Interesting....could you point me in the direction of this guy in Ukraine?
Say what you want but I've been getting fresh bulk 120 from some guy in Ukraine. They also have 127 sized among others.
Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....
Here's what the physical stuff looks like.
I suspect the film is made somewhere else and cut and punched on very old machinery. Look at the leader on the cassette. I've yet to shoot a roll yet, I'll get around to it. I like the packaging though.
That long leader is needed for old bottom-loading cameras like the screwmount Leicas and the Russian FED and Zorki cameras. They require a leader cut to be 4 inches long; the short leader used on modern 35mm films will jam in those cameras.
I know this. I just found it interesting that they're cranking out film like this.
Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....
The facts are:
1. The original Svema factory was one of first film factories which were closed and completely dismantled. This happened even before the strong decline in film demand started.
None of the emulsion making and coating facilities there survived, it was all gone.
2. All of what is now offered under Astrum/Svema label is repackaged film from other film manufacturers, e.g. aerial films from Tasma and Agfa (Belgium).
None of the Harman technology / Ilford Photo papers are made in China. It is all made at their own factory in Mobberley. I've been there, I've seen it.
And from my other factory visits and my latest market research travel in China I can ensure you, that there is no silver-halide photo paper factory in China which would be able to produce BW photo paper on the excellent Ilford quality level. Their papers are absolute high-tech products.
Best regards,
Henning
If the film is being cut and packaged in the former Soviet Union, its probably because the USSR was still making cameras that needed it into the 1980s and possibly the 90s.
Then you would be interested to know that the machine Eastman Kodak uses to perforate the motion picture film sold and used to shoot big screen movies is the same machine as the one used to perforate the film that Spartacus was shot on in 1960.I just find it interesting that they're cutting film on machines that may be Korean War vintage.
And where did this pearl of wisdom or industrial insight come from? Any evidence whatsoever?Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....
An extremely reliable and directly knowledgeable source - whose identity I am not at liberty to divulge.And where did this pearl of wisdom or industrial insight come from? Any evidence whatsoever?
Then you would be interested to know that the machine Eastman Kodak uses to perforate the motion picture film sold and used to shoot big screen movies is the same machine as the one used to perforate the film that Spartacus was shot on in 1960.
And there is just one machine at Kodak that can do that.
That long leader on 35 is most likely left over from old GOST standard. It's cheaper to leave as is then reconfigure whole machine or jig. Haven't seen it for very long time, since 80's
2. All of what is now offered under Astrum/Svema label is repackaged film from other film manufacturers, e.g. aerial films from Tasma and Agfa (Belgium).
This is correct as far as I know. I don't care who MADE it, I am simply glad that Astrum packages it and makes it available. The Astrum Foto 100,200 and 400 films are traditional grain panchromatic emulsions that are a lot like Tri-X and FP4 family of films and are consistent, reliable and a pleasure to use. It doesn't hurt that they are inexpensive as well. Most of these films (35mm pre-loaded cassettes) are between $3 and $4.5 USD per roll, and with shipping it adds just under a dollar per roll, so that's very budget friendly. I also like the "specialty" films like MZ-3 (with an ASA of 3!) for their unusual tonality (this is an orthochromatic emulsion) and incredible sharpness and FINE grain. If you are looking for an alternative to Kodak Tech Pan and don't mind it being orthochromatic, then MZ-3 might just do it for you. See: https://flic.kr/p/29jTq2o
Here is a photo made with Astrum's A-2SH 400 film: https://live.staticflickr.com/1836/43173627325_77052cd9fa_k.jpg
And this is made with Astrum Foto 200: https://flic.kr/p/Q7d6Z8
This is correct as far as I know. I don't care who MADE it, I am simply glad that Astrum packages it and makes it available.
If you are looking for an alternative to Kodak Tech Pan and don't mind it being orthochromatic, then MZ-3 might just do it for you. See: https://flic.kr/p/29jTq2o
What did you process those shots in? They look really nice.
Hello Paul,
I can understand your opinion. If that material works for you, that's fine. I will never say anything against that.
For me personally there are some additional factors: I don't like it at all if companies try to fool me. And unfortunately several of these rebranding / repackiging companies with no own film production have tried that. Some have even tried to instrumentalize me in my position as a PhotoKlassik author. And that is completely unacceptable!! If people cross this border, my good will and confidence is totally lost.
A Svema / Astrum distributor here in my country some years ago wanted me to report about their films in The PhotoKlassik, and he tried to fool me with this "new and own film production" story. He could not give any proof for it. I told him then the facts and gave links to the destroyed factory. I have never heard again from him.
Best regards,
Henning
Film community has a weird obsession of 'WHO MADE IT? WHERE IS IT FROM?'
No-one really cared back in the day.
As most of the photrio users want to know the origin and real manufacturers of the films they intend to buy, those here in this thread who know the origin - me included - just wanted to give the information to those who want to know. Not more, not less.
Out of several reasons to ask such question, there is one very well reasoned:
To avoid buying a film that one already knows for maybe higher price or more hassle or risk, or that one maybe already dislikes.
Both batches the film was very stiff in feeding out of the cassette, and were on a THIN Poly base. --Thinner than MP Print film.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?