Wow...This looks like crap.

Mark Smith · February 16, 2005

I just bought a new Eclair ACL camera the other day, and wanted to shoot some test film stock with it. I just bought a cheap 100' roll of Kodak 7250 reversal. I didn.t waste too much time in setting up the lighting etc [waste is the wrong word, but you get the gist]...And it came back from the lab just awful looking! For starters, there was a blue line that ran the entire length of the spool...is that a lab problem?...or something more sinister in my camera itself? And then in general, does reversal colour stock simply look like old newsreel footage?...or did I screw up entirely. It looked like I was watching the first 20 minutes of 'private ryan'...any help? I.m going to shoot negative next week and see how that turns out...but i.m curious if it was the film/the camera/the lab? Any ideas?

Mark.

February 16, 2005

Ouch! My sympathies. The blue line sounds like a (really bad) scratch. If you were loading the ACL's mag for the first time, is it possible that the film was misthreaded somehow? Is it, perchance, an English 400' mag?

Was your film daylight or tungsten balanced, and were you using the correct filtration (e.g., #85 for shooting outside on tungsten balanced film)? Was the film out of date, or had it been improperly stored? Was it a short end or recan of dubious origin?

Austin Schmidt · February 16, 2005

If the line is blue then it means the base of the film has been scratched and it is something that cannot be fixed in post. Definately something you need to figure out, because if the camera is under warrenty or hardely used, the seller may pay for fixing it. Normally, it is the emulsion side that scratches (the line color is then white) and this can sometimes be fixed when going through the various stages of post printing.

John Pytlak RIP · February 16, 2005

I just bought a new Eclair ACL camera the other day, and wanted to shoot some test film stock with it. I just bought a cheap 100' roll of Kodak 7250 reversal. I didn.t waste too much time in setting up the lighting etc [waste is the wrong word, but you get the gist]...And it came back from the lab just awful looking! For starters, there was a blue line that ran the entire length of the spool...is that a lab problem?...or something more sinister in my camera itself? And then in general, does reversal colour stock simply look like old newsreel footage?...or did I screw up entirely. It looked like I was watching the first 20 minutes of 'private ryan'...any help? I.m going to shoot negative next week and see how that turns out...but i.m curious if it was the film/the camera/the lab? Any ideas?

Mark.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If the film was a short end or recan, let the buyer beware! It could have been scratched before you bought it. Old or improperly stored color reversal film will get grainer and lose contrast with age.

7250 is a high speed tungsten stock using film technology that dates back to the 1970's. Since it was originally intended for television newsgathering, it is indeed "old newsreel footage". As you may know, Kodak has discontinued making the films for the VNF-1 process.

Mark Smith · February 16, 2005

Okay, I showed the film to some of my friends up here [in ny] and they think it was a lab error [the blue line]...i doubt it.s the camera because it was completely overhaulled by DUALL camera [a very respected camera shop here] in July. Is this something that could have happened in processing [because if so, I will go and demmand my money back!]

Thanks,

Mark.

Mark Smith · February 16, 2005

Oh, and to add my reply to the questions that were given - it was not recan, it was orignial stock that I bought from Kodak on 31st street in new york. The mag I was using was a 200ft [i believe english made - although the camera is the 1.5 french made]...I was told by the guy selling it that if i thread it wrong i can scratch the film, but he taught me how to make the loop the exact right size, and everything seemed to go fine in that regard...besides, wouldn.t it be the other side of the film scratched in that case anyway?

Mark.

Mark Smith · February 16, 2005

Okay, here is a frame grab that really shows the blue lines...

Mark.

Dominic Case · February 16, 2005

If the line is blue then it means the base of the film has been scratched

Wrong way round. A base-side scratch on reversal would look black, as it scatters projection light away.

A blue-coloured line indicates an emulsion scratch, with the top (yellow dye) layer either removed or pressure fogged.

Examine the roll: if the blue line goes right to the ends, past the camera lace-up, then it's likely to be a lab scratch. If it's interrupted, or shows any sign of disturbance at camera stops, then it happened in the camera.

Look closely at the film itself, over a light bench, or under a spotlight with a black background, to see reflected light. If you look at the emulsion side of the film, you should see the scratch itself. If (under a loupe or mangifying glass) you can see any debris from the scratch, then it happened after processing. If you can't see any sign of the surface being broken, then it happened before processing (could still be int he lab, or in the camera). During processing the emulsion swells then shrinks again, and this heals emulsion scratches, but of course can't replace any dye that has been removed.

A white line in a reversal film is a very deep emulsion scratch that has removed all dye layers: but a white line (on the positive print or telecine image) from a negative is usually a base scratch.

Dominic Case · February 16, 2005

Okay, here is a frame grab that really shows the blue lines...

Hmm. Definitely looks like emulsion rub/scratch. Probably before development - but could still be lab or camera. As I suggested, look at the very ends of the roll.

Mark Smith · February 17, 2005

Just to clarify, I don.t know what you mean by 'past the camera lace up' or really how you want me to go about checking this...?

Sorry,

Mark.

Dominic Case · February 17, 2005

When you load the roll of stock int he magazine, there is a short section right at the end that is wound onto the take-up bobbin before you load the magazine onto the camera. In other words, this bit of film won't have run through the gate. However, it will obviously have run through the processor at the lab. If you can see any signs of scratch on that very end of the roll, then it must be the lab.

Similarly, depending on how you ended the roll, there may be a chance to edxamine the tail of the roll. Though if you simply ran out the end of the roll, it won't be possible.

This always depends on the type of magazine in use. With the ACL I believe you can do most of the loading in daylight, so the end in question is likely to be fogged, making it difficult or impossible to see if the film is scratched there.

It also assumes that the lab returned all the roll, and didn't (helpfully??) remove the ends.

Mark Smith · February 18, 2005

I did load the film in the daylight...but if I look VERY closely, I can see the scratch on this end as well...actually this part of the film is scrathed in other places as well...so this means a lab error...right?

Mark.

J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR · February 20, 2005

I did load the film in the daylight...but if I look VERY closely, I can see the scratch on this end as well...actually this part of the film is scrathed in other places as well...so this means a lab error...right?

Mark.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Any way you look at it your best bet is to do some ordinary scratch testing with some secondhand stock. Look for problems in the camera, clean it meticulously then shoot and develop another test roll. That's the only way to be sure.