Jump to content

F.S. Fuji 35 & 16mm 400ft. Stock NEW


Rick Anderson
 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Marcel Zyskind said:

Not trying to throw a spanner in the works, but from what I understand Cinelab in London does not develop Fuji stock any more... Which sucks as I have 15x rolls of s16mm 250D in my fridge!

Actually, it's becoming a real problem. I've had nothing but issues getting the remjet to come off of Fuji stock. Sometimes it comes off ok in the machine other times it leaves speckles on the film after processing. I sold ALL of my Fuji stock as a consequence. However, 64D is such a unique/unusual stock that I've been collecting again in order to shoot a short with it and just "risk it".  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
7 hours ago, James Compton said:

The processing issue may be lab dependant. 2 weeks ago, I processed FUJI 160T VIVID 35mm at Kodak Lab Atlanta with no issues. 

You also may not see the speckles on 35mm as much. They are very faint on 16mm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello.
I'm gonna add my experience to this, here in France, no more Fuji can be processed since two years now. 
Beware when you shoot tests on the first 100ft of a 400ft roll, the remjet in that part of the roll will sometimes not be a problem, but the problem occurs later on the roll, the closer you get to the core and the highest chance you will have remjet problems.

We have done tones of tests in our lab here since we had feature films productions buying big stocks of Fuji for cheap. Best result was by pushing temperature in the baths at one point that the gelatin of the film became very fragile. In that case, all the remjet went off. But that is playing with fire when you are handling the footage of a proper production, so please no Fuji, I know that's sad, but its like that ...

PA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a very interesting issue. I guess it is related to the age of film? Or storage?

I bought an assortment of 16mm Fuji stock when they ceased production. I have stored the film in freezer since then and everything has turned out just fine. Those films have been processed by Video & Film Solutions in 2014, Andec, one Italian lab and most recently - just last Autumn - by Color by DeJonghe.

Granted, hearing of these issues makes me want to try to use them ASAP and in less critical projects. Fortunately I only have 400ft of 64D and 400ft of 400T left - and one random can of F-250T (in addition to a can of Agfa XT 125, but those last two mentioned are real vintage stocks, not to be used for anything even remotely critical!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, Paul-Anthony said:

I'm gonna add my experience to this, here in France, no more Fuji can be processed since two years now. 
Beware when you shoot tests on the first 100ft of a 400ft roll, the remjet in that part of the roll will sometimes not be a problem, but the problem occurs later on the roll, the closer you get to the core and the highest chance you will have remjet problems.

 

Exactly, its always at the tail of the film. I actually made a video all about this that I will be publishing soon. 

My film had been frozen from day one so I know it was not the film going bad or something like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Heikki Repo said:

I have stored the film in freezer since then and everything has turned out just fine.

Ya may not notice the issue. It took me a while of watching the same clip over and over again to see it. Wasn't even visible on the print I made. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Ya may not notice the issue. It took me a while of watching the same clip over and over again to see it. Wasn't even visible on the print I made. 

Sounds plausible. Anyway, if I'm shooting film that is at least 8 years old, I don't really expect the outcome to be perfect.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 hours ago, Heikki Repo said:

Sounds plausible. Anyway, if I'm shooting film that is at least 8 years old, I don't really expect the outcome to be perfect.

Yep, it’s hard to identify emulsion issues vs other issues with old film sometimes. I shoot lots of old stock and honestly, I’ve had mixed results. Most of the time if it’s been stored well, it comes out good enough. If it’s not been stored well, it’s generally trash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...