One day at a time sir, Kodak says they have years worth of the current acetate, since they are high on quality, this will hopefully give them enough time to source out good material...
Kodak stops making acetate film base by Making KODAK Film author
-
A
- Thread starter laser
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Sinar P2 8x10 Metering Back & Bellows
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Leica 90mm f2.5 Summarit-M
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
-
For Sale Minolta 7000 (Refurbished) w/ 50mm f/1.7
- Started by Acere
-
For Sale FS: RARE Nikkormat FS body for Parts or Repair
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
Sold GONE!...FREE for Shipping Cost: Polaroid 110 Pathfinder Camera Body for Parts or Repair
- Started by AnselMortensen
Forum statistics
One day at a time sir, Kodak says they have years worth of the current acetate, since they are high on quality, this will hopefully give them enough time to source out good material...
Pet film base is much more archival. For my purposes of documentation I favor it over the acetate base. For all formats 35, 120 and sheet film, I might add.
If PET didn't have the light-piping issues I'd much rather use it over an acetate base any day of the week. I am not concerned with jamming cameras with it, so that's not an issue for me. But polyesters have a very long life-time. However, if PET for all roll films meant having to screw with some kind of REMJET layer, then know, I'd rather use acetate.
Movie Projection started using Polyester in the 1950 era, and it is needed to support the "Platter Drives" that hold enough film to run fro a couple of hours at 90 feet a minute. The prints are spliced together with Tape, as you cannot cement splice polyester. Movie polyester is thinner than acetate, to exhibit the same stiffness. Light piping is not a problem as the print stock is used in the labs and so is loaded in the darkroom. Projectors have been set up with shear pins and such to avoid broken parts.
Movie Camera neg is GENERALLY on acetate. before digital intermediate, the camera negative was cut and spliced in the editing shop. Things like IMAX Require the strength of Poly in the Camera.
Still 35mm film is generally acetate, but things like tech pan for instance have been Poly. The last of the EFKE film was on poly. The Agfa aviphot stock is all poly. (Rollei/Maco) The short lived Ilford HP5 Motorwinder film was on poly.
Poly can be curtly, attract Static, light pipe and is almost impossible to tear by hand. Often the are are Back Coatings and grey dyes used to minimize this problem. Sheet film is often made on Poly for the extra stiffness.
Poly will not get vinegar syndrome.
Movie Camera neg is GENERALLY on acetate. before digital intermediate, the camera negative was cut and spliced in the editing shop. Things like IMAX Require the strength of Poly in the Camera.
Still 35mm film is generally acetate, but things like tech pan for instance have been Poly. The last of the EFKE film was on poly. The Agfa aviphot stock is all poly. (Rollei/Maco) The short lived Ilford HP5 Motorwinder film was on poly.
Poly can be curtly, attract Static, light pipe and is almost impossible to tear by hand. Often the are are Back Coatings and grey dyes used to minimize this problem. Sheet film is often made on Poly for the extra stiffness.
Poly will not get vinegar syndrome.
Also, while polyester may not be tearable (I don't tear my film anyway) it is easily cut with scissors. Kodak 2485 is also an ESTAR based film, as most of the surveillance stocks are.
Rem-jet is not an issue here. And "years" of inventory. That is insane!
"Years", that's what Kodak says...
You can make your bulletproof Windows from Kodak film with this new Polyester thing.
And now we know the kind of life you're living ^^ haha
~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
When was the last time Kodak actually used the words 'still photography' in one of their statements?
I remember that when DuPont was still making movie stock, they put their negative and reversal materials on their (patented) polyester Cronar base. This was a different material than Estar, and it was less subject to light piping. The point is that it can be done and was done on a commercial scale quite successfully. Whether that is in store for future film is a question.
Do we know if Kodak is still using their stocked up acetate for film production or if they have been purchasing it elsewhere already?
I remember seeing a high speed camera jam with film on Estar support. There were parts all over the MP lab.
PE
PE
Simon Galley of Ilford related the tale of when the same thing happened in one of there Coating areas. large metal parts bent. He said at the time he would never trust mylar in his camera.
Light piping is not necessarily a matter of base material. But a matter of intended use of that base.
Someting always overlooked here at Apug (in the sense of Acetate good, Polyester bad).
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,862
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Fotochemika's antihalation coatings weren't all that good to begin with. But if people just stuck with the traditional rule of loading roll film in
the shade, there wasn't a problem.
the shade, there wasn't a problem.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |