Jump to content

Charles MacDonald

Premium Member
  • Posts

    1200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Charles MacDonald

  1. brings to mind two technologies. the first is "Kodacolor" movie film, which used a lenticulalr film base and a special filter on Both the camera and projector. the filter would send the three prinaries to vertical areas on the film, and the lenticular stripes would send the same areas on the developed film through a matching filter on the projector. Not a long marketed product. the second is so called "single tube" vidicon consumer cameras, which had a filter on the front of the tube which resulted in teh colour information being able to be recovered from the video signal. the cameras would convert the result into "Normal" NTSC, PAL or Secam, and record it on VHS tape. that said, this is the first I have heard of this process.
  2. Early in making commercial colour films (as opposed to Home movies) using a reversal Original printed on reversal print film was the go to method in 16mm. some will have a soundtrack, but still be black, or black with edge printing, on the perf side.
  3. heavy leader for circulating film library prints. rough texture to knock off any sharp points in the gate of the projector, to avoid scratches. generally not something that is relevant today
  4. the video does show in great detail the process for making ESTAR film base. Hard to imagine Kodak being so open on their internal processes.
  5. yes, part of the early 16mm licence scheme would be that each brand of Camera had a special place in the gate where their was exposure to let the lab know what brand of camera was used. the closest one on the chart simon posted would be an AGFA-Ansco camera, but I have seen charts that go for a couple of pages. at the time,the cameras had two rows of perforations, and so no image was put in that area. Later, (Not that much later) it was decided that one edge could have the soundtrack instead of perforations. although home movies often did not have sound, and continued to use the double perf film. 16mm prints released for educational use, sales and amrketing and home and non-theatrical use would have the soundtrack instead of the right row of perfs. relatively recently (late 1990s) some cameras started using the entire soundtrack area to make for a wide screen image. that also uses single perf film.
  6. if you mean with a sprocket hole in between every pair of what would be 16mm sprockets, you may be talking about "Regular 8" regular 8 was exposed along one edge, and the roll turned over and then exposed on the other edge. after processing the film was split down the middle and the two parts spliced together. the holes were half the distance of 16mm sprockets so a total of 4 times the frames could be shot on each length of film. most often provided in 33 ft rolls (25 use-able feet) on a special spool for Home movie cameras. after processing the film was returned as a 50ft spliced length of 8mm film.
  7. https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/How-to-read-a-Kodak-film-can-label.pdf will give you what the label means. if you get the kodak price catalog, it has a listing of current and recent "sp" numbers. these are a decription of each type of roll that Kodak sells. I clipped a part of the table for 16mm film to give you an idea of the contents. the can will show for example "sp457" or the film type like DXN457. the same SP number may be available in different lengths.
  8. and if you are editing camera original, you may want to read up on "A and B" roll editing. that allows you to print from an edited camera negative without splices showing.
  9. deep in the Kodak web site are the current processing manuals. https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/page/processing-manuals which will expain all the various versions of the Kodak Prcesses. which may or may not help you to understand what happens in teh lab. If Robert says he made it work, I would belive him.
  10. I am wondering if you Might just try to get a few extra take up spools, (and cans) and see if you lab would be willing to do the extra splices needed to have for example two 50 ft shots count as one roll of 100ft. after your first shot, just cut off the film, and use a fresh take up spool to use the rest of the roll. be aware that for very good reasons MOST labs will charge each spool as 100Ft for developing, even if you only have 20ft on the spool. (for more effort to splice and keep track of each lenth of film than the actual cost of running it through the processor. then of course splice it again before scanning ot even printing.)
  11. looks a bit like a redox blemish... can you provide further deails on the age of teh film and it's storage. Redox is normally associated with Microfilm, but can affect any thin emulsion B&W film.
  12. B&W was always a niche product, and so might be more because of that, also it MIGHT require more silver as the image in B&W is silver, while the colour stock may use less. You may also want to note that it looks like they will sell ONE CAN of the Vison Color, But you need 3 cans worth to get the 3302. {16mm print film is almost always only sold as two rolls in a 35mm can.} you might want to inquire with the Filmotek- ORWO folks. to see what they offer as an equivalent.
  13. well, D76 was introduced as a motion Picture developer in the 1920s. and Kane was shot for relaese in the 1940s. D96 has replaced it for movie use, although it is still the "Standard" developer for both film comparison and still photography use. I would expect that the LOOK of Kane has more to do with Toland's skill than the chemistry the lab used.
  14. that would be in "Processing KODAK Color Print Films, Module 9 Process ECP-2E Specifications" which should be downloadable here : https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/page/processing-manuals
  15. this picture is from an old kodak catalog, it gives all the dimensions except for "r"
  16. It is generally assumed that one cannot re-perforate 16mm stock into regular 8 stock. The problem is that film is not dimensionally stable enough to ensure that the existing spacing is close enough that the new perforations will be perfectly centered. if not you will likely get a slight Jump in the image every other frame. here is one site which will sell you a PDF of the standards. https://www.engineertoolonline.com/product/SMPTE-109-2003/ here is another : https://www.pdfonlinestore.com/standards/smpte-109-2003.html you may be able to use that number to find someone else who can supply it. the actual standard for 8mm is actually SMPTE 239-2004 Motion-Picture Film (16-mm) - Perforated 8-mm Type R, 2R standard by Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, 01/01/2004 the Australian archive some some information at https://www.nfsa.gov.au/preservation/preservation-glossary/perforations
  17. for a while almost every production had their own path. Depending a lot on if the picture required many effects. or even if the Negative was cut or if the prints were made from a digital intermediate. (Their was one TV series that used the scan and leave the negative alone method that had to recently go back and cut and scan the negative as the scanning done at the time or original broadcast was not FULL HD. Kodak even at one time made a LOW contrast Print film (Kodak Vision Primetime if I recall) which could be scanned for video. it did not catch on from what I have heard. with digital origination, the opposite of course with Prints when needed made from the digital master..
  18. sometimes their is a hole that corresponds to a sync point to allow the picture and sound negatives to both be printed in -well - sync. Number punches sometimes used to identify individuals rolls. Also sometimes archives will punch a hole in the leader to do chemical tests on an old print.
  19. that is why I suggested to use a cloth to only put it on the back. it is over 10 years since I last tried to use Movie film for home processed stills. at that time I used water to wet two sponges one on tech side of the film, to try and keep the black from getting on the emulsion, as several folks told me that if it got on the emulsion it might never come off. I had to wash both sponges about every 6 inches of film. this was done after the wash step and before the final rinse I was using in home made chemicals which were somewhere in between ECN2 and C41 - I did give a 1 minute extra wash after the sponge step. the negs I recently scanned from that period were within what the scanner software could deal with.
  20. it is soften with the pre-bath, but is very dificult to get off. you might try wiping the back of the film with a microcloth wetted with pre-bath. but I am not sure how to remove THAT to ensure storage safety.
  21. Filmotec makes some ORWO sound stocks, but I have no idea what edge printing they have. the printing down the middle was needed for the SDDS system as it used the rebate area to hold data. I might be tempted to contact the factory in Germany to see what they are doing: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact Our enthusiastic and experienced team is always ready to help you with expertise and understanding for all your special needs. You can reach us by telephone from Monday to Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. GMT at the following numbers: Managing Director: Jake Seal Phone: +49 (0) 3494 36 96 80 Fax: +49 (0) 3494 36 96 82 e-mail: filmotec@filmotec.de Marketing and Sales Manager: Retirement_Boehme_210531 Opening and delivery times: Monday – Friday 07:00 – 15:00 Global Sales: Terry Bird email: terry@orwo.studio address: FilmoTec GmbH Ortsteil Wolfen Röntgenstraße 3 D-06766 Bitterfeld-Wolfen Germany http://www.filmotec.de http://www.filmotec.com
  22. if your goal is to make new Super 8 Prints, you may want to check used book stores for books about how it was done in the prime days of Super 8. typically the starting point was a low contrast negative made from original sources. the Negative might have been larger than super 8, (16mm or 35mm) and optically printed on Super 8 perforated stock. Super 8 print stock would typcally be be 16mm wide with two rows of perforations, or even 35mm wide with 4 rows of perforations and a "discard strip" with another row, which would be cut off and discarded after processing. (try to find a 1970-ish copy of "eastman motion picture films for professional use" ) as far as making copies from existing super 8 Prints, have you considered that in many countries the copyright laws give the rights to make copies exclusively to the copyright holder for up to 95 years? if you were to negotiate permission, the copyright holder whould no dount perfer that there work be presented in the best light, again wanting prints made from 16 or 35mm pre-print material. the lightest objection, that their is no longer any available print stock, may be overcome as their are a few die-hard firms who can perforate any stock in almost any perforation, although to get unperforated stock from Kodak will likely require a large special order and also some assurance that the project will not cause any harm to their reputation.
  23. when I tried to do this at home, I used to hang up the film over the sink and use two photographic grade sponges, very wet and hope that the one of the emulsion side whould keep the black off the front of the film. I found I had to rinse the sponge for about every 6 inchs of film. still the Pictures (stills) occasionally had a white spot or three. I was using the chemicals one shot, and they were often balck when they came out so some particles were probably enbeded before the development stage was even finished. using that method I don't think I used a prebath so the ugly blackness was loosened by the developer. that said Dale Neviles formulas did produce images that still had full colour 2 years later.
  24. Professional Movie Labs would ALWAYS be using a continuous Processor. with a dedicated section to remove the REM-Jet as the very first step. The Machine will use some sort of water jet and perhaps some sort of Buffer to ensure that the rem jet is washed away and has no chance of getting in the emulsion side. trying to do it in a still darkroom will always require some ingenuity.
×
×
  • Create New...