Dennis Toeppen

Yes, that's right. The packing job ruined the pizza boxes. The 12 x 12 x 16 cartons were too thin and I think a maximum stack of 4 would have eliminated crushing of bottom pizza box(es). The crushing clearly occurred during carton drops. I've never had problems with 16mm film shipped in these boxes, because it's much lighter and because the lab rolls have been smaller. But 35mm is too heavy in relation to the strength of the thin cartons.

The original plan was for them to scan. The cost-minimizing way to scan is to build the largest rolls the scanner can handle. They said this meant 1200'. I never really understood that. All DPT scanners seem to be able to handle more than 1200'. But that's my only reference.

There's the solution I was looking for. That sounds perfect. I can't wait to try this tomorrow. I've got some 2000' cans and plenty of cores (2" and 3"). I also found this shortly after posting the saga above. I don't like that only 180 degrees of each side is supported, but the price is right. As you can see, it's made of PPE, so it's archival. The nice thing about this solution is that I don't have to scrounge for free 2000' cans and a truckload of cores - although I think your solution is superior. https://www.printfile.com/product/ap351200-35mm-1200ft-film-container/ Thanks very much for your suggestion.

Picture... What's up with the super low limit on image upload size, BTW? Odd.

Saga... I had 70 x 400' x 35mm rolls processed at a reputable lab. They were spooled onto cores as 1200' lab rolls. Then each 1200' lab roll was placed into a ~2 mil poly bag, then roll and bag were placed into an 11.5" x 11.5" pizza box. A 1200' lab roll is about 11", so there was some play. The pizza boxes are thin 1 ply cardboard. The top and bottom are easily deflected, particularly when containing a 1200' lab roll. These must weigh 10-12# each. Next, 9 boxed lab rolls each were stacked in three rather flimsy 12" x 12" x 16" cartons, and the cartons were shipped via FedEx. Results: Worst carton was burst at one corner, crushed upward about 1" at corner, and box showed clear evidence of having been compressed by a load on top of it. The bottom five pizza boxes had broken at the top and bottom seams. Film in bottom few boxes had unwound a bit. Film in these bottom boxes also showed evidence of "coning". To me, this suggests that I will have both longitudinal scratches and perpendicular scratches. Also, at least one poly bag failed, so shards of cardboard and some dust made it into the bags to serve as grinding media. I'm kind of mad about this. But being mad won't fix the problem, nor will it undo the expenses I've incurred, nor will it return the subjects to the location the were in last summer, nor will it take the subjects out of retirement, nor will it bring back to life the subjects who have passed on. So I'm not dwelling on that. But I do need to figure out how to properly ship multiple lab rolls of 35mm film after processing, so this $*&#* doesn't happen again. It seems like reels are the best way to ensure the safety of film. But putting negs on reels? That seems kind of odd. The negs are on cores when they come out of the lab. Split reels seems like an ideal solution. But do I want to buy 10+ 35mm split reels? I'm sure that would be extremely expensive, if I could even find 10. 1200' lab rolls are slightly too big for 1000' cans. If I have them make 800' lab rolls in the future, that will drive the cost of prep and transfers way up, and they won't be snug in 1000' cans. I really don't know what to do. But I'm 100% certain that I am not the first person to ship processed 35mm film. I'm hoping someone out there can point me in the direction of a good solution. At some point, I need to ship this to get it scanned. Right now, 28,000' of 35mm is unseen. I hope not to destroy it before I see it! At least it's stored at 60F/30% RH. Thanks in advance for any wisdom you toss my way...other than suggestions that I go digital ?

My personal opinion is that you should steer clear of Calkovsky.

+1 for whole picture. what about a gradient on the bottom, maybe 20% at top edge, 80% bottom edge, when you've got weirdness to hide.

There was some discussion awhile back about putting 1R film in 50' GSAP magazines. I just thought I'd share my experience with Russian-manufactured Kiev 50' GSAP magazines, which are designed for 1R. I can sum the results up in one word: Awful. I've tried this at least five times, using different Kiev magazines, which were inspected for working parts/proper operation before loading. They've all produced similar results. Here are a couple tests: Revere 16, which usually produces footage with amazing registration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akmVFvfzQOw B&H 200 Pressure plate in magazine didn't cooperate much: https://youtu.be/Co8WFk9ZwiM?t=136 B&H 200 Here's the one time I got lucky: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V8Kqx-MKDo So I don't recommend using the Kiev magazines. That's about all I've got to say about that.

The worst thing you can store film in is aluminum film cans. The worst films I've handled have been in aluminum EKC cans. Steel cans aren't as bad as aluminum, but they are reactive. Best bet is Polypropylene (sp?), because it is quite inert. Holes are good. But don't go throw your holy cans in the basement, attic or garage! Molecular sieves are your friend, but don't overdo it. One final word of advice: "Microenvironment"

Yeah, I am extremely sick of governmental agencies trying to find revenue streams in normal day-to-day activities of its citizens. I mean, if they want to end taxes and switch to user fees, ok. But I'm sure as hell not ok with both. Don't even get me started on governmental entities asserting trademark rights in things that are owned by taxpayers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvJRgGle9wU&feature=emb_imp_woyt I was once pursued by a law enforcement ranger in Yellowstone after a person at the south gate noticed my Kodak K100 in my car. I am not kidding. Gate agent summoned LER and told him what I was driving. A few miles later, he spotted me as he was heading opposite direction and made a quick U-Turn. Then he followed me for a bit. I jumped off at the turnout for the first crossing of the Continental Divide and there wasn't space for him, so he staked out a position down the road. Then he followed me again. When we got to West Thumb junction, he pulled me over with a bogus excuse - claimed I was following too closely. I sort of chewed the guy out and he decided to go pester someone else. Good thing it wasn't my 235 or 416, or I'd still be in jail.

Just buy double-perforated film. I have an idea where you can get it: www.toeppenfilm.com

I suppose anything is possible. I like Mark Dunn's theory.

Basements and attics are film's two worst enemies.

Just Say No to 16/8 2R in 16mm cameras. Here's what happens (sample size=1): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKxVr1xwL2U

Wittner just posted an interesting video showing their perforators in operation. https://www.wittnercinetec.com/double-8 I'm glad these guys exist. Dennis Toeppen

Have you visited the Image Permanence Institute website? There is a ton of good information there. I have an archive of Kodachrome films back to 1937. The only films that have VS are the 1937 film (minor waviness) and, oddly, 16mm from the 70's with magnetic sound stripes. All film was stored in identical conditions from 9/1963 to present. When I encountered the minor VS 8 years ago, I got really worried and researched the matter thoroughly. Since I can't afford to have a room at low temp and 20 RH, I settled for appropriate micro environments. Specifically: 1) All films were moved to PP or PE reels & cans. 2) Films were double-bagged with appropriate ratio of film to EK molecular sieves. Having too little film in a bag with a molecular sieve can apparently over-dry the film. Each bag has a moisture indicator in it and a strip of the litmus paper that detects VS (buy from IPI). The litmus reading was only valid for some short period after insertion and is now not useful, as I understand it. I'd have to put new strips in the bags to check current VS levels. 3) The 16mm films with magstripes are stored in a fridge that's set at about 45F. I'm sort of trying to not destroy the sound on the magstripe, while also trying to keep the acetate in good condition. I did capture the audio on the magstripes before putting the film into storage. 4) The 8mm films with VS are stored at -10F. 5) The rest of the films, with no signs of VS are stored in a dedicatd fridge at about 32F. The key term in this all is micro environment. I need to start checking on the films annually. The fact that I haven't been monitoring them regularly has me a bit on edge, now that I've thought about that. Before I'll use any of these films for anything, I'll let them equilibrate with ambient air for maybe a week. I theorize that trying to scan too-dry film would yield disastrous results. I am not an expert. Visit IPI website and National Parks websites for really good, authoritative, expert info. NPS: https://www.nps.gov/museum/coldstorage/html/packaging4_2.html IPI: https://www.imagepermanenceinstitute.org Edit: Also, PP bags are supposed to be better for archival purposes than PE or PU. But beware, PP gets brittle and fractures at low temps, as I quickly discovered with the 8mm films at -10F. Edit2: And I agree with the recommendation to keep VS films the F away from good films. I wonder to what extent my films have gotten slimed by scanners in the past. I hope my good films haven't picked up acetic acid from the films that were on the machine before it.

Hartford is evil. Two thumbs up for Athos. They are very responsive.

I want to see an IMAX 15/70 film sometime soon. It doesn't really matter which film.

There wouldn't be anything worthwhile in any partial roll. Each roll is a scene at a particular place - establishing shots, action, wrap up. It would be impossible to match sky from a roll with a reshoot of just a couple shots. In some cases, establishing shots are on a half roll and action is on a whole roll. If any part of 1.5 rolls is bad, all of it is bad. That's what makes this one so frustrating. I reshot a scene yesterday and blew the last shot. Today I have to go reshoot the whole thing because sky is different today and there are no sunny (it was sunny no clouds yesterday) days in the forecast for the next two weeks.

Thanks for the very detailed, thorough, helpful response. The lab has agreed to waive all charges for developing of 14 rolls (9 good, 5 bad) and telecine. That covers the film stock loss and then some. I'm glad they did the right thing. I am going to ask Athos about this. Perhaps incidental damages are covered by my policy. Have a good weekend.

I didn't think anything of it, so the info wasn't transmitted.

That seems about right. Lab should engage in due diligence before putting customer's costly footage into their machine, and lab should use qualified/experienced staff for this step.

Hello, I'm hoping someone can give me some guidance on a situation. I've spent about 5 weeks shooting about 31 x 400' of 50D. I've got a cooler with me that contains 20 rolls of 35mm 200T, that I intend to also shoot. The fridge contains 7 rolls of 50D x 35mm, and 10 rolls of 50D x 35mm are enroute from EK. I imagine I'll shoot it all over the course of the next 3-5 weeks. This is relevant later. I'm shooting with an Arri 235, on the surface of the sun - also known as NM. Today, it was 97 degrees with a 15 mph wind. I'm doing about two setups per day, on my own. Every shot requires 95# of sandbags, and I have no grips or assistants. It's kind of rough work. I sent 14 rolls to the lab in June. No problems. Then 14 more rolls on Monday. Today, I got an email telling me that the film broke during processing and about 5 rolls were destroyed. Kind of a bummer. The break occurred where a mid-roll magazine switch happened. I've been shooting establishing shots in one mag, and action shots in another. I do this because action shots potentially take 100-200' of film, and I don't want to run out. It's hard to shoot establishing shots after the action shots, because continuity is broken by rapidly changing weather. When I swap mags, the film sometimes becomes pinched in the mag throat, because I'm doing the change in my car - which is very confined. On a few occasions, I've noticed that I pinched part of the film loop. I pull the film into the camera and it winds up creased. But I've never had a severe crease that the film gate got mad about or that had a broken edge, as far as I know. I tend to notice such things. The lab seems to be running on a skeleton staff. I'm glad they exist and I like them. They haven't disappointed me in the past. I wonder if skeleton staff isn't as good as regular staff. I asked lab to replace the film stock. What that would mean here is not charging me for processing and not charging me for telecine. The cost of those equal (within $100 or so) the cost of the lost film. They refused. I guess their position is that I am responsible for the break. But I feel that the lab bears responsibility for ensuring that whatever they get will make it through their machine. I expected them to simply agree to eat the cost of processing and telecine to compensate for the stock. I thought this was industry standard for film manufacturers and labs. I've never actually ever had a lab ruin a roll - not in 47 years of shooting film - so I don't actually have any direct experience. Their refusal to waive charges to compensate for the film loss is particularly frustrating because I have to bear the cost of an additional ~5 days of shooting to replace the footage. I'll incur lodging, car rental, lens rental, tripod rental, and other expenses during that time. I don't expect them to compensate me for incidental damages, but it seems like the incidental damages should make them feel a bit crummier about the situation. I conducted some experiments this evening with film, my camera, and a mag. I pinched the film to varying degrees. I was not able to break any of them by applying strictly a longitudinal load to the film. The only way I could get it to fail is if I bent i the film, like I was trying to tear it. When a side load was applied, I was able to tear it at the pinch. This leaves me wondering if an inexperienced machine operator did something that caused unusual loads to be applied to the film and made a defect tear that would not normally tear, If I were running a film lab and I messed up someone's hard work, I would waive all charges as a natural reflex. I wouldn't have to think about it for a second. And if that reflex didn't kick in, I'd at least think about whether waiving fees is the best move in terms of maximizing future profits. Like, if I don't waive fees, I may not get the rest of the job or any business at all from this customer in the future. I'm interested in gathering information from others to guide my approach to this situation. Thanks in advance for any wisdom/anecdotes.

He worked on one of my A-Minima mags. Great guy. Will try. Thanks.