Svema film at Freestyle Photo in USA

[Agulliver]

Say what you want but I've been getting fresh bulk 120 from some guy in Ukraine. They also have 127 sized among others.

Interesting....could you point me in the direction of this guy in Ukraine?

 

[AgX]

If you don't want to do business with "some guy", the same offer make Astrum in Shostka. Whether you consider that economical it is you to decide.

 

[jtk]

Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....

 

[kevs]

Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....

What makes you think that?

 

[Wallendo]

This new film sounds a lot like the film marketed a few years ago by Silberra with an Indie Go Go fundraiser. They ended up buying AGFA aerial film and having it finished somewhere in Russia or Ukraine.

 

[Cholentpot]

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.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

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.

 

[Cholentpot]

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.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

I know this. I just found it interesting that they're cranking out film like this.

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.

 

[Henning Serger]

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).

Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....

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

 

[Cholentpot]

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

I don't care where it's made. As long as it works and it's cheap. I know it's cheap, I'm not sure if it works though...

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.

I just find it interesting that they're cutting film on machines that may be Korean War vintage.

 

[MattKing]

I just find it interesting that they're cutting film on machines that may be Korean War vintage.

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.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Just think how much Ilford paper is made in China....

And where did this pearl of wisdom or industrial insight come from? Any evidence whatsoever?

 

[MattKing]

And where did this pearl of wisdom or industrial insight come from? Any evidence whatsoever?

An extremely reliable and directly knowledgeable source - whose identity I am not at liberty to divulge.

 

[gorbas]

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

 

[Cholentpot]

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.

If it ain't broke...

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

Pretty neat that it's still around eh?

 

[removedacct1]

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

 

[Cholentpot]

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

Film community has a weird obsession of 'WHO MADE IT? WHERE IS IT FROM?'

No-one really cared back in the day.

What did you process those shots in? They look really nice.

 

[Henning Serger]

Hello Paul,

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.

I can understand your opinion. If that material works for you, that's fine. I will never say anything against that.
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.

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.

I have unfortunately made lots of very negative experiences with some (not all) of the rebranding / repackaging companies. Lots of misinformation were given, often even pure lies about the films. Including data sheets with completely wrong data trying to hide the truth about the film.
And that is neither good, nor necessary, nor helpful for the customers and the film photography scene at all.
Offering correct information about the films by the supplier should be an implicitness / matter of course.

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

Thanks for the suggestion. I have used Tech Pan in the past. But I have found my perfect replacement already years ago with ADOX CMS 20, now CMS 20 II. A film which is even surpassing Tech Pan in detail rendition.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[removedacct1]

What did you process those shots in? They look really nice.

Thanks. I believe I used D-76 with the A-2SH and probably Xtol with the rest.

 

[removedacct1]

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

Henning.
I can understand your displeasure when a company intentionally misleads you to think their product is something that it is not. I would likely have a different response to this subject if I had your experience as well.

 

[AgX]

Film community has a weird obsession of 'WHO MADE IT? WHERE IS IT FROM?'
No-one really cared back in the day.

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.

 

[cmacd123]

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.

My curiosity on all this is that their are some films sold as premium products (and at Premium Prices) that are apparently more or less identical to other brands sold as "student Specials" at low end prices.

I love to have choices and always like to try "new" films. BTW I did get some Astrum film a year ago, from a mail order seller. Some came in the Yellow and Blue box and another couple of rolls came in just a film can. 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. Beeing ages behind in the darkroom, I have not developed any yet.

 

[Henning Serger]

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.

Exactly.
And that are very good reasons for lots of enthusiast photographers.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

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.

Charles, that is a clear indication that you've got some Tasma or Agfa aerial film. Both companies also produce some of their aerial films on 60 micrometer thick base material. If you look at their websites, you will find these offerings.
35mm photo film is mostly coated on 125 to 135 micrometer triacetat base, or on 100 micrometer PET base. All these films work flawlessly in 35mm film cameras.
But 60 micrometer thin film can be problematic.

Best regards,
Henning