How to properly dispose of nitrocellulose film?

[RauschenOderKorn]

A friend of mine has thousands of rolls of old nitrocellulose film in his archive. The shots (mainly passport pics and wedding pics from the 1950s) are not particularly worth preserving, besides IP rights issues probably block further use / sale / ... for at least another half century, so he asked me how to dispose this film properly. The trashcan will do for a few rolls, but given the amount, this seems like the wrong way to go. A bonfire of this magnitude is out of the question, totally no option!

What would be the safe and proper way to dispose these films?

 

[Kino]

Check around to see if there is a silver reclamation company that will take on the project. The sliver recovery might just pay for the cost of disposal if negotiated properly...

 

[tezzasmall]

THOUSANDS of roll?!?!?!?!?!

Having just googled 'disposing of nitrocellulose film', there is lots of info out there.

The main thing though, is that after a quick read, it says it is VERY combustible from 38C upwards, so your friend should be REALLY careful!

And DON'T, DON'T, DON'T put any in the trashcan!!!

Here are the first few links that I browsed, but there are many more:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg469.pdf

https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/02-22.pdf

https://www.kodak.com/motion/suppor...ng_of_processed_nitrate_film/default.htm#disp

http://www.loc.gov/preservation/care/film.html

Terry S (UK)

 

[Agulliver]

Is your friend absolutely certain it's nitrocellulose? 1950s is pretty late for such material, especially in still photography.

 

[Kino]

Nitrate is very common up until the late 1960s due to backlog of stock and use in certain areas because of desirable properties of that base (excluding flammability). Specialized stocks on nitrate base were available on order up into the 1970s because of this...

Burning is a way of recovering the silver from the base (the ash is processed to reclaim the silver), but it needs to be done properly by a certified reclamation facility.

Yes, don't throw it in the trash. You might have a visit from some very upset government officials...

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

The films are from the estate of a professional photographer. I a not aware of the total amount of film, I am going to have a look at it some time the next weekends. What is known that there are several cupboard full of glass plates from the era aprox. 1880-1950, but quite a bunch got lost. As it seems, there are also several cupboard full of film from the 40s- 60s. All film after that should be safe, especially as colour started kicking in at that time, too.

 

[BradS]

Surely, the local municipality or county has a facility and procedure for hazardous waste disposal? I see that you are in Germany and I do not know how that translates...do you have counties there? Here, the county has a special place where residents and companies can dispose of hazardous materials.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am sure a lit match will do the job, but there must be better ways.

 

[removed account4]

Burning is a way of recovering the silver from the base (the ash is processed to reclaim the silver), but it needs to be done properly by a certified reclamation facility.

it gives off a toxic gas that will kill people who breath it in. it was the cleveland clinic fire, whose burned nitrate film toxic fumes killed people that
forced kodak to release safety film. best thing to do with it is to call a hazardous waste disposal unit and have them take it off your hands
and get a signed bill of lading saying you disposed of it properly.

good luck !

 

[37th Exposure]

Have you considered asking any historical societies or museums? I suppose they’d not only take the films but give them a good home. They might be junk to you but who knows....

 

[Luckless]

If you suspect you have large volumes of it on hand, then contacting your fire department is possibly warranted, and probably strongly advised. Risks rise with volume of material due to potential of chain reaction - A single roll going off when prying open an old steel case isn't the end of the world, but a single roll catching fire while you're standing in a room with potentially thousands of other rolls? Well that's where 'problems begin', as you exit the realm of an ER visit for some limited burns, and head toward the world of morgue visits as the number of rolls involved increases.

I would call the fire department's non-emergency line, and ask if a member or two from the hazmat team could come over to help inspect and advise on further action. Especially if you're unsure of the long term storage conditions or actual volumes involved.

Odds seem good that the film, if its lasted this long, is either fairly stable as far as nitrocellulose goes, or is not actually nitrocellulose film. But personally I would rather have someone with breathing gear and a fire extinguisher in the next room rather than sitting at the fire hall across town while I'm looking through it to be sure.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

If you suspect you have large volumes of it on hand, then contacting your fire department is possibly warranted, and probably strongly advised. Risks rise with volume of material due to potential of chain reaction - A single roll going off when prying open an old steel case isn't the end of the world, but a single roll catching fire while you're standing in a room with potentially thousands of other rolls? Well that's where 'problems begin', as you exit the realm of an ER visit for some limited burns, and head toward the world of morgue visits as the number of rolls involved increases.

I would call the fire department's non-emergency line, and ask if a member or two from the hazmat team could come over to help inspect and advise on further action. Especially if you're unsure of the long term storage conditions or actual volumes involved.

Odds seem good that the film, if its lasted this long, is either fairly stable as far as nitrocellulose goes, or is not actually nitrocellulose film. But personally I would rather have someone with breathing gear and a fire extinguisher in the next room rather than sitting at the fire hall across town while I'm looking through it to be sure.

Highly agree with this. They should be able to come out with suggestions about disposal.


Thanks Luckless for the wise advise.

Regards

Marcelo

 

[abruzzi]

But personally I would rather have someone with breathing gear and a fire extinguisher in the next room rather than sitting at the fire hall across town while I'm looking through it to be sure.

I'm not sure an extinguisher would do much good:



EDIT: I'll add that the film projector I used to use had a cutoff mechanism that basically cut the film in the projector (about maybe a foot) so if the film caught on fire, the projector would seal up, and the only film lost was bit inside the projector, and the fire didn't spread to to the ~2000 feet above or below the the projector on the feed or take up reels.

 

[BradS]

Searching for "cellulose nitrate based film" produces all kinds of interesting and informative articles...
here are just a few...

https://www.amnh.org/our-research/n...ral-conservation/health-safety/nitrate-films/

https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/02-22.pdf?pdf=2-22

https://www.nps.gov/museum/publications/conserveogram/02-20.pdf?pdf=2-20

There are many more...including info from Kodak.

 

[removed account4]

I'm not sure an extinguisher would do much good:



EDIT: I'll add that the film projector I used to use had a cutoff mechanism that basically cut the film in the projector (about maybe a foot) so if the film caught on fire, the projector would seal up, and the only film lost was bit inside the projector, and the fire didn't spread to to the ~2000 feet above or below the the projector on the feed or take up reels.

what a dope.
releasing poison gas like that in the environment
the person should be put in prison

 

[mshchem]

A friend of mine has thousands of rolls of old nitrocellulose film in his archive. The shots (mainly passport pics and wedding pics from the 1950s) are not particularly worth preserving, besides IP rights issues probably block further use / sale / ... for at least another half century, so he asked me how to dispose this film properly. The trashcan will do for a few rolls, but given the amount, this seems like the wrong way to go. A bonfire of this magnitude is out of the question, totally no option!

What would be the safe and proper way to dispose these films?

Call your local hazardous waste disposal agency. Modern gun powder is made with nitrocellulose amongst other things.

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

Thanks for your input.

I had researched the topic prior to posting here, so I am aware of the general concepts about storing and handling of nitrocellulose film. But I have found no indication on the actual disposal procedures.

As I told you, it´s not mine to make the calls. Intentionally burning the film is out of questions, especially in these quantities. Officially informing local waste disposal agencies or the firefighters or municipial authorities probably will probably lead to a chain of events in which people without any knowledge on the subject will try to make the calls, either to be the hero of the hour or to charge for it, or both. Especially as nitrocellulose film apparantly is covered by particular legislation applicable to explosives (https://www.bundestag.de/blob/426932/ef55b9a6dd8ccf2bc4836dc88f43af3e/wd-10-020-16-pdf-data.pdf), this might totally backfire.

I have spent some additional hours online yesterday, and it seems the competent authority in Germany is the Bundesfilmarchiv (Federal Film Archive) in Koblenz (http://www.klaus-kramer.de/nitrofilm/nitratfilm_top_04-09.html) which - according to this source - will advise on all matters related to nitrocellulose film. So my advice to my friend will be to contact them. If they are interested in the films, maybe that is an option, and if they are not interested, they are the competent and experienced authority on how to proceed.​

 

[AgX]

I'm not sure an extinguisher would do much good:

The guy in that video used CO gas at his attempt. Suffocating extinguishing makes no sense. Instead sufficient water has to be used, to cool down the film.

Likely solid CO, as CO-snow, could have worked too.

 

[Kino]

[/QUOTE]

The guy in that video used CO gas at his attempt. Suffocating extinguishing makes no sense. Instead sufficient water has to be used, to cool down the film.

Likely solid CO, as CO-snow, could have worked too.

RaushcenOderKorn

NO, you cannot extinguish a nitrate fire, only contain it until it burns out; It generates its own oxygen and will burn under any liquid or in any inert gas environment.

In fact, the WORST thing you can do it to try to smother the flames, as that causes incomplete combustion and results in even more unburned, toxic and combustible gasses which accumulate into a pocket and cause a "flashover" and explosion.

The best thing to do is to determine if it is even worth keeping, and if it is, to store it properly. That being said, almost no one outside of a government institution has the proper facilities to store nitrate film safely.

Our nitrate vaults have a fire suppression system that isolates each reel of nitrate in it's own cubby hole. Should a single reel combust, it can burn itself out while the fire suppression system cascades a sheet of water around the burning reel. While it won't extinguish the film, it will allow it to cleanly burn-up while keeping the fire from spreading to adjacent reels.

RaushcenOderKorn has the right idea in contacting the Bundesfilmarchiv. They know the regulations inside and out, plus they will be able to help the owner evaluate the historical value of the film. Often we have collectors who are simply eager to dispose of film that turns out to be very historically important.

 

[Kino]

it gives off a toxic gas that will kill people who breath it in. it was the cleveland clinic fire, whose burned nitrate film toxic fumes killed people that
forced kodak to release safety film. best thing to do with it is to call a hazardous waste disposal unit and have them take it off your hands
and get a signed bill of lading saying you disposed of it properly.

good luck !

Safety film has been around far longer than the Cleveland Clinic Fire. It was developed and used in the early 1900's by several film companies both in the USA and Europe as a response to several devastating cinema fires in the late 1890's and early 1900's, but was found to be inferior to nitrate in its strength and durability.

22mm Edison Home Kinescope, 28mm and 9.5mm Pathe and Kodak 16mm were all safety base formats.

 

[removed account4]

i never knew it was around, but just not used..
i love being wrong and schooled
thanks !

 

[Kino]

i never knew it was around, but just not used..
i love being wrong and schooled
thanks !

Not trying to be snooty, just concise...

This is the bomb for technical information on the history of photographic materials (at least in the USA).

Images and Enterprise: Technology and the American Photographic Industry, 1839-1925 (Johns Hopkins Studies in the History of Technology)
Mr. Reese V. Jenkins
Synopsis:

From the early daguerreotype to the rise of the motion picture, Images and Enterprise explores the business, technical, and social factors that transformed the American photographic industry between 1839 and 1925. Reese Jenkins's prize-winning history traces the technical changes that culminated in George Eastman's creation of the Kodak system of amateur photography in the 1880s. Its compact, simply operated cameras would revolutionize an entire industry―even if at first the whole camera had to be mailed back to the company for developing and reloading. Images and Enterprise also vividly portrays the emergence of cinematography in its relationship to traditional photography and reveals the growing importance of institutionalized research, as Eastman Kodak and the other American and European photographic materials manufacturers strove to develop commercially practical color photography.

About the Author:
Robert A. Rosenberg, Paul B. Israel, Keith A. Nier, and Martha J. King are volume editors for Volume 3 at the Thomas A. Edison Papers at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.


https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=22346072243&searchurl=tn=Images+and+Enterprise&sortby=17&cm_sp=snippet-_-srp1-_-title1

and it can be found rather cheap used.

 

[AgX]

NO, you cannot extinguish a nitrate fire, only contain it until it burns out; It generates its own oxygen and will burn under any liquid or in any inert gas environment.

In fact, the WORST thing you can do it to try to smother the flames, as that causes incomplete combustion and results in even more unburned, toxic and combustible gasses which accumulate into a pocket and cause a "flashover" and explosion.

NO, Water is THE means to extinguish a NC fire. As such it is even explicitely advised by one manufacturer.
Of course, as with any fire, the package density is of influence on the cooling effect.

NC is still manufactured for non-explosive use! It thus is no stuff from hell. But is has to be dealt with extreme care.

Yes, smoldering NC fire produces nitrouse gases. Which the same time means that not all NC fires produce such toxic gas.

 

[removed account4]

Not trying to be snooty, just concise...

didn't take it that way.
im ignorant about these things
and its obvious you and others know
more than me

 

[Kino]

NO, Water is THE means to extinguish a NC fire. As such it is even explicitely advised by one manufacturer.
Of course, as with any fire, the package density is of influence on the cooling effect.

NC is still manufactured for non-explosive use! It thus is no stuff from hell. But is has to be dealt with extreme care.

Yes, smoldering NC fire produces nitrouse gases. Which the same time means that not all NC fires produce such toxic gas.

Tell you what, I'll stick to my understanding of the nature of nitrate, (being surrounded by and handling millions of feet of the stuff for 20+ years) and you continue to hold your own opinion and we will both be happy...