Microfilms (or: will there ever be a new CMS20?)

[Henning Serger]

But they're really just the same thing?

As explained above: Just different wording / expression / semantics. Partly because of historic reasons (see Matt's post), partly because of different terms used in different countries / regions.

Is that film also produced by AGFA or MACO and being discontinued soon too?

Maco is not a manufacturer. They do not produce anything by themselves. They are to 100% a distribution company. All products offered under the Maco or Rollei-Film name are produced by other manufacturers for Maco.
SPUR Ultra R 800 is also based on an Agfa microfilm, and that film (as all Agfa microfilms) was discontinued, too.

Can you push these developers as well?

Yes, in the sense that the characteristic curves / the density values in the highlight zones remain relatively moderate and in the printable range.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[mshchem]

EI for daylight, tungsten and nuclear fusion

 

[Alan Johnson]

There are numerous films that might function as a replacement for CMS20, eg:

Eastman By The Numbers: BW Movie Film for Your Still Camera - The Film Photography Project

The Film Photography Project informs, engages and inspires film enthusiasts of all levels. While promoting the viability of vintage cameras and film.

filmphotographyproject.com

The problem seems to be that the development data is only given for "ordinary" developers and the result is relatively low ISO compared to CMS20 in its low contrast developer Adotech. Thus to get higher ISO with one of these replacement films there seems to be no readily available low contrast commercial developer, except this might work, I did not try it:

https://www.digitaltruth.com/products/photoformulary_tech/Formulary%20TD-3%20Developer%20[01-0065].pdf

Eastman 2369 ,aka 5369, seems to have the highest response at 200lppm frequency:

https://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/E5369/e5369.html

 

[Alan Johnson]

http://www.goinglomo.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Kodak-5369-Technical-Data.pdf

FPP High-Con 2369

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

I have to wonder how long the need for microfilm will keep it around...digital storage is much more compact, more conducive to copying for distribution than film copying, and can have incredibly fine resolution.

There is no such thing as digital long term storage. You continuously have to rewrite from one failing harddisk to a new one. Anything that needs to be readily accesible is better of in a digital storage but if you want to archive large amounts of data film beats digital currently after year 8. In other words: The costs for the film, developer, tin can and space in an abandoned salt mine (good for the next 10k years) are lower than 8 years of continuous rewriting of data and maintaining/replacing datacenter infrastructure. Not to mention the lower CO2 footprint.

 

[wiltw]

There is no such thing as digital long term storage. You continuously have to rewrite from one failing harddisk to a new one. Anything that needs to be readily accesible is better of in a digital storage but if you want to archive large amounts of data film beats digital currently after year 8. In other words: The costs for the film, developer, tin can and space in an abandoned salt mine (good for the next 10k years) are lower than 8 years of continuous rewriting of data and maintaining/replacing datacenter infrastructure. Not to mention the lower CO2 footprint.

Am well aware of the not-permanent nature of storage media for digital, yet I failed to consider that when speculating about replacement of microfilm with digital storage.
Certainly, periodic re-write of digital data can be automated, making sustenance of data less arduous for those responsible for perpetuity of data, but the cost of long term permanence is indeed higher. Yet if one archival agency burns and distributes digital data 'refresh' copies to tens of thousands of subscribing entities, the overhead need not be monstrous.

 

[cptrios]

The Fuji HR-20 microfilm is available unperforated in bulk rolls of 35mm with a minimum order of 20 but IMO it seems unlikely that it will be available in cassettes and perforated in the forseeable future.

Does anyone on here have any experience with HR-20? Microfilmworld.com (which is where I assume you're looking at it too) says it's equivalent to Imagelink, but who knows. I'd definitely be interested in going in on a bulk order if anyone else is...but 20 rolls might be a big ask!

By the way, does anyone have a recommendation for how to fit a microfilm bulk spool into a daylight loader? Is pretty much the only option to respool it onto a standard 35mm one?

 

[NiallerM]

Has anyone tried to reverse process CMS 20? Will it accept a bleach/redevelopment cycle? I have a couple of rolls and have been wondering about experimenting. What is the film base like?

Also, anyone have experience with 4x5 sheets of it? I have a project where I will be seeking the strong contrasts of this stock. Hell, do sheets of it still exist anywhere?

I'm really looking forward to pushing a roll of the stuff, and whadyakno? After a week of constant bright sun, today is beautifully grey and muted - as if I'd put in a request for the best conditions.

 

[dokko]

Has anyone tried to reverse process CMS 20? Will it accept a bleach/redevelopment cycle? I have a couple of rolls and have been wondering about experimenting. What is the film base like?

I haven't tried myself yet, but I remember quite a few discussions about it, and it seems to work excellent. I think Henning Serger amongst other wrote about it a few times, best to do a google search.
The base is very clear.

Also, anyone have experience with 4x5 sheets of it? I have a project where I will be seeking the strong contrasts of this stock. Hell, do sheets of it still exist anywhere?

yes, again quite a few people here wrote about 4x5 results.
fotoimpex is probably your only option for sheet film since they only sell of remaining stock directly. it's 99Euro for 25 sheet.

 

[NiallerM]

I haven't tried myself yet, but I remember quite a few discussions about it, and it seems to work excellent. I think Henning Serger amongst other wrote about it a few times, best to do a google search.
The base is very clear.



yes, again quite a few people here wrote about 4x5 results.
fotoimpex is probably your only option for sheet film since they only sell of remaining stock directly. it's 99Euro for 25 sheet.

Cheers for that! I'll definitely try the reversal. I'll run the film before committing to sheet, but I think it will be needed.

 

[NiallerM]

I haven't tried myself yet, but I remember quite a few discussions about it, and it seems to work excellent. I think Henning Serger amongst other wrote about it a few times, best to do a google search.
The base is very clear.



yes, again quite a few people here wrote about 4x5 results.
fotoimpex is probably your only option for sheet film since they only sell of remaining stock directly. it's 99Euro for 25 sheet.

Just to add: I have looked at the literature again, and Adox themselves say that it can be used for reversal. I'll use (and reuse(?)) their recommended developer, and use a standard bleach. Aw, hell. I'll use fresh developer for the second round. Why not push the boat out?

Thanks again.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Has anyone tried to reverse process CMS 20? Will it accept a bleach/redevelopment cycle?

@NiallerM: Adox CMS 20ii can be indeed reversal processed. I wrote about it here:

Adox CMS 20 Slides, what bleaching chem ??? - Page 4

I tried several ways to reverse ADOX CMS 20, I failed to obtain good results. Well, I obtained interesting burnt lomographic results: https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592977@N05/22569910808/in/dateposted-public/ But I'd like to obtain a quality result like if it was from one of...

www.largeformatphotography.info

 

[destroya]

I tried a roll in my standard reversal process and got totally clear slides. but I wont be doing more of them unless someone comes up with a process that works. the other rolls in the tank came out perfect tough.

john

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I tried a roll in my standard reversal process and got totally clear slides. but I wont be doing more of them unless someone comes up with a process that works. the other rolls in the tank came out perfect tough.

john

If your bleach was either the regular dichromate or permanganate bleach, then the results you got are not surprising. These bleaches are too strong for CMS 20ii and will remove all the halides. Perhaps a substantially diluted dichromate bleach or reduced bleaching time will work. OTOH Copper Chloride bleach works fine without any problem. However, unlike dichromate and permanganate bleaches, bleaching with Copper Sulphate involves two steps. First the silver image is converted into Silver Chloride and then the Chloride is removed by Ammonia.

 

[destroya]

If your bleach was either the regular dichromate or permanganate bleach, then the results you got are not surprising. These bleaches are too strong for CMS 20ii and will remove all the halides. Perhaps a substantially diluted dichromate bleach or reduced bleaching time will work. OTOH Copper Chloride bleach works fine without any problem. However, unlike dichromate and permanganate bleaches, bleaching with Copper Sulphate involves two steps. First the silver image is converted into Silver Chloride and then the Chloride is removed by Ammonia.

yes, it was my standard dichromate bleach. there was a very very faint image, so i did suspect that could have been the cause. I have very few rolls left, so I dont have enough to experiment with, so i'll stick with them as negs.