Excellent point about the huge volume of movie film, help me out, in 9th grade I made a 10 minute film, I wanted to super impose titles, I used what I called "regular 8" it was split down the middle and spliced back together. Was that double 8? I always thought it was just 16mm. Everyone else in my class made a dopey black and white video, state of the art for 1973. I was in charge, director, did most of the cinematography, best scene was when I had my buddy filming me,from the backseat, driving my 65 Chevy Biscayne, straight 6, 3 on the tree. I was peeling around corners so fast, the body roll on that car was so bad, it looked like the car was on two wheels.The North Vancouver BC, Canada Kodachrome lab that my Dad was customer service manager for between 1961 and 1983 had sighted people in the pre-splice area - allways women if I understood and remember correctly.
I'm not sure how long it took them to load an entire roll - which itself was almost a mile of film at a time - but they did that day after day, shift after shift. In busy times the Kodachrome line was running 24 hours a day.
I remember my Dad talking about a mysterious set of scratches that appeared one time. They traced it to a very small, apparently innocuous change in how one of the women was handling the film at the pre-splice stage.
When you think of volumes, it is important to remember how much of that film was double 8 and Super 8 movie film.
IIRC, the split down the middle regular 8 was double 8.I used what I called "regular 8" it was split down the middle and spliced back together. Was that double 8? I always thought it was just 16mm.
They could, except for the different printing on them.
But how do you know that the Shanghai backing paper and ink won't react with the Ilford emulsions?
Donald is correct - any problem with using the Ilford 120 backing paper with Ilford film would only be with the relatively small differences in the printing.Thanks Donald. So if the Shanghai backing paper reacts with the Shanghai film it will be on part of the first and last frames only? I have never seen a 220 opened out so to speak so if the backing paper can affect part of the first and last frame of a 220 but doesn't obscure the first and last frame, how does it manage to affect the exposed frames but not obscure part of those frames?
pentaxuser
I wrote to the chap offering Shanghai 220 films via Facebook but didn't receive a reply.
http://www.yalefilmandvideo.com is my go-to place for dual-8 B&W processing of Foma-8. In the 1980 when I was in school, we could not get B&W reversal processed, so I did all my film work in color, reluctantly. Availability of B&W reversal processing today is another reason I think film photography is better now than it used to be. Even in the 1980s I had to mail-order 120 B&W film with a paper mail-order form and a check and the selection was much more limited than what Freestyle or B&H offers today.
Many backing paper problems have been ink related. Would any 220 film ever be in contact with ink? I can't imagine why it would, but no have any 220 paper to evaluate.
Back in the threads about Kodak 120 imprinting, PE mentioned that 220 would have not had this problem as the contact between paper and film is minimal.Many backing paper problems have been ink related. Would any 220 film ever be in contact with ink? I can't imagine why it would, but no have any 220 paper to evaluate.
Did he say how many is a minimum order?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?