If Fuji discontinue all E6 we will see New Ektachrome in 120, 4x5, 8x10 ?

[removed account4]

What currently manufactured film(s) are suitable for contact printing colour negatives to make slides? I've been looking for such a solution to make medium format stereo slides when the day comes that Fuji discontinues slide film.

bring the files to a zerox shop and have them make you color transparancies of your files ...
its cheap and readily available

 

[AgX]

Clear RA-4 transmissive print film can be used.

 

[trendland]

I would like to state : If you want to have slides (to projection / or no projection)
there is no alternate to E6 films.
That's the point - therfore you have an urgend need to E6 films with highest standard (max. ISO 100).This makes E6 films indispensable.
If you have to print with digital (mixed) workflow you may have better characteristics with c41 films.
Or lets say - there might be no further need today to use E6.
If you have following idea : " I am still using my prefered c41 films - who need E6 today ? And if I need slides I can easyly lets make copys of special unmasked c41 - soon I will have a pretty slide without the use of any E6 " - you have to know : The quality you lost with such method is unaceptable.
The same unaceptable lost from quality to me is the use of ISO 200/ISO 400 E6.
Also the same (I never did it) is to copy c41 with c41 from own camera (with exposing).
If you have the idea to avoid film totaly and use digital shots with the new Nikon
65 MP full frame monster to have a pretty projection with a digital beamer I would like to ask : "Wich kind of beamer you can affort ?"
To me ( I can't say 100% sure ) a simple
135 projector from Ebay (~ $100 with good lens ) should absolute top a modernest 4k beamer (resolution, light brightness/brilliance).
And if you just compare the unforgettable experience with a midt format slide projection (sure you need therefore a bit more than $100,- on Ebay...) you just need the min. of a 6k
beamer !!!!
Have a short look at your local dealer and ask for the price of 6k...!
The use of simple halogenic lamps cost you $4,50 - $8,95 if it is broken after 2 years.
So ask in addition the price of the 6k
beamer lamp - you will also need EVERY TWO YEARS - I can tell you : "It is just funny to know this price"
So there might be the urgend need on E6 films in most possible avaible different formats again?
Or do you think different ?

with regards

 

[AgX]

If you have following idea : " I am still using my prefered c41 films - who need E6 today ? And if I need slides I can easyly lets make copys of special unmasked c41 - soon I will have a pretty slide without the use of any E6 " - you have to know : The quality you lost with such method is unaceptable.

Copying C-41 negative onto unmasked C-41 film is different from copying onto clear base RA-4 print film.

 

[trendland]

Copying C-41 negative onto unmasked C-41 film is different from copying onto RA-4 print film.

Yes of course - but since the 80th it was
the prefered method from labs to give copys to amateuric photographers.
And the quality is just worst.
Some press photographers also prefered
a special method to come in business with agencies to the same time.
Their photos wasn't so bad - may be ?
But the agencys didn't except 135 format.So they used following trick :
They shot a copy with Pentax 6x7 from 135 (dont't ask me for the film I can't say) and soon they offered a well know
format (Art Directors best Baby).
But in concern of quality - it is the the most nonsense !
Perhaps Art Directors had a need to new glasses during the 80th?

with regards

 

[AgX]

Yes of course - but since the 80th it was
the prefered method from labs to give copys to amateuric photographers.

Back then a C-41 print film was used. There was no unmasked C-41 camera film availabe in 35mm.

However also something elso was done: selling customers rebadged cine camera film for cheap as type 135 and then printing this as well on cine print film for slides but also making (unmatched) paper prints from it.

 

[Berri]

I wonder if it would be possible to have a c41 negative film printed onto 35mm print film meant for projection

 

[Sirius Glass]

There is nothing wrong with E6. I like it. I just do not and have not needed it for years. However it is important to keep E6 alive and healthy.

 

[AgX]

I wonder if it would be possible to have a c41 negative film printed onto 35mm print film meant for projection

Strictly speaking the only remaining print film designed for projection is cine print film. And here we have at least a contrast mismatch with C-41 negatives.
The clear print films that match C-41 negatives are not designed for projection but fit nevertheless, as they got the right density range.

 

[Craig]

There was no unmasked C-41 camera film availabe in 35mm.

Vericolor slide film?

 

[trendland]

Vericolor slide film?

That may be right Craig.But I can't realy remember.I had just one time 3 - 5 frame copy of c41 onto unmasked c41.
As I might remember it was signed as Fuji.May be it was RA 4 print film. I realy can't say for sure.
But what I can say for sure - It hasn't quality and it can't have quality indeed.
Because it is a copy.
Notice in analogue for example also in video - you have the lost of 1 generation.
We forget it allways because of digital issues.
So it is no way at all.
with regards

 

[railwayman3]

I wonder if it would be possible to have a c41 negative film printed onto 35mm print film meant for projection

Way back (1970's ) Kodak in the UK (through dealers) offered a 35mm slide-from-colour-negative service. I have some of thesetaken by my late Father, made when he required several identical sets of slides of his factory where he worked. These are dated 1974, the quality is very good and there seems to be negligible fading, even after 40+ years.

 

[AgX]

Vericolor slide film?

Yes, a 35mm C-41 print film. I was speaking of an unmasked camera film

 

[AgX]

Vericolor slide film?

I said:

Back then a C-41 print film was used. There was no unmasked C-41 camera film availabe in 35mm.

That Vericolor version was a print film.

 

[iandvaag]

Clear RA-4 transmissive print film can be used.

copying onto clear base RA-4 print film.

Sorry for the delay in responding. I'm very interested in this. I searched through the entire RA-4 product catalogue at B&H and didn't some up with anything. Is this material available for purchase by consumers anywhere? What is its intended market, is it used for projecting or viewed with backlighting? If you could point me to any additional information about this material, I'd be very grateful.

I've considered contact printing C-41 film onto maskless C-41 film. The problem is the contrast mismatch (~0.7 x ~0.7 gives contrast of ~0.49), and a lot of tweaking to the developer would be needed I think, and even so I wouldn't expect great results.

I would definitely consider printing ECN-2 film onto ECP film, but I'm interested in medium format, not 35mm. Most if not all cinema work seems to be done with a digital intermediate, so the only ECP film in IMAX size is designed for digital recording, not for optical printing from negatives. It might still work with some fiddling, but the minimum order quantities of this film are rather unreasonable for an individual.

bring the files to a zerox shop and have them make you color transparancies of your files ...
its cheap and readily available

I've tried this and was thoroughly disappointed. The resolution was poor and the dot matrix was very visible and obtrusive. Digital negatives are fine for contact printing, but they don't seem to be good enough for enlarging. I'm looking at my slides with a handheld stereo viewer, so the resolution has to be extremely high. I think the only digital/hybrid technique that would be successful are the light valve technology recorders that major studios use to make movie prints and film intermediates. These recorders are obviously not available for purchase and I can't imagine that anyone has one set up to allow me to print 2 feet of images or whatever.

Not to bash digital, but honestly, no stereo digital technology I've ever seen can even remotely compare to a medium format slide in a stereo viewer. If slide film is discontinued, we will have lost the most satisfying, realistic 3D experience for the perceivable future.

 

[AgX]

Those transparent print films are intended for lightboxes. They are offered by Kodak Alaris and Fuji, Agfa cancelled these meanwhile. These days I even posted links to them.

 

[Sirius Glass]

"If Fuji discontinue all E6 we will see New Ektachrome in 120, 4x5, 8x10 ?"

There is no quid pro quo. There is no relationship between the companies. If Fuji discontinues all E6, there is no telling what Kodak will do.

 

[ITKI]

Strictly speaking the only remaining print film designed for projection is cine print film.

..like CineStill ?

 

[AgX]

No, CineStill is cine camera film (that by the retailer got the rem-jet layer removed).

Camera film is designed as first stage, print film as second stage film.

 

[kb3lms]

It would be nice to be able to get cine print film for making slides, etc., but it doesn't seem to be available at all.

 

[ITKI]

..ah ok, thanks for clearing that up @AgX

 

[NJH]

Those transparent print films are intended for lightboxes. They are offered by Kodak Alaris and Fuji, Agfa cancelled these meanwhile. These days I even posted links to them.

You mean Duratrans presumably? Loads of info on the net and retailers for that stuff.

 

[AgX]

It would be nice to be able to get cine print film for making slides, etc., but it doesn't seem to be available at all.

Cine print film would not be the right match for C-41 camera films, as it is designed for ECN camera films.

 

[iandvaag]

Thanks. It turns out the product was listed under "Darkroom Display Materials & Specialty Paper" The current product from Kodak is called Endura Trans Digital RA display (formerly Duratrans) and the Fuji product is called Fujitrans digital display material. It appears that both the available materials at B&H have a translucent white background, not a clear one.

The Kodak material's publication says it "can be exposed both digitally and optically." Is this also true for the Fuji product? The Fuji publication seems to only mention digital exposure.

Has anyone here on APUG used either of these materials before for printing C-41 negatives? Is it just as simple as printing onto regular RA-4 paper? It's a bit pricey just to try it on a whim, although I'm really interested. Honestly, I'm a bit surprised that this material is still in production.

 

[Arklatexian]

Sad to say it but they are scanning it on flatbeds. They could get better results with a decent MF camera and decent MF scanner but the later these days are a road to depression, anxiety and all sorts of other pains caused by trying to live film in a digital world. No doubt about it, the recent high resolution digital cameras have effectively killed E6 for print output, but there is nothing and will never be anything like a glass mounted 6x6 projected onto a big screen.

Pardon me but every time I shoot E6 films and develop them myself or have them developed, I end up with transpariences or slides, not prints. Have I been missing something since E6 came on the scene. I had the same problem before that when I used E1. No prints there either.......Regards!.