What is "Kodak Safety Film"?

natelfo

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
25
Format
Medium Format
I have a collection of some older photography books, primarily about darkroom technique, and a majority of the illustrations that show negative strips are imprinted "Kodak Safety Film" on the negatives. The books don't really specify the exact type of film other than Technical Pan BW. What makes this film so safe? At first I thought maybe it could be developed under a safelight, but I think that only Orthochromatic film can be developed under a safelight. I am probably wrong, and that's why I am asking. I assume that this film is no longer produced and these books are mostly from the 1970's and 80's. Could someone please shed some light on this so I can sleep at night...:confused:
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
To the best of my knowledge, a non-flammable base material is what made it safety film...or at least a lot less flammable than what they were using before. I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think that's the gist of it.
 

Arvee

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
976
Location
Great Basin
Format
Multi Format
2F is correct. Early film was made on a cellulose nitrate base (nitrocellulose) and was extremely unstable and flammable.

-Fred
 
OP
OP

natelfo

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
25
Format
Medium Format
Thanks. It's all down hill from here
 

Larry Bullis

Subscriber
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
1,257
Location
Anacortes, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
2F/2F said:
To the best of my knowledge, a non-flammable base material is what made it safety film...or at least a lot less flammable than what they were using before. I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think that's the gist of it.
Click to expand...

You got it. They were using cellulose nitrate, which had a nasty habit of burning up or even exploding if conditions were right and the film was in an enclosed container. Robert Flaherty's film for what was to be Nanook of the North burned prior to release and he had to go back up to Hudson's Bay to reshoot it.

When I started in photography in the early 1960's the family freezer was full of "safety film" because my stepfather had picked up a bunch of surplus somewhere after WWII.
 

raucousimages

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
824
Location
Salt Lake
Format
Large Format
When I was in Jr. High I worked for a photographer who had taken over an old studio. Durring a safty inspection of the building the fire dept found two wood crates of old nitrocelluolose 8X10 negs that had started to degrade in a storage closet from the old owner. They said they were concidered a low explosive on par with black powder. The edges had melted together and they said pulling them apart could set them off so we couldn't even make one contact print. They took them to Camp Williams and burned them on the demolition range. The fire melted the sand together just like burning old dynamite.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
A few weeks ago this same topic came up and someone posted a reference to a safety film on youtube with firement trying to extinguish a nitrocellulose film fire. They showed that once it is going, it cannot be stopped. This is the most dangerous of all film types and is known commonly as guncotton. It is made by dissolving cotton (cellulose) in nitric acid, thus the name nitro-cellulose. It is used in modern smokeless gunpowders.

The George Eastman house here in Rochester is one of the largest repositories of cellulose nitrate based films held in their huge archives of old photos. They go to extreme precautions to prevent fire of any sort.

PE
 

Gim

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
401
Location
Michigan
Oh Man, I hope I'm not the only one that stole my parents negatives from the junk box to make stink bombs for school. Early 50's...wish I had the negatives now.
Jim
 

mjs

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
1,123
Location
Elkhart, Ind
Format
Multi Format
Gim said:
Oh Man, I hope I'm not the only one that stole my parents negatives from the junk box to make stink bombs for school. Early 50's...wish I had the negatives now.
Jim
Click to expand...

Somehow, Gim, this doesn't surprise me in the least.

Mike
 

df cardwell

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,357
Location
Dearborn,Mic
Format
Multi Format

Frank Szabo

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
311
Location
Broken Arrow
Format
8x10 Format
Gim said:
Oh Man, I hope I'm not the only one that stole my parents negatives from the junk box to make stink bombs for school. Early 50's...wish I had the negatives now.
Jim
Click to expand...

My time in the high school science lab was the 1960s and we had a rather good assortment of stuff one could make a great deal of mischief with and did so totally with school equipment and supplies rather than bringing stuff from home.

We tried the electrolysis of water into its components (blew up the lab apparatus), stink bombs were horrendous and the sour mash recipe got us thrown out of class. We did try the guncotton recipe and it worked great - soak cotton in nitric acid then rinse thoroughly with water.

There's no good reason (other than divine intervention) why those two other fools and I are still alive today.
 

Ralph Javins

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2008
Messages
830
Location
Latte Land,
Format
Multi Format
Good morning;

Great question and an interesting development of the topic as it progressed.

Yes, cellulose nitrate or cellulose acetate were common film base material before World War II. The basement of the library in downtown San Diego had a problem with that around 1950. Lots of photographs lost. Such incidents as that were reasons why Eastman-Kodak came out with the "Kodak Safety Film."

A gentleman I knew back in Washington, D. C. was Eric Weile, a Dutch immigrant to the US of A just prior to the war. He made film back in The Netherlands. He found a safer occupation upon arrival here in the restaurant business, culminating in "Eric and Helen Weile's Ice Cream Creations, The Home of the Glutton!" located on the East-West Highway near New Hampshire Avenue. You had to surround one to fully appreciate the meaning of the name on the sign. A regular payday weekend special event. I lost my Vierfrassen Card when my wallet disappeared about 15 years ago.

The Chemistry Lab. Yup, did that too. My chemistry partner was Gwen Katz, an National Honors Student finalist, and she was very thurough. We managed to blow up the "rate of reaction" experiment. A bit more than just the simple "pop" from hydrogen in a test tube. Brought in people from all over the building. Yes, it is amazing that that we survived our youth. Perhaps there is evidence for the existence of God and Guardian Angels.

Thanks for bringing up the question and all of the neat memories.

Enjoy;

Ralph Javins
 

PHOTOTONE

Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
2,412
Location
Van Buren, A
Format
Large Format
I would like to mention that there WAS safety film prior to WW 2. Many films (movies) intended for home and school use were printed on early "safety" film, however it was not as satisfactory as Nitrate as far as stability and wear for professional use. Motion picture projectors up well into the 1950's were equipped with elaborate "safety" gear to limit fire. There were enclosed magazines for the reels of film, with "fire" traps, which where a series of overlapping rollers the film traveled thru to get to the projector. This was to limit any fire that started in the projector from getting to the reels of film. In addition, the projector and sound head had doors that closed over the mechanisms, thus isolating the film from the outside room. In addition, all reels of film not being projected were stored in metal cabinets that had a slot for each reel, and each reel had its own compartment with a door. Even the electric rewind machine was completely enclosed, such that you put the film in, shut the door and turned it on. It rewound the film and turned itself off. In addition, chemical fire extinguishers were often mounted above the projectors. I believe it was in 1950 that the movie industry was forced to make the switch to all safety film. So in a properly equipped and operated projection booth, there was never any film left casually out to create any problem from a cigarette ash or spark. And yes, projectionists (I was one) could smoke in the projection booth, which in itself was a fireproof room. I am not old enough to have worked during the Nitrate period, but I have worked in many projection booths that were still in use, that were designed and equipped during the Nitrate period. In addition, films at least thru the 1980's were shipped in very heavy steel cases that originated during the Nitrate era.

I would not feel uncomfortable projecting a well preserved Nitrate film today, if I personally inspected it first foot by foot, and the projection system was still fully nitrate compliant. In fact I have done this in a theater that I owned at one time. If the film is not starting to deteriorate, then normal projection with a Nitrate skilled projectionist with well running equipment is not a particular hazard.

I wouldn't dream of running a Nitrate film in a modern multiplex, because in modern projectors, they have done away with any form of "containment" for any projector fire, as all modern film does not burn.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ross Chambers

Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
701
Location
Blue Mountai
Format
Multi Format
On a par with theatre projection boxes, and perhaps even more hazardous, were motion picture cutting rooms where bins full of head and tail trims were hung in many strips awaiting filing. I entered the industry after this period and we could leave a bin of safety film overnight, I understand that nitrate had to be filed and stored in steel cabinets daily. I had a textbook which spanned the change from nitrate to safety film and its advice to anyone seeing a fire of any degree in a cutting room with nitrate film was to unhesitatingly close the door, exit and run.

Regards - Ross
 

Stephen Frizza

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
1,464
Format
Medium Format
So who's bright idea was it in the first place to make a film base that could burn the house down? did they not realize the dangers involved with this material? or did they think the risk was worth the reward because the film worked well until it began to break down?
 

Mark Antony

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
789
Location
East Anglia,
Format
Multi Format
I bought some exposed but undeveloped nitrate film on ebay last year:
A latent Past

A friend of mine is a film archivist and informs me to keep it chilled or at least below 40°c
The main problem is that it doesn't need oxygen to burn it's self feeding!
He says it will burn under water!
I'm going to get it preserved in FICA
Mark
 

tim_walls

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,122
Location
Bucuresti, R
Format
35mm

I hope you collected it - 'Nitro Cellulose based Film' is explicitly named as being prohibited for posting in the UK, and "in some cases, the sender may face prosecution."


(Not having a go - just thought it might be an interesting point to ponder lest any other bright spark finds some and decides to sell it on eBay .)
 

Aurum

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
917
Location
Landrover Ce
Format
Medium Format
(Not having a go - just thought it might be an interesting point to ponder lest any other bright spark finds some and decides to sell it on eBay .)
Click to expand...

I'd have reworded that, but its quite appropriate in the circumstances :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…