Charles MacDonald

I have a couple of hundred feet of 5222 that I loaded into still cassettes back when it was new around 1986. It how develops with Very grey edges, and and needs a higher contrast Mulltigrade filter to print. (an option that is not available for movies) The higher speed the film, the more it fogs even in the freezer. For caparison I finished off a few rolls of Plus-x still film from the same era two yaers ago, and it was fine. The roll of 4X loaded at the same time I found was not printable.

Of hand the new Vision 3 50D has got to be close, I think Kodak is claiming their best sharpness ever - and this is after the debut of the EKTAR 100 Still film. This non-focusing lenes were the low end of the line in teh early cameras and are often triplets. The focusing lenses were aimed at a higher price point and so may have better optical correction.

If I read the manual correctly they use FNdd where the two digits are the last two digits in the type number,

Fuji does not seeem to document the date very well, some of their older print films had a code which listed two digits for the year and two letters for the quater of the year. Their manual -- http://www.fujifilm.com/products/motion_picture/products/pdf/fujifilm_motion_picture_film_manual.pdf Shows the heading of "manufacturers code", for the block that corresponds to your "F72FD5" so I would guess that you could try contacting Fuji and asking for the information.

It has a grey base just like any other B&W camera stock. The black backing removal step is not part of "Normal" B&W processing. Closest I have seen is one Still film (EFKE) which has a dye layer on the back which becomes colorless in the developer.

That is the remarkable thing about film, it has no Quantization by itself. Which is why when a film with a damaged negative is "restored" to digital, most filmmakers would be sure to save both the damaged original, as well as a new 3 strip separation. SO that when the next cycle of technical obsolescence comes around they can decide if the best material is the pre or post digitaly processed version.

Not that Tape has a stellar reputation for longevity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tape_baking Data center folks set up arrays of disks in a RAID configuration, and use the network to copy the data to more than one data center. Tape backups are cycled through, so that it is uncommon to actually have to refer to the backup tapes. Of course we all know taht "Minor damage" to film requires a few frames to be re-touched. Minor damage to digital turns it into a pixel playground.

there are a couple of ways to check a camera, but focus is just a small part of an overhaul. A full clean and lube will mean removing several parts and cleaning them, a full overhaul means more dismantling and possible part replacement or rebuilding. a good camera guy should be able to give you an idea by looking if the camera is overdue for an overhaul. depending on how long it has been stored, the lubricants may be dried up and not lubricating. Remember that a couple of ruined rolls of film cost as much as a overhaul.

Anything much faster than about ISO 25 in bright sunlight will be easier if you have a ND filter available. 24FPS is effectively a /50th to 1/60th Shutter speed. The famous sunny 16 rule would mean ISO 50 film would require f/16 at 1/50th in bright sun. ISO 250 is more than 2 stops faster. so as has been stated you would have to crank it down to f/22 or even f/32. Some ND would allow a larger appature in order to control your Depth of Field. If the world was perfect Kodak would still sell XT Pan. which at ISO 25 was perfect for bright days.

Standard answer is to ask a lab to test it. They will cut off about 5-10 feet and process it, and then read the desity to see how much fog it has developed. They might even use a sensitometer to expose a test in the trial film. depending on the speed of the film - faster film is more likely to shift - you probably will come out OK.

I always worry about fluorescents causing flicker with the interaction of the flashing that they do in combination with the shutter. Some of the CFL bulbs have a ballast that flashes them fast enough to avoid the problem.

Are all your Compact Florescent lamps equipped with a high frequency ballast?

Pentax made two series of Screw mount lenses, the Super Takumar and the Super Multicoated Takumar. Some of the Pentax still film cameras like the Spotmatic F need the Super Multicoated lenes as they also have a cople of extra levers on the back to engage the metering system on those model cameras. The Big difference is the Super Multicoated lenses have a very modern anti-relection coating (up to 14 layers the sales manual claimed) so they should have more contrast and less flare. Both are great lenes. One other quirk is that some of the 1.4 units have a thorium Glass element, which will yellow over time. This effect can be reversed by leaving the back of the lens in the sun for a couple of days. (being careful not to start fires or expose the lens to rain) these are sometimes called the "radioactive lenses")

Adding more light, or opening the lens wider or the two ways that one can add exposure. (slower frame rate is another as it leaves the shutter open longer but of course that speeds up the action.)

to make B&W you combine all three colours, so if the stock is has gone grainy you will get extra grain. if the colour ballance is too far off it will look like you used a random B&W filter. OTOH, any colour shift will not matter in B&W.

They often turn up on e-bay, but I don't see any today. If all fails you might contact urbanski films. http://moviecraft.tripod.com/supplies.html he has some "new" 400ft cans listed (http://members.tripod.com/~Moviecraft/webpix/400ftsteelcan.jpg) for about 5 bucks each. of course if you needed a pallet load Kodak would sell them. (Which is probably where Urbanski got his)

Foma USED to make a colour stock based on the old Agfa Patents. Like the rest of the east Europe photo industry they staped as the product would not be competitive with Kodak and Fuji. I wonder if they still have the technology to put something like that back into production? I wonder if Agfa might license one of them to produce a film based on the last Agfa Movie stock. The follow behind ADOX.DE recently posted on another forum that they have equipment to make 16mm Film if it would help their plans to resurect or clone Agfa APX B&W film. AGFA themselves apparently only have the ability to make Polyester film. One outft in germany is finishing some of the AGfa AviPhot Ariel Camera film for still cameras. The AviPhot Colour negative does not have a mask.

you don't. Perhaps that is why film makers have good imaginations :) And the advantage of the darkroom, you can organize your table or bench with what you want to work on, and select objects by feel. Empty cans on the left, Magazines in the middle, exposed film on the right, ends under the bench. or whatever system works for you.

The cheapest one TOTAL DARKNESS. Sit in your room with all the lights turned off, if you can't see ANYTHING after 10 minutes it is probably dark enough.

Also your hands are less likly to get sweaty, you can scratch an Itchy nose, and you can arrange things on the table. Disadvantage is that if you drop something it can roll away and be hard to find.

yes. Same way you would use if you were breaking the roll down to fit a bolex. IN the darkroom, run the roll on a rewind, (normally in a split reel to prevent it from unwinding.) Spool off as much film as you want to another rewind. A 100ft spool will work here. You can rest your thumb on the flange to judge when you have a full spool. Cut the film and return it to the can, then REWIND the 100 ft spool onto another 100ft spool. You can put that in a box, or right into the camera. Be sure the (now 300ft) roll is bagged and sealed, and mark it as a 300ft short end. I often use this process to break ends down to fit my Filmo, although in that case I run the whole roll onto a vintage 400ft spool, and rewind that on to 100 ft spools. I use the 400ft spool to reduce the risk of accidental exposure.

A lot depends on the "look" you want. if you want say folks on a generaly dark steet, you can get away with less light that if you want to feature the street itself. The light will have the right direction, but you do have to be careful of the heat generated. Normal household fixtures and table lamps often have the largest bulb that they are rated for already installed, so you may want to consult with an experienced Gaffer to be sure you don't start a fire. It is the normal expectation that older film gets less sensitive to light, therefore requiring more exposure.. only a test will really show you how much your stock has drifted. As far as the shutter angle, a circle has 360 degrees, so a 180 degree shutter is open for half the frame time and the film is advancing for the other half. half of 1/24 of a second is 1/48th. (actual time will vary slightly is there are always a some other factors in edge cases. SOME cameras do have a variable shutter, although the upper limit is how long it takes the film to move to the next frame. The folks that are supplying your camera should be able to tell you want range of adjustment (if any) the Camera you will be using has.

looks quite good.

The N74 is only listed as intended as a negative, so it would look rather funky projected. Perhaps you were wanting it printed onto positive stock?

yes, my still tests of the N74 so far have been giving printable negs at 6 minutes 20C in HC-100 Dilution B, which is the same as is recommended for 5222. The UN54 came out very "Thick" looking at that setting. and I have still not found the right settings after a couple of other trial rolls. Sounds like the UN54 really is primarily a reversal material.