D76 stock, But perhaps there is something not explained in the data.

 

[fdonadio]

well some progress, the folks have published a "suggested practices" sheet

Reeeeaaally strange agitation regimes. I like to go with the "standard" of continuous agitation for the first 30 second, then for 5 seconds every 30 seconds.

 

[cmacd123]

indeed, and D76, 20C, ASA 80, 7 minutes with inversion every minute for the first 10 minutes? I guess you dump the tank and keep inverting?

 

[fdonadio]

indeed, and D76, 20C, ASA 80, 7 minutes with inversion every minute for the first 10 minutes? I guess you dump the tank and keep inverting?

I missed that!

Well, I am sure someone's gonna revise that document ASAP.

 

[mshchem]

What about the E6 product, any news at all? I hope they stay solvent. If that means making black and white film for a while so be it.
Mike

 

[Europan]

Reeeeaaally strange agitation regimes.

Not at all, such an old-time film and all ciné film is best processed with uninterrupted agitation. The gelatines are not hardened or perhaps only a little and thicker. This calls for a constant flow of liquid across the surfaces.