Thomas Larang

Behind the lens circular pola stacked with a linear - focus issues ?

Hi Chris, thank you for the response,

I did a testplan long ago on the focus issue on for example 85mm at f1.4. The focus is shifted minimaly past infinity, so focusing on infinity is no problem thanks to very thin filters.

Best regards

/Thomas

Hi everyone,

How would you like to have internal variable ND filters on your Sony NEX?

Right now there is a FundedByMe.com campaign (Swedish version of kickstarter.com) to raise funds for the HolyManta VND, the first lens adapter ever with a built-in variable ND filter. I created this adapter out of frustration over how fiddly, time-consuming and awkward it was to use external screw on filters. Ever since I created the first prototype, I can't stop using it, and I can't stop filming because it is soo much more fun now.

Please show your support here:
http://fundedbyme.co... ... -adapters/

Also, you can find more information on the adapter at http://www.holymanta.com

/Thomas Läräng, founder of HolyManta

Hi everyone,

How would you like to have internal variable ND filters on your Micro Four Third camera?

Right now there is a FundedByMe.com campaign (Swedish version of kickstarter.com) to raise funds for the HolyManta VND, the first lens adapter ever with a built-in variable ND filter. I created this adapter out of frustration over how fiddly, time-consuming and awkward it was to use external screw on filters. Ever since I created the first prototype, I can't stop using it, and I can't stop filming because it is soo much more fun now.

Please show your support here:
http://fundedbyme.com/projects/1740/hol ... -adapters/

Also, you can find more information on the adapter at http://www.holymanta.com

/Thomas Läräng, founder of HolyManta

Ok, thanks for the reply!

Hi!

I recently acquired a Scoopic 16, and was wondering if the CdS unit regarded as reliable even after so many decades? I know that the krasnogorsk for example has problems with batteries, and the beaulieu sensor unit is degraded and less sensitive after a long time.

Cheers,

/Thomas

just bought canon 518 super 8 camera and found out that ektachrome 64T is impossible to find. what film should i use to get similar effect. thank you so much.

Ektachrome 100D is the new and in my opinion improved color reversal stock.

/Thomas

Thanks Martin for your reple, and you are absolutely right, it turned out that the bleach had degraded somehow, making it unable to remove the anti-halation layer.

Kevin: Fomapan R100 can be bought from wittner-cinetec as meterware to load your own reloadable super 8 cartridges with. Apart from when I don't screw up the processing, the film gives me some really nice images.

To answer your question about grain, film processed as a negative will in general have more apparent grain than the same film processed as reversal. This is because during exposure, a greater proportion of the larger silver hailide crystals have managed to be hit by a photon of light than the smaller crystals. This means that during first (or negative) development, there are more of the larger crystals developed into silver than the smaller ones - so the negative image comprises larger crystals, which, as clumps, are the visible grain. In reversal, these larger crystals are then bleached out, leaving a greater proportion of the smaller crystals to form the positive image during the second development stage.

cheers,

richard

Thanks Richard for the reply

This cannot be done with Fomapan, sorry. Other reversal films don't have this problem, but Fomapan has a special layer that iis disolved in the reversal process only.

Not that's not completely true, to rescue some of those filmstrips I had to use the bleach fix from an E6-kit I had, which also turned out to be a possible negative bleacher since it removed this layer. (I suppose you mean the anti-halation layer). Does anyone now if this procedure is ruining my film? I only have my Super8 monitor to view the film so I can't really see if the small deatils get lost, but it looks good from what I can see so far in the monitor.

Ok, so I rescued the films I first thought was lost, so here's is what I'm wondering now: Is there any loss or gain in resolution with developing reversal film as negatives? Is it noticable at all after scanning?

/Thomas

Thomas

 

Give the film three to five minutes in the bleach bath, a short intermediate water rinse, then five minutes in the clearing bath with enough agitation, and two minutes in water, agitated. Then only switch on the light, incandescent light. Continue to agitate in water until five minutes completed.

 

If you still have too dense a positive the first development was under. Nine to eleven minutes will be appropriate at 20 degree Celsius. First and second developer can be identical. Make sure you develop without fog. To check this develop simple positive film wich you can purchase at a lab. Expose the positive stock in your camera reading the meter for 10 ISO.

I found the problem! Richard was right, the bleaching mix was faulty.

I even tried dipping a portion of the previously wasted filmstrips in the bleaching in lamp light, and loo and behold, I get a negative! I even tried to do a second develop on this strip, but it wouldn't do, but at least I can now get a negative and save that precious shot! So basically, I guess the bleaching was faulty, causing the anti-halation layer to remain, causing the filmstrip to remain un-transparent. Correct bleaching mix made the strip transparent where it should be. Horray!

right, if what you can see during re-exposure are black images, then the bleach hasn't done its job. There should be no black at all. None whatsoever. The black is silver, and all developed silver from the first development should be washed away by the bleach, leaving only un-developed silver-haylide. Yes, you can see a version of your photographed imagery, however the scene should only be visible as the absense of silver-haylide. Fomapan has a silver anti-halation backing on the base side of the film. This too should be bleached away by the bleach. I suspect the brown layer you see is the anti-halation silver backing indicating that the bleach is the problem. Failure to bleach would result in completely black film upon re-developing. ARe you sure you are mixing the bleach properly? Is it a potasium permangenate bleach or a potasium dichromate bleach? What acid is involved?

cheers,

richard

I see, I'll try to mix a new bleaching mix from the start and give it another go tonight. I think I'll do a comparison with a new developer as well to really see which one of the steps is cuasing this, just out of curiosity.

The bleaching is a mix of sulfuric acid and Potassium permanganate.

I'll get back with the results later!

Hi Thomas,

when you say you can see what you shot when you have the lights on during re-exposure, what do the images look like? Do you see any black on the film (which is developed silver like a conventional silver negative)? Or is what you are seeing basically a cream coloured roll of film (with no silver) but with a faint trace of the images you shot still visible as a slightly lighter cream colour? If there is any silver there at all from the images you shot (ie if there is any black at all on the film after bleaching) then your bleaching isn't doing the job it is supposed to.

So tell us about the image you see during re-exposure.

richard

Hi Richard,

What I see during Re-exposure is my white bleached base of film, with the things I filmed in black, and that's how it should be, right? The backside of the film though is brown. Is it really supposed to be brown? Shouldn't the film have some transparencies because right now it is not transparent at all, just white-bleached with black motifs on emulsion side, and brown on the other.

How are your temperatures? It sounds like you are over developing the second developer.

 

-Rob-

All my temperatures are as they should be - room temperature.

Thing is, when I get to the second exposure, I can clearly see all the things I filmed on the emulsion side, but there is still a brown layer on the other side. Shouldn't that layer be gone by this stage? The film is not transparent at all as I remeberad Tri-x being by this point...aah I'm going nuts.

I've tried different developing times of 1st developer, as low as 4 minutes and as long as 15 minutes. All of it ends up being clearly visible until I dip the filmstrip in the 2 developer solution, and all goes black immediately. (with a bleaching pass and a clearing pas in between of course)

Hi everyone! I posted this at film stock but I thought I give this section a shot as well.

Im in desperate need of help here. I'm trying to develop this stock - Fomapan R100 - with it's own developing kit designed especially for this.

I do all of the steps - 1st developing - Bleaching - Clearing bath in darkness, and when I turn on the lights I can clearly see the things I filmed with my super-8. I do the re-exposure step, BUT, when I do the 2nd developing step, all of it goes black, everything that I filmed disappears into total darkness.

What am I doing wrong? Plz help me if you can. I have developed Tri-x before and it worked fine every time. But I have only had slight success with Fomapan, with it's own kit.

/Thomas

Hi everyone!

Im in desperate need of help here. I'm trying to develop this stock - Fomapan R100 - with it's own developing kit designed especially for this.

I do all of the steps - 1st developing - Bleaching - Clearing bath in darkness, and when I turn on the lights I can clearly see the things I filmed with my super-8. I do the re-exposure step, BUT, when I do the 2nd developing step, all of it goes black, everything that I filmed disappears into total darkness.

What am I doing wrong? Plz help me if you can. I have developed Tri-x before and it worked fine every time. But I have only had slight success with Fomapan, with it's own kit.

/Thomas

Hi Thomas,

 

Have you ever reloaded a Super 8 Sound cartridge? I have some Kodachrome Super 8 Sound film in 200' cartridges, but there are very few cameras that can take that size cartridge. I wonder if they were loaded into 50' cartridges more people could use them?

Hi Craig.

Unfortunately I have no experience Whatsoever with sound cartridges or sound film. Isn't sound film a bit wider to fit in a sound strip? In that case I doubt you can fit it to a non sound system without having to slit of the sound strip.

/Thomas

Thanks for the offer Richard, I'll thnk about it but I'm also starting to enjoy this little endeavour. I printed my own labels today to put on my cartridges. Again, you can check this out on my website.

Exactly, I wouldn't recommend that anyone should store their cartridges in the open, just as I wouldn't recommend anyone to store their regular Kodak/Fuji/Kahl stock out of their protective bag in the open either. My plans are to load the cartridges, shot within a few days and develop them at home as quick as possible. That should eliminate tape coming loose with time causing light leak. Plus put two bits of tape parallell to eachother, other than the pictures were I just split a bit of tape in half.

I recently started to develop my own phootage at home, both out of curiosity and of me being sort of a miser :) After this I started looking for other fun ways of cutting cost with filming super-8, and one of them was to buy raw super-8 film on large rolls from e.g. Witter and load cartridges with it. Since reloadable cartridges cost (maybe not that much though) I started testing cutting up old used cartridges and re-use them.

On my homepage you can see how I did this.

http://holymanta.com/super8.html

Cheers!

/Thomas