New fast (800) Tungsten balanced film called Cinestill

AgX · Sep 9, 2013

In fact I do not know about any small volume ECN or ECP chemicals kit.

Photo Engineer · Sep 9, 2013

There are no small volume Motion Picture kits.

But, processing ECN in C41 with a push might adjust contrast such that good images are obtained for the average user. Try it. If you like it try more and more! After all, it ensures the life of analog.

PE

Roger Cole · Sep 9, 2013

It could be quite fun, the lack of remjet for antihalation could provide some neat effects when used intentionally. Heck, I immediately started wondering what it would look like cross processed in E6!

clayne · Sep 9, 2013

True there are no small volume ECN-2 kits out there but this does not preclude one from purchasing component chemicals and mixing it up for personal use on a small scale.

Photo Engineer · Sep 9, 2013

Gee. This is not really cross processing, it is sideways processing!

cmacd123 · Sep 10, 2013

REM-Jet is always a bit of a pain, but it is one of the most effective anti-halation setups out there. the other major place you (would have) found it was on Kodachrome.

The Movie processors have a special set with a pre-bath, and water jets to flush it away. To save water the current Movie print film has stopped using rem-jet in favor of a AHU layer that decolorises in the normal process and the ECP-2 has a new schedule that omits the Jet removal and the wash stage to save water, (they went to dye sound tracks many years ago to likewise omit an extra wash step. that required the sound heads in all theatres to change to a RED LED or Laser light source) )

As far as the speed if you read AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER magazine you will find that many cinematographers routinely use the 500T films at a Lower ISO to ensure they get good shadow detail.

The Movie folks prefer the Tungsten balance film as it is easy to slap on a 85 filter to shoot in daylight/HMI/Arc/Florescent etc. with a mionimal loss of speed, (100T at 64 daylight for example)

AgX · Sep 10, 2013

Kodak themselves do not even give ISO speeds but only E.I. speeds for that film.

Photo Engineer · Sep 10, 2013

Charles, the last ECN I encountered was processed by a friend a year ago, and he had to wrestle with the rem-jet. So tell me they changed in the last year? I'll have to check this out.

As for rem-jet though, it also served as an antistaic layer in the cameras. The rapid motion of the film could build up a lot of static. What did they use as an antistat? I have to check that out too.

PE

frobozz · Sep 10, 2013

Photo Engineer said:
Charles, the last ECN I encountered was processed by a friend a year ago, and he had to wrestle with the rem-jet. So tell me they changed in the last year? I'll have to check this out.

That confused me too, but after reading it a couple of times I think he's only talking about print film (ECP,not ECN).

I do have to wonder how come they could make the 100D camera film with no RemJet, but couldn't manage it with the negative films?

Duncan

AgX · Sep 10, 2013

Photo Engineer said:
As for rem-jet though, it also served as an antistaic layer in the cameras. The rapid motion of the film could build up a lot of static. What did they use as an antistat? I have to check that out too.

PEDOT would be an alternative. Agfa for instance use that for several purposes including as antistatic layer in their films.

Photo Engineer · Sep 10, 2013

All I know is that EK used rem-jet for two purposes.

PE

David Grenet · Sep 10, 2013

frobozz said:
That confused me too, but after reading it a couple of times I think he's only talking about print film (ECP,not ECN).

I do have to wonder how come they could make the 100D camera film with no RemJet, but couldn't manage it with the negative films?

It isn't that they can't make it without remjet, as they clearly make colour neg film without it for still photography. I think it's more that the remjet is more suitable for MP use but it was easier to simply use a still emulsion (E100VS if the internet is to be believed) with different perforation and edge marking as their MP transparency offering.

clayne · Sep 11, 2013

Is 250D remjetted?

AgX · Sep 11, 2013

Yes.

All Kodak cine camera negative films have got it.

clayne · Sep 11, 2013

That conflicts with the 100D statement though.

frobozz · Sep 11, 2013

clayne said:
That conflicts with the 100D statement though.

100D is not a negative film, it is (was) their last color positive film.

Duncan

oldlincoln · Sep 11, 2013

AgX said:
Yes.

All Kodak cine camera negative films have got it.

All the COLOR cine film.

AgX · Sep 11, 2013

Yes, I meant colour.
With all the adjectives I lost one....

David Grenet · Sep 11, 2013

Sorry, the 100D I assume was being referred to was E100D, Kodak's transparency MP offering. All negative films use remjet.

cmacd123 · Sep 12, 2013

Photo Engineer said:
So tell me they changed in the last year? I'll have to check this out.
As for rem-jet though, it also served as an antistaic layer in the cameras.

I was referring to Eastman Colour Print 3383/2383 as I recall. It does have a process survivable antistaic layer that gives the back of the film a bit of an iridescent sheen.
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Distribution_And_Exhibition/2383.htm

"2383/3383 Film is coated on a new ESTAR base featuring proprietary Kodak technology that replaces rem-jet with a process-surviving, anti-static layer, and scratch-resistant backing layer. This film has an efficient antihalation layer under the emulsion layers, using patented solid particle dyes that are decolorized and removed during processing."

AFAIK ALL negative film uses a version of rem jet. The first Fuji Movie negative did not but they quickly fell in line.

As you indicated static is a problem, for example 16mm Movie film in 100ft rolls still comes on a metal spool, while Microfilm comes on an almost identical plastic spool.

cmacd123 · Sep 12, 2013

David Grenet said:
I think it's more that the remjet is more suitable for MP use but it was easier to simply use a still emulsion .

Yes, although they also said that they had to make unspecified changes to the still ektachrome for Movie use. Likely some form of lubrication on the backing. Of course the whole project may have been to use up master rolls of ektachrome by selling it as a KWEL thing to Music Video producers. For a while they had a super 8 version of 64T until the 64T still film ran out.

Colour Negative for movie use is always with rem jet, they have probably been tempted to use it for B&W also but the Labs would have been forced to change their processors.

Photo Engineer · Sep 12, 2013

Charles;

If you mean ESP, specify it. If you mean ECN specify it. Otherwise it causes confusion.

PE

AgX · Sep 13, 2013

cmacd123 said:
AFAIK ALL negative film uses a version of rem jet. The first Fuji Movie negative did not but they quickly fell in line.

No, but you may be right refering to cine, colour negative, camera films.

clayne · Sep 13, 2013

Obviously that was implied by context, AgX.

cmacd123 · Sep 14, 2013

HI Ron, Sorry of my post was confusing, I THOUGHT I made it clear that I was referring to the "Print" stock - ECP.

cmacd123 said:
To save water the current Movie print film has stopped using rem-jet in favor of a AHU layer that decolorises in the normal process and the ECP-2 has a new schedule that omits the Jet removal and the wash stage to save water, (they went to dye sound tracks many years ago to likewise omit an extra wash step. that required the sound heads in all theatres to change to a RED LED or Laser light source) )

And Yes, Agx the context of this thread is the "cine" or Movie stocks, as the subject film is Eastman colour NEGATIVE 500T with teh rem-jet anti-halation layer somehow removed.

I am not sure of the VERY OLD Ektachrome movie film of the 1970 era that used Process ME-4 may have also had a rem-jet step that was the major difference between ME-4 and plain E-4 not that it matters much at this late date.

New fast (800) Tungsten balanced film called Cinestill

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency