Kodak Portra 800 and ColorPlus 200 now on polyester base

[brbo]

Apparently, you can now get this sort of information on FB sooner than on Photrio...

Kodak confirmed that Porta 800 and ColorPlus 200 are now coated on 3.94 mil Kodak ESTAR base. They made the change because their acetate supplier was not able to keep up with demand.

Anybody noticed any negative/positive side effects of this change? Although I don't shoot much Portra 800 (price) or CP 200 (meh) this change might come to other emulsions in the future, too.

 

[halfaman]

I remeber using some Rollei B/W films in 120 format with that kind of polyester base and the strip curl like hell when dry. Super unconfortable to handle, but I had the impression that the strip remains more flat in the negative holder compared to triacetate.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I've use lots of Kodak Estar-AH base film in the past and haven't seen a curling problem. But then, today's Kodak seems to have lost much of its expertise.

 

[pentaxuser]

Apparently, you can now get this sort of information on FB sooner than on Photrio...

.

No shock there, surely? Just look at Ilford's change. There will never be the equivalent of another Simon Galley as far as I can see. Indeed, I believe it is debatable whether there would have been someone like a Simon Galley, had the prevalence and power of social media been the force it is now, back then in the middle of the first decade of the new millenium

pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

Speaking of Simon Galley (once manager and owner at Ilford Photo), he strongly rejected PET as film base for still cameras, fearing possible destruction of the transport system.


I myself welcome the move by Kodak. Let us wait and see whether this is will become a permanent choice or only for the time being.

 

[nbagno]

Apparently, you can now get this sort of information on FB sooner than on Photrio...

Kodak confirmed that Porta 800 and ColorPlus 200 are now coated on 3.94 mil Kodak ESTAR base. They made the change because their acetate supplier was not able to keep up with demand.

Anybody noticed any negative/positive side effects of this change? Although I don't shoot much Portra 800 (price) or CP 200 (meh) this change might come to other emulsions in the future, too.

Where on FB?

 

[brbo]

Where on FB?

Noritsu Scanner Users group.

Pasting here one of the posts with the info from the thread that started with something like "... f***ing Kodak and its Chinese* cellophane base...":

Emailed them last week and got a phone call this morning from the man himself Tim Ryugo. He sounded almost like I had hurt his feelings but was very nice and provided the following info in an email:
"The new support is 3.94 mil Kodak ESTAR base, which features enhanced quality, transparency, and dimensional stability.
We made this change because our acetate supplier was not able to keep up with demand.
As demand for film has increased over the past couple of years we have converted some of our films to this base, we have shipped over 4m rolls with no negative feedback.
Portra 800 was converted around August last year and Colorplus shortly after that.
This was only done after extensive internal and external testing."


* Yes, the prevailing understanding on FB is that most of the Kodak's film is made in China or Colorado at best.

 

[nbagno]

Noritsu Scanner Users group.

Pasting here one of the posts with the info from the thread that started with something like "... f***ing Kodak and its Chinese* cellophane base...":

Emailed them last week and got a phone call this morning from the man himself Tim Ryugo. He sounded almost like I had hurt his feelings but was very nice and provided the following info in an email:
"The new support is 3.94 mil Kodak ESTAR base, which features enhanced quality, transparency, and dimensional stability.
We made this change because our acetate supplier was not able to keep up with demand.
As demand for film has increased over the past couple of years we have converted some of our films to this base, we have shipped over 4m rolls with no negative feedback.
Portra 800 was converted around August last year and Colorplus shortly after that.
This was only done after extensive internal and external testing."


* Yes, the prevailing understanding on FB is that most of the Kodak's film is made in China or Colorado at best.

Thanks. I'm a member of that group and just missed it. Thanks

 

[Lachlan Young]

* Yes, the prevailing understanding on FB is that most of the Kodak's film is made in China or Colorado at best.

There's an ESTAR plant at Kodak Park. Far more likely to be coming from there I suspect.

 

[Kino]

* Yes, the prevailing understanding on FB is that most of the Kodak's film is made in China or Colorado at best.

That shows you the value of information on Facebook; NILL.

 

[Huss]

Is this vegan?

 

[brbo]

That shows you the value of information on Facebook; NILL.

Still, people that scan hundreds of rolls noticing change from acetate to polyester and then getting confirmation from Kodak seems… well, possible. Do you have information that the change to Estar is false?

 

[brbo]

Is this vegan?

Only if you scrape off the emulsion.

 

[YoIaMoNwater]

Is this vegan?

Next trending YouTube video: vegan style oven baked film chips!!! Yum!

 

[MattKing]

The ESTAR base has both plusses and minuses. It is a bit more susceptible to light piping, and of course you don't want to use it in a motion picture or high speed motor drive camera unless it has been perfectly adjusted (ESTAR is strong and won't tear).
The Kodak Alaris technical document still says acetate for both 135 and 120 sizes. Is there an indication on the Facebook page whether the change applies to both 135 and 120?

 

[nbagno]

That shows you the value of information on Facebook; NILL.

Well, for good or bad, many of the resources there used to be available in other locations have migrated over to Facebook groups. That's the only reason I'm there. Have a Jobo technical question, there are two Facebook groups dedicated to Jobo. Noritsu scanners, on FB. etc etc. So, the value of information on FB is actually

That shows you the value of information on Facebook; NILL.

Although you may not like FB, me either for that matter, it's now become the best resource for certain things like Jobo's, Noritsu scanners, etc etc. I have an account there with zero friends but many groups that I am interested in. I've seen both good and bad information here as well.

 

[AgX]

The ESTAR base has both plusses and minuses. It is a bit more susceptible to light piping, and of course you don't want to use it in a motion picture or high speed motor drive camera unless it has been perfectly adjusted.

-) the light piping issue always referred to here is a misunderstanding likely based on using un-apt base for type 135 films. A PET base can be adjusted to have same light piping properties as TAC base


-) all cine print films today have got PET base
(Yes, one of our fellows here experienced a projector main drive shaft or so harmed by transport failure.)

-) PET based type 135 films have been widely on the market for over 15 years by Maco (aside of 72exposure thin-base film from Ilford from much earlier) and I do not remember a single report here of a camera having been broken to such films.
However Ilford say so:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...dwaynes-refusal-to-process.67884/#post-958097

 

[Huss]

Only if you scrape off the emulsion.

I'm not, I just know some vegan photographers who ignore the fact that the film they use has animal byproducts in it.
Guess that's a bridge too far!

 

[Lachlan Young]

If they've tweaked the Portra 800 coating package for Estar base, then it does open up the possibility of Portra 800 in sheets (and Colour Plus as well, I guess), if you're prepared to pay for them.

 

[cmacd123]

There's an ESTAR plant at Kodak Park. Far more likely to be coming from there I suspect.

Kodak dismantled (Scrapped) their Acetate film base manufacturing equipment, But do use ESTAR in many products. At the time they discontinued making Acetate base, they said that they had several years supply in stock and that they could buy more from a factory in Germany if they ran short. Based on what Henning mentioned a month or so ago, that may be the acetate plant that VEB ORWO used to own. Ilford also mentioned that their Acetate base comes from Germany at one time.

in the Motion Picture realm, Camera Negative is traditionally on Acetate. Lab intermediate films and sound films on Estar, and when Prints were made in abumdance, those were also on ESTAR base. when prints started to come out on ESTAR Theatre projectors were modified with shear pins to deal with an ESTAR jam.

ESTAR is longer lived and more stable in dimensions. It will not give Vinegar syndrome.

the 3.94 mil thickness SHOULD not cause too much problems, compared to the 5 mil acetate base. The Theatre prints were moved to thinner stock to deal with the fact that the Polyester is "Stiffer" (Modulus of elestisity) and the thiner stock was selected to have the same flexibility as the acetate.

poly can only be spliced with tape or Ultrasonic splicers, but that is not something still photographers normally need to do.

the ESTAR would have to be made with a GREY base to avoid light piping being a problem with normal 35 mm cameras.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Based on what Henning mentioned a month or so ago, that may be the acetate plant that VEB ORWO used to own. Ilford also mentioned that their Acetate base comes from Germany at one time.

Island Polymer Industries in Wolfen is presumably who you are referring to. It was the Wolfen triacetate plant, but thoroughly modernised. It may be that the Kodak plant was simply not as scalable/ efficient.

And C-41 triacetate base is glass-clear anyway, so polyester base is not a big deal when it comes to anti-halation treatment etc.

 

[cmacd123]

And C-41 triacetate base is glass-clear anyway, so polyester base is not a big deal when it comes to anti-halation treatment etc.

I suspect that it has more to do with the nature of the plastic itself, If you hold a 16mm acetate print, and a 16mm Polyester print on their reels up to the light, the polyester print will look much brighter through the width of the film than the acetate print.

now often colour negative has a silver anti-halo layer below the emulsion, which might well block any light piped. (that layer is made transparent by the bleach and fixer as part of the processing.)

 

[Kino]

the ESTAR would have to be made with a GREY base to avoid light piping being a problem with normal 35 mm cameras.

YES! The neat thing about Estar is its "water-clear" base that will actually improve light transmission a tiny bit and is clearer than Acetate.

Conversely, light-piping IS a problem with this material, so be even more careful when loading new rolls in outdoor situations.

Even with grey base, it can pipe several millimeters into the edge of the film if exposed to a bright light, but if you load in subdued light, it should be fine.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Polyester is a huge improvement. It's dimensionally stable. But I don't give a damn in this case because I don't use either of these films. I do use lower speed equivalents from Kodak. Acetate shrinks and won't stay in register very long if printing masks are involved - but that's the kind of thing amateurs don't give a damn about. Estar tends to be a little stiffer, which is nice when you want something to lay flatter in an enlarging carrier. And the better dimensional stability means its more wrinkle or warp resistant under the same conditions.

 

[AgX]

Aside of what you said PET is archival and does not disintegrate over time as TAC base does.

TAC base can/will be affected by Vinegar Disintegration, a process that leads to loss of the image as in the disintegration of Nitrate base.