Checkinh a film stock?

Filip Syczynski · October 15, 2007

Hi!

A few days ago I bought some older (2004) 35mm film stock, each for just 10£ so I thought that I wouldn't lose much by just risking it (3 x 400ft Kodak Eastman 250D 7297 1R 3 x 400ft Kodak Vision2 100T 7212 1R ). I wanted to ask, if there is a chance of maybe testing the stock (just some 20ft?) before shooting anything on it? (not to gather all the crew, actors etc. and then the footage would come out black after processing... that would be a disaster).

Tim Carroll · October 15, 2007

In the past I've done a "clip test" (I think it's called). Shoot about ten to twenty feet, send it to a lab and have it processed, and then look at it with a light table and a loop.

-Tim

John Brawley · October 15, 2007

Hi!
A few days ago I bought some older (2004) 35mm film stock, each for just 10£ so I thought that I wouldn't lose much by just risking it (3 x 400ft Kodak Eastman 250D 7297 1R 3 x 400ft Kodak Vision2 100T 7212 1R ). I wanted to ask, if there is a chance of maybe testing the stock (just some 20ft?) before shooting anything on it? (not to gather all the crew, actors etc. and then the footage would come out black after processing... that would be a disaster).

Hi Filip...

you can ask a lab to do a dip test for you. They'll take a few feet off your roll and process it. Then they measure the base density and then give you a figure. I vaguely recall more than +10 in R G or B wasn't good. Of course...it never stopped me from shooting with it....:-)

jb

Filip Syczynski · October 15, 2007

Thank You for your help! I'll do the tests ASAP

Jonathan Bowerbank · October 16, 2007

You don't even have to shoot anything, just cut a few feet off and send it to the lab for the clip test. They'll test its density and let you know what sort of condition its in.

A. Whitehouse · October 16, 2007

Just be aware that the dip tests are very precise and Ive shot whole shorts with few problems on stock that was declared unusable and no good at the lab. If your going a TK or Digital route it isn't as much of a big deal. On my own project I made sure to shoot the first 30 feet of each roll for make-up, filter, lens tests etc. It was a pain in the ass but my stock had been in a fridge for 5 years +. It was interesting shooting on 5293 in a world of V2s. While I knew that the stock had been well taken care of before it had hit my fridge (i scored it from a really large production) age does take its toll and it showed up in grain on some rolls. Anyway, don't give up hope if the tests come back negative but go into this with your eyes open.

Sasha

Sam Wells · October 17, 2007

Hi!
A few days ago I bought some older (2004) 35mm film stock, each for just 10£ so I thought that I wouldn't lose much by just risking it (3 x 400ft Kodak Eastman 250D 7297 1R 3 x 400ft Kodak Vision2 100T 7212 1R ).

You are aware, I hope, that these numbers refer to single perf (1R) 16mm stock, not 35mm ?

-Sam

Andrew Brinkhaus · October 25, 2007

Another quick test to see the results of the stock would be to just buy a cheap bulk loader, and cut a foot or so and load it up in a 35mm photo canister, and shoot a roll on a still camera. Get it developed wherever, and check your prints when you get them back for any major damage/defects to the film.

Frank Cook · October 25, 2007

Another quick test to see the results of the stock would be to just buy a cheap bulk loader, and cut a foot or so and load it up in a 35mm photo canister, and shoot a roll on a still camera. Get it developed wherever, and check your prints when you get them back for any major damage/defects to the film.

DON'T DO THIS!!!!

Most motion picture film has a coating that will RUIN a "mall mini-lab." Do NOT develop this film at a local shop. The coating plugs the plumbing system. It coats big bucks to fix! The lab owner will hate you, and might want you to pay the thousand of dollars it costs to make the repairs (ie. take you to court). :blink:

Hal Smith · October 25, 2007

Most motion picture film has a coating that will RUIN a "mall mini-lab." Do NOT develop this film at a local shop. The coating plugs the plumbing system. It coats big bucks to fix! The lab owner will hate you, and might want you to pay the thousand of dollars it costs to make the repairs (ie. take you to court). :blink:

I believe John Pytlak once said that all it took to get the Remjet backing off was a hot water bath. If that's correct, then it should be possible to pull the Remjet off exposed film in a simple home darkroom process, dry the film, reload it into the still cannister, and then take it to the minilab machine. Anyone ever try this?

(Turns out this isn't correct, see following information)

I found the thread discussing DIY processing:

John PytlakFeb 13 2006, 12:10 AM

(Paul Bruening @ Feb 4 2006, 02:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Karl, thanks for great info,

What's the best way to remove the remjet backing? Will it come off with just water jets or does it require some form of physical contact? Would a series of sponges do the job? What about a soft centrifugal roller from a squeege works?

The Kodak H-24 ECN-2 processing specifications include a high salt alkaline prebath to soften the rem-jet (but leave it on the film in the tank), then a directed water wash-off (to remove most of the rem-jet and not have the particles get back on the film), and finally buffing with more water wash off (to remove the residual binder).

Doing it by hand (in total darkness) will likely remove most of it, but it is difficult to not have some particles get attached to the film as your sponges/buffers load, and some gets pushed through the perfs.

Full thread here: <a href="http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/lo...php?t11703.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/lo...php?t11703.html</a>