Richard Tuohy

Hi Philip, it is the first developer only that needs to be adjusted. Indeed, in the entire reversal process, only the first developer is time critical - everything else is 'to completion'. good luck richard

Justin sure gets some remarkable results with old film. I would suggest the processed film looks very different from that transfer. I suspect there would be no blacks at all on the film itself. Certainly I think it is extremely unlikely you would get anything aproximating this. A fair amount of old super 8 comes our way. You aren't likely to get anything that looks like this I am afraid. Well, that said, the 11 year old stock - VNF I presume - might still have a little contrast left.

Yes, the Aviphot is notched as 250d. Daniel Wittner says they experimented with both options (160d and 250d) and found that while it didn't matter that much, 250d was on balance better. The Velvia 100d and the Astia 100d are both notched the same as Ektachrome 100d.

I think there is no exposure compensation you can do for out of date colour reversal film. The film is likely to be badly fogged. With reversal, badly fogged means the film will be produce images that are very light (heading towards completely clear with no image at all). Over exposing won't help that. In fact, there is nothing you can do. Yes, perhaps if it was negative film, under rating the film (ie over exposing) is a good idea. But with reversal, no. richard

also try urbanskifilm.com rt

Don't be put off by this thread. It comes down to testing in your own camera. Having lined up a lot of strips of film for the purposes of 'flat printing' (ie contact printing under glass with a torch) the different alignment of perforations is quite amazing. I doubt there is a systematic error in the pitch of ORWO film. Yes, the problems being reported are realy happening to forum members. But I don't believe Orwo are systematically using the wrong perforator and perforating long instead of short pitch on their camera films. If something systematic is going on, it is more likely to be the kind of problem that Simon has mentioned above. Something to do with the base, or lubrication or friction of these particular stocks.

The majority of the great films were made in 4:3, and a greater number are in black and white too ... and there will never be a great film made in 3D.

Hi Marc, how much sodium bisulphate did you use, and how much P. permangenate? Interesting that it worked. well done. rt

Thanks for the correction Heikki, apologies for my misinformation. rt

There is no still film version of this stock. Wittner however do have 100' rolls of 35mm currently available. However they will also have 16mm 2R available within a couple of weeks.

Hi Kevin, as an experimental filmmaker, I am interested in the Linagraph Shellburst film. I could make something interesting out of that! Are you interested in parting with these? many thanks, richard ps my email is richard@nanolab.com.au

Hi John, the bleach is cheap, the film isn't. Mix fresh bleach before you re-test. Assuming you are following the correct sequence as Brian pointed out, if the bleach was inadequate you might expect a very dark negative to entirely black film. This is because the second developer, assuming it was good, should have developed the remining Silver halide, thus producing the 'positive' silver image. This should mean that you have both the originally developed negative silver image and the now second developed positive silver image. So, was the negative quite dark? richard

Hi David, ADOX are still an emulsion manufacturing company. The film is actually ADOX made. Some of the ADOX range was being made by the Croatian company that made EFKE film, notably the so-called 'art' emulsions ADOX sold. But the 100 speed is made by them. And what is more, they are loading it into the GK film cartridge, rather than the Kodak cartridge. I have 40 on order. cheers, richard

Hi all, Kodak no longer sell the #8 safelight filter which is recommended for colour print stock. Their discontinuation notice of some time ago suggested #13 as a replacement. I am using the #13, which is very dark. If you look at the specificaitons for these two filters, the #8 has greater transmission at the apporox 600nm part of the spectrum. Does anyone know for sure whether the effect of the #8 over the #13 is a brighter light to work under? Here is the kodak spec page on safelights: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/ti0845/ti0845.pdf cheers, richard

Its camera film Phil. Its B wind with emulsion in. If you are in doubt, compare the cat number in the Kodak catalogue.

Roger has said that the Retro8 software that will be available some time after the initial release of the machine will be able to work with negative. He also said people who purchase will be able to get the upgrade at no extra cost. I suspect the machine offers 'auto exposure' only, given it works so slowly and is designed to be set running then left alone. Have to have that confirmed however, don't take my word for it.

Yes, Kodak was quite wrong to write on the 100d box that you should leave the sun/bulb switch on 'bulb'. This is quite wrong for most super 8 cameras. The exceptions are cameras that can't read the smpte notch coding for 100d anyway. It is as though kodak (or the person who designed the box) didn't understand the smpte super 8 notch system. From memory the Velvia 50d is notched as what would officially be called the 25d notch. The asa notch is the same size as the old Kodachrome 40 notch, but without the filter notch. The K40 asa notch was 40 t which is the same as the 25d notch. However, the German Bauer cameras which don't have a filter notch detector, read velvia as 40 (and you should switch the filter switch to bulb). The way to make cameras that do have a filter notch reader and do in fact differentiate between daylight and tungsten speeds (and not all cameras with filter notches do that - so were designed to work with type-G film ... (long story)) is to cut in a filter notch on the velvia cartridge, then switch the filter out by putting the switch on 'bulb' or inserting the filter key or screw. Its very complex stuff. As suggested above, best is to try it and know for next time how it works in your camera. cheers, richard

Hi Vadim, just wrote and lost a long post to this. Damn. However the important point is that your camera takes normal camera film. Compare the image you posted in post 37 and the 'official' black and white images in post 6. In post 37 your film is leaving from the wrong side of the supply spool. As post 6 shows, it should leave from the bottom of the supply spool, not the top as you have it. You need to know that a camera isn't theaded differently with double perf film. Double perf in a single perf camera simply means that the extra perf isn't used. Your camera does take film up eumlsion out, rather than emulsion in, however it does need the supply film to be normal - which means emulsion in.

Hi Rob, Thomas is going to send me some, so hopefully that will be all I need to do my tests. Thanks for replying and offering! cheers richard

Thanks Gentlemen, removing the front and giving the front section a good clean and lubrication certainly did the trick. cheers, richard

Hi all, I am wondering if someone out there who works at a lab with printing facilities is able to help me out with getting a few hundred feet of colour intermediate film. There are no longer labs with printing facilities in Australia (well, except my own personal lab that is!) I have been been working on an interesting experimental technique that allows me to selectively make areas of a print either colour positive, colour negative or black and white pos or neg. A print from this print stock is too contrasty however. I'd like to try my experimental method on intermediate film. ITs a pretty cool technique, and I'd like to be able to end up with a master negative. Yes, I could print from my 'worked' print stock onto internegative, then make prints from that. But interneg is very expensive, and it would also mean an extra 2 generations, rather than one. I'd like to give working directly on intermediat a go. my email is richard@nanolab.com.au it would be much appreciated many thanks, richard Ps I could work with either the 16mm or the 35mm versions.

Hi Dom, you are a legend! I posted here because I didn't want to ring you and pester you for help again. Thanks for answering. It came with three c-mount lenses that I figure I could probably sell for the price i paid for the camera (I paid $220), so I think I might like to try taking the front off rather than asking for a refund. I have taken the rotating part of the turret off, but there are more screws underneath. If you do get a chance to check the manual, that would be great! speak soon, rt.

Hi all, I have just ebay purchased an old Bell and Howell Filmo 70DL for a young film artist in Malaysia. The motor, however, appears to be seized. I have tried putting a little oil in the oil holes. I'd like to open it up and have a look (being very careful regarding the spring). Currently the spring is fully wound up. It won't unwind at all. This will make disassembly problematic I believe. Anyone have any thoughts or instructions as to which screws I could safely unscrew in order to open the camera up? many thanks, richard

Hi Ric, there is no dedicated mixing, coating or finishing equipment just for ektachrome. Its the same equipment as used for all their other stocks. Yes, they could sell the formula and the proceedure, but not the machinery without ending all their MP film production. cheers, richard

Hi Dave, I think we can assume only that Kodak have more 100d to 'finish', rather than that they are actually making more. Their initial announcement stated that they had enough for 3 months at the usual rate of sales. Given the 'just in time' model of production companies like Kodak a likely to use, it makes sense that while their supply of finished stock was sold quickly, there is still more to finish. richard