Processing reloaded single 8 cartridges

[Geoff Howell]

For the past week or so I’ve been experimenting with loading Tri-X and Vision3 50D in to very old single 8 cartridges.

My technique is pretty straight forward; I simply pull the out of date 1960’s/1970’s Fuji film out of the cartridge, cut it at both ends (leaving about an inch attached to the spools) I then use tape splices to attach the Kodak film and wined it back in to the single 8 cartridge (in a changing bag of coarse), so far it seems to be working pretty well!

 

I’m putting about 25ft of film in to each cartridge as the thickness of the Kodak base doesn’t allow for fitting a full 50ft into a Fuji cartridge. So, as it stands the contents of 1 super8 cart = 2 single 8 carts.

 

My question is: dose anyone have any suggestions about the best way of having my reloaded cartridges processed?

 

My first concern is about potentially having to pay for processing per cartridge and not per foot of film (like I would with 16mm) , this would effectively double my lab costs; while I don’t at all mind doing this for my test films; in the long term this doesn’t make much financial sense.

 

Would it be worth my while to empty my exposed film on to one big spool, stick it in a can and send that to the lab instead of a stack of reloaded cartridges?

 

If I were to do this what would be the preferred method of joining the separate lengths of film together?

Would I be correct in my assumption that tape splices would be at risk of dissolving in the baths?

 

Also, on a slightly unrelated note, dose anyone know what's going on with single 8 in general? Wittner has sold out of all their color stock and has no current plans to get any more, Retro Enterprises (are they still open???) seems to also be out of stock although there’s something on their Japanese website about more coming soon, dose anyone know anything about this?

 

thanks

 

 

[christophernigel]

Hi Geoff ,

 

Just get a lomo tank and DIY it at home , save on lab cost and after a while it's so easy to do and cheap ?

[Geoff Howell]

Hi Geoff ,

 

Just get a lomo tank and DIY it at home , save on lab cost and after a while it's so easy to do and cheap ?

Thanks, this had indeed crossed my mind and there's an arts council funded lab that dose courses in diy processing quite close to me.

however I'd rather stick with sending the film off to a lab for the time being as I'm still finding my feet with regards to testing out Kodak film with my single 8 cameras and adding DIY processing into the equation will potentially complicate things.

[christophernigel]

Thanks, this had indeed crossed my mind and there's an arts council funded lab that dose courses in diy processing quite close to me.

however I'd rather stick with sending the film off to a lab for the time being as I'm still finding my feet with regards to testing out Kodak film with my single 8 cameras and adding DIY processing into the equation will potentially complicate things.

 

Film is Film , and yes there is so much to learn in the play of light and shadow and the art of filmmaking , I have learned over the year's it's so much better to DIY it than to send it to a lab , but we each have to start somewhere ,

All I can say there 's a great kick when shooting the film then home processing and hand editing , the film is all your's , yes and there are lot's of mistake's to that I have made on the way which also make's you pay , which is all part of learning / but when it work's such a great feeling/ rush and beyond word's ,

[Tom Chabbat]

This is an interesting topic, I am working on a single-8 project with reloaded cartridge, as it is of today the cheapest way to film in single-8. I know there's some spanish members here working this way, but I don't know know how they do the processing. Even when working in super-8, some people use reloadable cartridges, but do they all process their films themselves ? If you want to use high quality negative stock, I personally thinks it's better to let professional labs do the job. Andec seems to develop by cartridge, but maybe they can do reels on special order, it may be pertinent to ask...

[Andries Molenaar]

Don't splice exposed film. Labs don't want that. If it breaks in the machine they are in trouble. And so is you film and other people's film.

 

After exposing take the film from the cartridge and reel it per piece onto a 50ft reel. Store it in a lighttight container.

Thick black plastic bag and wrap it in aluminium foil.

 

Dwayne's had done K40 super-8 clips for me and charged per feet. I even exposed S8 K40 in a MINOX and 16mm in a Rollei 16. I enquired with Andec and they do processing from a reel too. I suppose Wittner will do so too as they offer processing for meterware and Kaccema refills.

 

Other labs should be asked per person.

 

Hand processing labs like super-8.nl or nanolab could possibly fit two 25ft clips onto one LOMO reel. Although a splice which is not smooth may hamper loading the reel.

Personally I would use two decks and avoid the hassle. Or use the smaller LOMO for R8 which can hold S8 too.

[Mark Dunn]

IIRC lengths are stapled together for processing. There is quite a lot of 'pull' in the machine and tape splices aren't meant to withstand that.

I can't see that a lab would need to charge by the camera load- they make up multiple loads to process as a batch so there's no extra work really, just a few more staples.

[Geoff Howell]

thanks everyone!

lots to think about.

 

with regards to emptying the cartridges on to spools; as long as the emulsion is facing outwards dose it make a difference what way round the film is wound?

what I mean is once the film is exposed I'll be winding it out from the cartridge's take up spool and on to an empty 50ft spool resulting with the end(last frames to pass through the camera) being at the center of the 50ft spool. This would be the opposite to when I send 16mm for processing with the start of the film being at the center of the spool.

[Mark Dunn]

Actually unprocessed film is usually EI- it only comes EO for exposure and the natural curl is EI, so the wind would be very loose EO. It is wound EO after processing.

It doesn't matter if it's heads out, the machine doesn't use a sprocket.

[Simon Lucas]

DIY is possible. It is the long route.

 

To do it by pro route, you can also get some safe posting packs from

 

http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/04_filmm/s8_meter.php

 

Load your film onto one of those reels and they will process for you. Look for:

 

'Deadline Set for Super 8 meter 15m'

[Geoff Howell]

yeah, learning to process at home is definitely on the to do list.

For the time being though I've sent the film to the Super8 Reversal Lab in the Netherlands; fingers crossed!

 

next up (if my test films are a success) will be trying to improve the capacity of the Fuji cartridges, I read that I should be able to cram about 40ft into them but don't think I'm getting anywhere near that; maybe around 30 at a stretch.

 

Having examined the cartridges in detail; the cores on to which the film is wound seem to be a bit on the needlessly big side. reducing their diameter by about 3mm should free up enough room for around 20/30 seconds of footage at 18fps.

 

I'll wait and see what comes back from the lab before I spend anymore time on this

[christophernigel]

yeah, learning to process at home is definitely on the to do list.

For the time being though I've sent the film to the Super8 Reversal Lab in the Netherlands; fingers crossed!

 

next up (if my test films are a success) will be trying to improve the capacity of the Fuji cartridges, I read that I should be able to cram about 40ft into them but don't think I'm getting anywhere near that; maybe around 30 at a stretch.

 

Having examined the cartridges in detail; the cores on to which the film is wound seem to be a bit on the needlessly big side. reducing their diameter by about 3mm should free up enough room for around 20/30 seconds of footage at 18fps.

 

I'll wait and see what comes back from the lab before I spend anymore time on this

Hi Geoff ,

If you let Frank know about the film's, he is very good did alot of work for me over the year's , till I when DIY !

[Simon Lucas]

yeah, learning to process at home is definitely on the to do list.

For the time being though I've sent the film to the Super8 Reversal Lab in the Netherlands; fingers crossed!

 

next up (if my test films are a success) will be trying to improve the capacity of the Fuji cartridges, I read that I should be able to cram about 40ft into them but don't think I'm getting anywhere near that; maybe around 30 at a stretch.

 

Having examined the cartridges in detail; the cores on to which the film is wound seem to be a bit on the needlessly big side. reducing their diameter by about 3mm should free up enough room for around 20/30 seconds of footage at 18fps.

 

I'll wait and see what comes back from the lab before I spend anymore time on this

 

Are there any of the other Super 8 film stocks thinner such that it would fit more into the Single 8 cartridge?

[Geoff Howell]

 

Are there any of the other Super 8 film stocks thinner such that it would fit more into the Single 8 cartridge?

I'm not sure, would I be correct in assuming all the Kodak film is produced using the same (or at least very similar) base?

From what I've heard the Fuji stills films that are being re-cut and re-perfed for Single 8 are on an even thicker base than the Kodak stock and have been known to jam in some of the lower end/smaller cameras; dose anyone here have any experience of that?

 

I've been shooting tests with a P2 and AX100, the P2 seams happy enough with the film moving through the gate with no problems (as far as I can see), the AX100 tends to jam when first loaded but seems ok once it gets going.

[Mark Dunn]

Kodak MP stock is all acetate. Fuji Single-8 was well-known for being on the thinner polyester- you couldn't cement-splice it.

From what I can find out, 35mm. Velvia 50, from which one assumes they are cutting the S-8, is quoted as being 127µm whereas Kodak's usual 3.6 mil acetate equates to about 91µm, so you appear to be right about that. 120 film is coated on a thinner stock, 98µm. Perhaps the labs who are re-cutting it should have specified that base instead.

(From the Velvia 50 and Kodak Plus-X datasheets. Sheet film is on a much thicker base).

 

Postscript: Looking at the data sheets for Ektachrome 100, it was on 5mil/130µm (35mm) and 3.9mil/100µm (120). So maybe Kodak picked the wrong base for Super-8 E100 as well- didn't it sometimes stick?

[Tom Chabbat]

yeah, learning to process at home is definitely on the to do list.

For the time being though I've sent the film to the Super8 Reversal Lab in the Netherlands; fingers crossed!

 

next up (if my test films are a success) will be trying to improve the capacity of the Fuji cartridges, I read that I should be able to cram about 40ft into them but don't think I'm getting anywhere near that; maybe around 30 at a stretch.

 

Having examined the cartridges in detail; the cores on to which the film is wound seem to be a bit on the needlessly big side. reducing their diameter by about 3mm should free up enough room for around 20/30 seconds of footage at 18fps.

 

I'll wait and see what comes back from the lab before I spend anymore time on this

 

I must warn you, I don't think it's wise to reduce the core diameter ! If you look at it closely, it's already as thin as it can possibly be. The flat side permits to easily attach the film to it without creating a bulge when it's fully wind. This flat side is at its closest 0.5mm to the groove with permits the core to stay in place from the downside (the sprockets side). If you reduce the core diameter, this means you'll have to find a new way to attach the film, which seems difficult to succeed without a bulge... And you need to keep the groove I mentioned intact for not compromising the light tightness. I really think, looking to it, that those Fuji cartridges were cleverly designed to be the smallest cartridges possible. Any modification will compromise their reliability I guess.

[Simon Lucas]

Wittner seem to be getting 12m on a Single 8 cart using Orwo stock

 

Retro-X / ORWO UN 54
Single-8 Kassette ca. 12m / 40 ft.

[Andries Molenaar]

I learnt that Agfa 200D stock meterware will be available again by the end of

October and that Wittner expects to fit 72.5 meters on 60 meter daylight spools...

 

Which implies that it is thinner than other earlier stocks.

Good news for the Fuji reload experimenter :)

Edited October 8, 2013 by Andries Molenaar

[Joerg Polzfusz]

Hi,

 

when the film stock is acetate-based, then you can only fill 10-12m into a 15m-Single8-cart, depending on the material.

Even though the Agfa 200D is polyester-based, it's only a little bit thinner than acetate-based stocks. Hence several Single8-filmers reported that only approx. 13m fit into a 15m-Single8-cart.

 

Jörg

[Martin Baumgarten]

The only way to know is to ask the labs yourself. I (PPS) will process the two segments for the same price as a 50ft cartridge.

 

Regarding reloading of the FUJI Single-8 cartridges, the new AGFA 200 Color Reversal film that is available in Super 8mm cartridges would fit into the Single-8 fully, since it is a polyester thin filmbase. Wittner jsells bulkfilm of this as well, so check with them if interested. Even if only 45ft fit, that is still a lot better than 25ft splits.

 

Lastly, I do not recommend trying to file/grind down the inner cores, since any gain you get would most likely cause other cartridge and film transport problems. The cartridge was designed around the FUJIChrome polyester based filmstock, therein lies the problem for reloading with cellulose triacetate based filmstock.

 

Best of success in your Single-8 filming endeavors!

 

 

[Geoff Howell]

just heard from the the lab, the film should be back in a couple of weeks; fingers crossed.

 

in the mean time I've just bought a job lot of expired r25n (various dates between 2003 and 2009), not sure how it's been stored but I've shot 5year out of date un-stored Tri-x with no problems (there's also plenty of example's of 20yr old+ un-stored K40 on Youtube) and given the slow speed of r25n plus the fact I only paid around £15 for 550ft of film I figured It was worth a look.

 

regarding the modifying of the single8 cores, I've been reading a Japanese film blog which mentions the reloaded Cinevia films jamming and how this could be alleviated by only loading around 30ft of film instead of 40ft.

 

so it looks like any attempts to improve the cartridge capacity could be counter productive.

[Marc Marti]

I was thinking the same as you. Usually, I process my films at home, but with the ridiculous prices of reversal film, I'm planning to shoot on negative and send it for processing at Andec. Perhaps, if you are adventurous enough to make a good cement splicing in the dark (not that difficult), the best option should be to send all the film spliced on a big reel, but I think we shold contact them first.

 

Talking about Single-8, I still think it's worth the hassle. Here's a frame scanned in HD by ochoypico.com

Fuji Velvia + Fujica ZC1000 + Kern Switar 10mm. This is almost the top in 8mm film definition ;)

 

 

sube fotos

Edited October 17, 2013 by Marc Marti

[Mark Dunn]

They won't like cement splices. If a splice fails in a processor it takes the entire run with it.

In any case labs rewind customer films onto a master roll . Whilst doing this they would remake the joins with steel staples

Edited October 18, 2013 by Mark Dunn

[Geoff Howell]

SUCCESS!

just got the films back from telecine!

Everything came out great apart from some quite bizarre over exposure problems with a Fujica AX100 in an underwater housing; the camera seemed to be fine above water but as soon as it went under (even just a few inches with more than enough available light) everything would become incredibly over exposed and out of focus. any ideas as to why this might be happening? presumably it must be a problem with the meter?