Dirk DeJonghe

After many years of remaining dormant, flashing is now used in our lab quite often these days when making proper internegatives from positives or reversal originals. We mostly use 200T stock preflashed and Pull processed to a particular gamma to get really good internegatives. This method is also used with the current crop of internegative stock from Kodak which is really 50D in longer lengths and on polyester base.

Yes, colour temperature influences the sensitivity.

If you use SEPMAG to do the editing, you would have to transfer it back to digital WAV files and then finish the mix in digital. Transfering digital to/from SEPMAG is quite straightforward.

When I started the Ektachrome print stock was 7389, later 7399. Making prints from ECO onto this stocks gave reasonably soft images. Making prints from Kodachrome onto 7389/99 you ran into infrared absorption problems making the shadows reddish. To avoid these reddish shadows you needed to print onto Gevachrome 902 reversal stock or onto Internegative stock with preflashing.

I think the ECO stock would work very well in Super 8 today with a good scanner.

There were only two ways to get the proper contrast from an ECO original. The first one was to print to Kodachrome print stock, not available except in the US and discontinued about when I started processing ECO in 1975 or so. The second most widely used method was to print to Internegative. If you needed to mix 7242 with ECO, it was customary to preflash the ME4 Ektachromes to match the ECO.

It would probably survive ECN2 process.Will be very fogged by now. The first developer in ECO3 process was Phenidone/hydroquinone based. D76 should work.

Edit: it won't survive ECN2 since it had a prehardener and neutraliser before the first developer. B&W developer is OK.

I had lots of customers using NPRs in the early seventies. The stock used was always B-wind but the exposed film was emulsion out. You cannot and should not buy A-wind stock for camera use. The exception is the Minima where you rewind your own, no longer supplied by Kodak.

The old internegative stock, 7271 was high contrast to be used with Ektachrome commercial low contrast reversal. The current IN stock is similar to 5203 and needs pull development plus flashing to work properly. It is not a trivial task, just read the instructions on the Kodak website;

We did a S16 job two months ago on 7213 200T. Pushed two stops for grain. The effective speed gain was less than a stop in the shadows, grain was as planned, serious loss of highlight detail not planned. More difficult to scan due to blocked highlights in neg.

I use a low-tack sticky tape as used by painters on delicate surfaces. Kodak doesn't use any tape to attach the film to the core. Maybe they wind the film to the core and attach the flanges later (easy to do).

In a Quicktime container the projector speed is just an number in metadata. If you capture at 24fps and change metadata projector speed to 18fps, it will playback slower but all frames will still be 1:1. It is only when you import the file into your timeline that fps have to match if you want to maintain 1:1. Obviously a clip running one minute at 18fps will be much shorter in duration at 24 fps while keeping the same number of individual frames.

Negcutting is still done, a new feature film is planned for later this year, they want negcut, traditional film grading and later a full scan of the cut negative, Baselight grading and DCP etc. Keykode numbers are essential for both negcutting and rescanning of selects.

There is only polyester sound stock available now. We use ST8D as long as stocks last, after that maybe Kodak or Orwo special order.

I am happy to report that we do optical sound transfers, both 16 and 35mm as well as silver sound tracks on 16mm colour prints. Mono only. We are right now doing soundtracks and prints for a major museum of modern art in a major US city.

We can make optical negatives directly from your WAV or BWF files.

David, a number of years ago we worked on a short where the client wanted yellow highlights and blue shadows. It was done via IP/DN. If you flash the DN stock with blue light and use yellow printing lights for IP to DN step, you will get the effect.

If you ship Fedex you won't have any X-ray problems.

It looks like an Aaton XTR without the display on the motor side. I also never saw that kind of video assist. The important facts; it has the magnetic drive of an XTR. Aaton or PL mount is easy to change. I don't have my old Aaton pricelists anymore but I seem to remember they made a simplified version of the XTR without timecode or electronics, I could be wrong, it is about 20 odd years ago.

I have a Minima for sale, send me a PM or email.

Heikki,

It is indeed a wrong interpretation. There are other reasons, amongst them: labs don't want the competition to know their pricing, most customers want personalised quotes, prices are more and more complex due to numerous variations and combinations of services.

We always try to work out the 'best' solution for customers, sometimes paying a bit more at the beginning to end up with a superior product at the end, or saving money in different ways.

We are still here and in full operation, digital and analog.

Color and B&W, 16 and 35mm, traditional film grading or Baselight digital.

Thanks to Fedex and the internet, distances are no longer a factor.

Several of her films can be ordered from Amazon on DVD.

If it was transfered on a CCD telecine such as Spirit or Shadow, it is very likely failed FPN compensation. (Fixed Pattern Noise). Ask for a new telecine transfer and show the defect.

Wetgate printing would completely eliminate any base-side scratches. These show up as white on the print. Any colored scratches are on the emulsion side and will not be affected by wetgate printing.

The lighter density unsharp area, to the right of the base scratches, appears to be a printing defect (D-line) and is a reason to reprint free of charge. If you have the same defect on a telecine transfer of the same negative then it is a pressure mark due to something in the camera touching but not scratching the emulsion side.

I would ask the lab to examine the negative and if the D-line is a printing defect, offer to pay the difference between dry and wetgate printing. You would then get a new print without the camera scratches.

Looking at it, I think it is a bit of dirt stuck in the printer gate. If it is not on the negative, the lab should reprint this reel.

Is it during the entire length or just a section? On a Model C printer there is air pressure at the gate to prevent dust sticking in the gate, but it could still happen.

Because the film is moving continuously, what would be a camera hair in a camera and show up as a dark spot near the edge of the frame, in a contact printer this would show up as a 'D-line' (technical term the lab people will understand).

It would be helpful to examine the negative first, there is still a possibility it might be pressure sensitization (exposure by pressure on the emulsion).

The white scratches to the left of the D-line would probably disappear if printed wet-gate.

They are the zoom and focus bars for the Cooke family of zoom lenses, nothing to do with the camera.