New films shown at ICIS by Fuji and Kodak

benjiboy · May 12, 2006

Brings to mind an old photographic saying that a lens or film was "so fast you could shoot a black cat in a coal cellar with it " now we really can.

dschneller · May 12, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
Basically, you use a heated metal plate and you hold the film on the plate (in the industry it is called a hot shoe) and the film develops. Don't inhale the fumes.

PE

Would a hot water bath work as well?

Petzi · May 12, 2006

Water isn't liquid at 160 deg C.

dschneller · May 12, 2006

Petzi said:
Water isn't liquid at 160 deg C.

Understood, I was wondering if the 160 deg C was a critical temperature or if development could occurr at a lower temperature for a longer time. Similar to using a diluted developer.

I also wonder if it could be baked in an oven at 160 deg C. The thought of holding the film on a hot plate in the dark brings to mind images of burnt fingers and hands!

Petzi · May 12, 2006

I think an oven could not work because when you open it, the hot air comes out. Then you insert the film. The film needs to be warmed up to the right temperature, and that is going to take a while because even when the air has the right temperature, it is not a good conductor of heat and does not store heat well. It would thus be cooled in the vicinity of the film for a moment.

So it would be pretty hard to control temperature and time of development. In the oven you would have to rely mostly on convection (and perhaps some radiation), while the metal of mummy's flat iron stores heat well, and its surface would not be significantly cooled down by the contact with the film.

Perhaps an FB paper dryer could work, but I think most can not reach 160 deg C.

bogdan · May 12, 2006

Please post photos!

If you'd just have some minutes, please post some pictures made with this mythical film. I'd have several friend who'd be pretty interested, too...

Bogdan

gcoates · May 12, 2006

PE, do you have any idea what the grain structure would look like for such a film? This is VERY interesting...

Photo Engineer · May 12, 2006

Posting pictures would be difficult as it is now only published in the copyright journal of the ICIS 06. It is not mythical and I really am not happy with that appelation (sorry).

The grain structure appears to be in the range of 400 speed films or better. This has surprised eveyone connected with this project at EK from what I can gather from their presentation at ICIS 06.

I want you to be aware that this was described in the presence of Dr Tadecki Tani of Fuji R&D and one of the inventors, moreover Dr. Tani, one of the inventors and I had dinner together Sunday night. Dr. Tani had no questions or objections to this article which was subject to peer review. This is no myth, it is real.

Please forgive the lack of pictures as this is not mine to post.

PE

Petzi · May 12, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
The grain structure appears to be in the range of 400 speed films or better.

And they have still not decided whether to market it?

Photo Engineer · May 12, 2006

Petzi said:
And they have still not decided whether to market it?

The response both here on APUG and at the ICIS conference was "UNDERWHELMING" to say the least.

Since a small run of this is worth a small fortune, I can understand the EK POV.

PE

Terence · May 12, 2006

To be honest, I only just came across this post. I typically don't look in this forum. I have to imagine a LOT of APUGgers would be interested. I have to agree though, I'm not sure how a typical person would develop this film.

Petzi · May 12, 2006

If the film is usable in general photography, and it has the properties decribed here, then it is a sensation. It would be a good reason to get the 35mm camera out of the cellar.

Talk to photo magazines about it, have them run a story about this achievement. Then you can reach a lot more people than here and spread the news faster.

egdinger · May 12, 2006

The 24000 iso film is really exciting, and I like the idea of thermal developement. Could one use a clothes iron and just run it over the surface to get it to develope?

I think a reason for the lack of response is that most people can't think of a use for it. I for one would think it would be great for spelunking, and painting with light in situations where you don't want to use a large light.

bobbysandstrom · May 12, 2006

I think the lack of response is due to the lack of this product even registering with someone casually perusing the forum. It would be and unbelievable thing to have such a film and I think everyone who thought about it for a minute would agree!

agGNOME · May 12, 2006

bobbysandstrom said:
I think the lack of response is due to the lack of this product even registering with someone casually perusing the forum. It would be and unbelievable thing to have such a film and I think everyone who thought about it for a minute would agree!

I agree, I would love to try/use this film for available light photography. The
lack of interest that may have been displayed could be the unfamiliar factors surrounding the handling/processing of the film, or even feelings of indifference towards Kodak from some.

For those that are interested, but feeling lazy at the moment here's a 'copy and paste' operation for you: use the following attachment to paste this word document into an email.

BTW, I hope Ron Mowrey does not mind the recreating of the posted jpeg into a more easily transmitted form.

fparnold · May 12, 2006

I'll admit not having replied since as an amateur, I'm unlikely to shoot more than ~12 -20 rolls (35mm vs 120)/year. On the other hand, given my preference for hand-holding the TLR, and a dark environment, it would probably become my workhorse B&W, if the tonality is ok and I could process it reasonably convieniently.

I'd love to see it, but I'm afraid that I don't represent enough of a market to make much difference to EK. OTOH, as long as it's not outrageously priced, I'd take 20 rolls in 120 (or 5 - 10 boxes in 4x5) to give it a good trial run. I kind of like the idea of film that could be ironed.

fdisilvestro · May 13, 2006

I suggest everyone interested in this film to send the form to Kodak. There might be hundreds of us that think will shot 10~20 rolls a year. It is the total quantity that counts.

bobbysandstrom · May 13, 2006

Just sent in my form!

Tom Hoskinson · May 13, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
Unless I see interest in the advance order form from Kodak for the new high speed film, I will not go to the trouble of scanning it in and posting it.

I thought that this first by EK would generate more interest.

PE

Hi PE! I'd like to send in an advance order for Kodak's new high speed film.

wirehead · May 13, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
The response both here on APUG and at the ICIS conference was "UNDERWHELMING" to say the least.

I think the biggest thing is that if you tell a film shooter about it, their eyes will light up. I told a few of my friends about it thursday evening and they all want it like a highschool kid wants the keys to daddy's Porsche.

But they have to hear about it first. And they have to still own a film camera.

But, really. Pinhole photography at handholdable shutter speeds, complete with fill-flash. Moonlight photography at handholdable shutter speeds. Grain like a 400asa film.

Roger Krueger · May 13, 2006

O.K., I sent my form in.

My biggest concern is how this could be developed at home. Does overdevelopment matter? A clothes iron is hot enough, but getting a precise temperature and time would be tough. Ditto for an oven. Plus a moving surface like a clothes iron would scratch.

I know this is well above dry-mount temperatures, but are there dry-mount presses that could be overdriven to this temp?

In general mucking about a 160C surface in the dark doesn't seem like a whole lot of fun, but for a real ISO 12,000 I guess I'll learn to live with a few burns.

Now that I think about it, this might be the one case where 4x5 would be a lot more convenient than roll film--you could probably convert one of those electric fry pans or waffle irons (the reversible ones that have a flat surface too).

OTOH, sending it out to a central facility like with Kodachrome and waiting 14 days to see your images would pretty much kill my interest. So would having to spend more than about $250 on special equipment for a film that has a seriously uncertain future.

ajuk · May 13, 2006

The data for the 400 speed film indicates that it should have the grain and color reproduction of their 100 speed reversal films.

I thought Provia 400x has an RMS of 11 compared to there 100 speed films 7 or 8?

Kodak showed a sample motion picture film comparing their new 50D Vision film and their other new Vision films. The shots were stunning, especially the stills comparing grain and sharpness. This was followed by a talk on the 2 electron sensitization.

Is that still only in movie film?

Seems strange Fuji would introduce a new 1200 speed film, bit of an odd ball number, unless they have decided they got the grain ETC good enough at that speed to make an ISO 1200 portrait film? Would be interesting to see a comparison between 400f and 400x.

Oh and is there a link to any other pages on the web mentioning this ISO 24000 film?

Photo Engineer · May 13, 2006

I am going to guess here, but I would imagine that since this is an experimental film, Kodak will want the exposed film returned to them for 2 reasons.

1. To insure proper processing of this film - it is the first time out there, and as was pointed out above, it is not easy to come up with a processor for this type of film. They will want to insure uniform, high-quality processing with known processing equipment.

2. They will want to see the pictures to monitor quality. In fact, you may be asked to fill out questionaires regarding exposure and etc....

Then, the film will be returned to you processed.

That is, if this even takes place at all. No guarantees. They are just testing the waters here. Anyhow, that is my guess.

Now, as for processing, and having had some experience processing thermal materials, you do not want to have anything touch the emulsion side while processing! You cannot press between two items. The emulsion would probably stick to anything while hot. So, the heat processes that I know of involve heating the back of the support.

PE

agGNOME · May 13, 2006

Roger Krueger said:
OTOH, sending it out to a central facility like with Kodachrome and waiting 14 days to see your images would pretty much kill my interest. So would having to spend more than about $250 on special equipment for a film that has a seriously uncertain future.

I would have the exact same concerns, although I'd be willing to put up with sending the film off during a "testing" phase. After the testing has been satisfied, I'd likely only use the film if I can process it at home. PE, if possible can you fill us in on what equipment/procedure might be suitable for setting up a processing scheme for such film ?

Photo Engineer · May 13, 2006

agGNOME said:
I would have the exact same concerns, although I'd be willing to put up with sending the film off during a "testing" phase. After the testing has been satisfied, I'd likely only use the film if I can process it at home. PE, if possible can you fill us in on what equipment/procedure might be suitable for setting up a processing scheme for such film ?

We used a heated archlike metal plate called a 'shoe' which had a thermometer inserted into it to read temperature, and it was heated by coils. The film was processed by moving the base side slowly over the shoe so that total contact time from start to finish equalled the development time required.

This could be done manually for sheets of film or paper, or automatically with a moving web of film, using rollers to move it across the shoe.

I don't suggest that anyone do this in total darkness and that is why I suspect that Kodak will process the first batch (if any) themselves to provide quality and safety.

PE

New films shown at ICIS by Fuji and Kodak

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency