Kodak planning to replace remjet on vision 3 films

[MultiFormat Shooter]

Does anyone know when Eastman Kodak stopped producing cellulose triacetate, in-house?

 

[bfilm]

Does anyone know when Eastman Kodak stopped producing cellulose triacetate, in-house?

It was in 2013 that Kodak stopped making cellulose triacetate.

I think the main makers today, at least for the cellulose triacetate that is used for film base, are Daicel in Japan and Island Polymer Industries in Germany.

Daicel has been Fuji's supplier since the beginning. In fact, Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. was originally spun off from Daicel in 1934.

Island Polymer Industries is the successor to the old AGFA and ORWO.

https://www.daicel.com/cell_ac/en/

https://www.daicel.com/cell_ac/en/triacetate/

https://www.islandpolymer.com/tac-for-photographic-purposes

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

It was in 2013 that Kodak stopped making cellulose triacetate....

Thanks! That's a lot of good information.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Has anyone done bleach bypass processing with the new Vision3 films? Any experiences to share?

 

[Fortepun]

Can't stop

 

[Fortepun]

Has anyone done bleach bypass processing with the new Vision3 films? Any experiences to share?

Nope, but this is what Kodak says: "The new Anti-Halation layer is a technically advanced formulation containing proprietary components and SILVER. This will result in significantly higher densities in a skip-bleach process."

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Nope, but this is what Kodak says: "The new Anti-Halation layer is a technically advanced formulation containing proprietary components and SILVER. This will result in significantly higher densities in a skip-bleach process."

Thanks so much!

 

[BHuij]

FYI I just developed and am currently scanning my first roll of Vision3 250D AHU (bought from Reflx lab in a roll of 36 as "320D AHU").

The only thing I changed from normal ECN-2 development was handling the remjet (or lack thereof). With the older 250D, I'd use Kodak's actual recipe for remjet removal bath as the first step, then rinse pretty thoroughly a few times until the water wasn't coming out gray anymore. Then after fixing, I'd unspool the film and gently rub off any remaining remjet with a gloved thumb in running warm water.

With this AHU stuff I just used a normal 2-minute presoak at temperature and developed per usual, also skipping the mechanical removal step after fixing. It looks exactly as good as the old stuff, and was simpler to process, which was my hope.

Anyone know where I can get more of this stuff? I don't care who is re-rolling it. Reflx lab appears to be out of stock. In the US but willing to ship from outside the country.

 

[Cholentpot]

FYI I just developed and am currently scanning my first roll of Vision3 250D AHU (bought from Reflx lab in a roll of 36 as "320D AHU").

The only thing I changed from normal ECN-2 development was handling the remjet (or lack thereof). With the older 250D, I'd use Kodak's actual recipe for remjet removal bath as the first step, then rinse pretty thoroughly a few times until the water wasn't coming out gray anymore. Then after fixing, I'd unspool the film and gently rub off any remaining remjet with a gloved thumb in running warm water.

With this AHU stuff I just used a normal 2-minute presoak at temperature and developed per usual, also skipping the mechanical removal step after fixing. It looks exactly as good as the old stuff, and was simpler to process, which was my hope.

Anyone know where I can get more of this stuff? I don't care who is re-rolling it. Reflx lab appears to be out of stock. In the US but willing to ship from outside the country.

Can we start a 'studio' and do a group buy? I'm out of 250D and I can't get my mittens on short ends right now.

 

[ChrisGalway]

FYI, ThisIsHowIRollFilm https://thisishowirollfilm.co.uk/ in the UK has AHU 250D at UK£12/roll.

There has to be lots of suppliers in the US!

 

[nathanbucs]

This guy is US based:

https://www.reddit.com/r/photomarket/s/AGCwOQDTvh

 

[Cholentpot]

This guy is US based:

https://www.reddit.com/r/photomarket/s/AGCwOQDTvh

I want 100-400 feet, not single rolls.

 

[blee1996]

I saw Reflx Labs has 320D AHU in stock again, so I ordered two rolls to try out. While I was at it, I ordered two rolls of Lucky 200 color film too. We shall see...

 

[BHuij]

I haven't shot any personally, but I've been pleasantly surprised with how decent Lucky 200 looks in the scans I've seen online.

 

[blee1996]

I just developed first roll of Kodak Vision 320D AHU (Reflx Labs branded) in Kodak C41 kit, and the color was quite awful. I don't think it is worth posting here, and cross-process this film in C41 is ruining it. In the same tank, the also new-to-me Lucky C200 roll turns out well (I posted in another thread).

For my next roll of 320D AHU, I will definitely use proper ECN-2 chemical (sans remjet removal) and see if I can get better results.

 

[Fortepun]

I just developed first roll of Kodak Vision 320D AHU (Reflx Labs branded) in Kodak C41 kit, and the color was quite awful. I don't think it is worth posting here, and cross-process this film in C41 is ruining it. In the same tank, the also new-to-me Lucky C200 roll turns out well (I posted in another thread).

For my next roll of 320D AHU, I will definitely use proper ECN-2 chemical (sans remjet removal) and see if I can get better results.

It's true. The new AHU looks worse developed in C41 than in ECN-2, regardless of remjet.

 

[koraks]

I can't imagine it's different than the remjet-backed version. After all, Kodak ensured that the film as such is the same, so logically, it will process the same. Mind you, I've never found Vision3 developed in C41 to come out very well.

 

[lamerko]

I don't have any of the new film with AHU (I still have quite a lot of older stock - I even stocked up right before they stopped production temporarily), but I've also heard some complaints from friends. Perhaps the new film behaves a bit differently under 'atypical' conditions, compared to the tightly controlled lighting on film sets. Kodak guarantees it for cinema use, but not necessarily for the ways this film is used outside of that context…
If you remember the CineStill version with the remjet removed - it behaved quite differently, not just because of the halos but overall. Perhaps AHU cannot compensate 100% for certain aspects, and even though it's technically the same emulsion, there may still be some differences…

 

[brbo]

If you remember the CineStill version with the remjet removed - it behaved quite differently, not just because of the halos but overall.

Really? How?

 

[koraks]

If you remember the CineStill version with the remjet removed - it behaved quite differently, not just because of the halos but overall.

I don't believe this to be true.

Also, Kodak has been very clear on the identical performance of the old vs. the new AHU product:

This change does not alter sensitometric performance, nor does it require any
adjustments in processing while product with remjet is still in the market. During
the period there is both remjet-backed VISION3 film and the new VISION3 AHU film
structure in the market, there is no issue with combining remjet and AHU product
together in any workflow. From capture to processing and post-production, the two
film structures work together seamlessly.

If you see differences, it's due to differences in the processing and possibly post-processing digital corrections.

 

[dokko]

Perhaps the new film behaves a bit differently under 'atypical' conditions, compared to the tightly controlled lighting on film sets. Kodak guarantees it for cinema use, but not necessarily for the ways this film is used outside of that context…

I have not used the new version without remjet, but as koraks writes, it‘s very unlikely to behave differently than the old version since Kodak specially mentions the films behave the same.

I‘ve shot quite a lot of Vision3 film processed in ECN-2 for motion picture projects, many of them in uncontrolled/mixed light situations, and the film reacts beautifully (similar to Portra800 and better than most other photo emulsions).

I‘ve also made many scans and some fully analog prints of Vision3 films cross-processed in C-41 chemicals and like koraks, I find the color reproduction rather unsatisfactory and much worse than properly developed cine film in ECN-2 if aiming for natural colors.