Who Wants Film? Check this out.

[raid]

400ft (4) Kodak Film: anyone willing to share?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://cgi.ebay.com/4-400ft-35mm-Mot...em270094898231

These are four rolls of 400ft each, for a total of $200 plus shipping [right now].
That's about $50~$55 for a 400ft. roll.
Let's team up and buy this lot and then share.
Who wants in?
__________________
Raid in Pensacola, Florida.

 

[EmilGil]

If it wasn't tungsten film I might have been interested...

Edit: It's some cine tungsten film, ISO125.

 

[like2fiddle]

I can't seem to access the ebay page. What Kodak film? If Tri-X, count me in.

 

[raid]

I can't seem to access the ebay page. What Kodak film? If Tri-X, count me in.

Roger: It's not Tri-X but motion picture film. I think, it is Kodak 5293 Tungsten film

Raid


Part of the ad:

4 400ft rolls, sealed cans of 35mm film. These were extra rolls from a recent comerical shoot. Has been kept in fridge, Why pay over 200 hundred for 1 roll from Kodak when you can get 4 for the same price. I have 100% feedback and have been a member since March of 2000 and I have positive feedback from selling my film. I will ship this UPS Ground(1 to 6 Days) for $30 and only in the USA please. I ONLY ACCEPT PAYPAL thank you. Specs 5293 EASTMAN EXR 200T 35mm 400 ft roll 857-9641 Description of film by Kodak EASTMAN EXR 200T Films 5293 (35 mm) is medium- to high-speed tungsten-balanced color negative camera films with microfine grain, very high sharpness, and high resolving power. They feature wide exposure latitude and accurate tone reproduction. The emulsion contains a colored-coupler mask for good color reproduction in release prints. EASTMAN EXR 200T film is an excellent choice for anyone wanting to shoot a single stock over a wide range of shooting conditions. It's fast enough for almost any situation. Yet its grain and sharpness are comparable to films a full stop slower. Plus, using one stock eliminates a lot of short ends and loading mistakes, all of which saves you money. (EI 125D) "The (EASTMAN EXR 200T film) 5293 film records less grain and a wide range of tonality, and is fast enough for deep focuses." More info Description EASTMAN EXR 200T Film / 5293 (35 mm), is a medium- to high-speed tungsten-balanced color negative camera film with microfine grain and very high sharpness. It features wide exposure latitude and accurate tone reproduction. The emulsion contains a colored-coupler mask for good color reproduction in release prints. Base EASTMAN EXR 200T Film / 5293, 7293 has a clear acetate safety base with rem-jet backing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[tetrisattack]

And just to further quash any hopes of getting a good deal on this film, note that motion picture film isn't compatible with C-41.

There was a firm called Seattle FilmWorks that tried selling the short ends of long rolls of motion picture film, but they eventually tanked. Interesting to read about though.

 

[erikhaugsby]

And just to further quash any hopes of getting a good deal on this film, note that motion picture film isn't compatible with C-41.

Is it developed through a proprietary process then? Or E6? Or does it turn out like crossprocessed E6/C41 films?
Wonder why motion picture stock is different from 'normal' film...

 

[astrosecret]

different gradiations in tone and color than say porta or kodak gold. if you shoot tungsten film outside without an 85 filter you'll get blue tones all over. cine film has tighter grain at higher speeds and the new vision 2 stocks are tailored to replicate reality as closely as possible, which allows for the most efficent color correction/image manipulation in the lab or via a DI. The Expression stocks have more of a pastel look to them. cine film also is 1 perf i think.

 

[tetrisattack]

You know, I'm not terribly familiar with the ECN-2 process, but looking at kodak's tech pub on how to develop it, it looks like it differs mostly from C-41 in that it has an anti-halation (rem-jet) backing that has to be chemically softened and mechanically buffed away. I imagine this is sort of like kodachrome, in that cross-processing it in C-41 chemistries could seriously damage roller transport machines or any other replenished minilab equipment.

I can't positively say why motion picture film has an antihalation backing, save that the film must deliver absolutely the highest image quality to get each tiny frame to look good at massive projection sizes, and that high-end cine lenses exist in a special zone of reality all unto themselves (color matching between lenses, for example, and t-stop settings alongside f-stops to account for light transmission characteristics!), where maybe halation really makes a difference.

 

[astrosecret]

the anti halation backing is so the light entering through the shutter doesn't reflect off the apeture plate re-exposing the film, which is commonly reffered to as "ghosting."

 

[raid]

...meaning that this film is useless for us here.
Sorry to have brought such stuff to your attention. I had no clue that this film is like Seattle Film Works film or Dale labs film.

Raid

 

[Doug]

FWIW, I have souped Seattle Film Works neg film in C41 chemistry at home, successful following the normal C41 process. Except for all the sooty black junk that remains behind. I bet a commercial lab would be real upset to contaminate their machine with this residue. It was Eastman Color Negative 5247 ECN exposed at EI = 80, a repackaged movie film.

 

[ZorkiKat]

I too have processed motion picture stock in C41. The results are useable colour negatives. Home processing is the only option since commercial labs aren't too happy to see all that rem-jet coating left as black gunk in their machines.

The resulting negatives will not yield normal looking pics if printed using the filter channels used for usual colour negatives. Then again, filter printing pack settings are supposed to change between film brands and makes. A moderate change in either magenta or yellow channel is all that's needed to make excellent prints from motion picture stock. Scanning on the other hand, given the fact that software corrects what it scans, offer an easier way out, with a bit of post processing.

Friends who are in the cinema trade sometimes give me 'short ends' of Kodak
500 Tungsten film (ISO 500 Vision). The last 50 feet in the camera magazine is often left unused and discarded since it won't run long enough for a serious take.

Here is one example from a Kodak Vision 500T negative:

 

[raid]

I am in line for some 400ft B&W film by Kodak.
I read about it on nelsonfoto.com.

Raid

 

[Hiyawaan]

Hey guys, there was a lab in LA call RGB which when I was in college would sell 35mm motion picture film in 35mm still canisters and do developing. Very helpfull for film test when you got no cash to burn 400ft. No sure if their still doing it though. Check out
http://www.aandi.com/mp_stock.htm
they seem to be doing it.

 

[Edward Felcher]

It's interesting how 35mm film for still cameras is going to come full circle.

In the Barnack era, the Leica and others were developed to be able to use the spool ends and surplus 35mm movie film. It was bulk loaded and cheap. People had to load it into their own metal spools to use in their Leicas.

It was a long time before 35mm film specifically made for still photography was commercially available for retail, in pre-loaded spools. The idea was even ridiculed by Luddites at the time. No "real photographer" would ever buy a commercial spool of film!

Now that film is eventually going to die a slow death, people are going back to sourcing 35mm cine film and one day it might end up one of the last ways to take still photos with 35mm equipment.

 

[raid]

Edward,
There will always be film available somewhere in the world.

Raid

 

[peter_n]

Absolutely.

 

[Edward Felcher]

I didn't say film was going to disappear in the near future, but not many people envisioned the unbelievably rapid decline of film in the face of digital.

Not tomorrow, but film will eventually lapse into a smaller and smaller niche item, until it becomes much more expensive and harder to obtain.

The demise of many film labs will happen more quickly.

No doubt there is still a healthy market for film in most parts of the world, I wasn't trying to get your hackles up, just making an observation.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Edward,
There will always be film available somewhere in the world.

Raid

That is true. But getting film (or at least the type an RF fan would like, ie, silver-based BW) from those parts of the world where it is available to the parts where it is wanted can be a problem. Getting film shipped in from elsewhere may not be a problem in America or in most European countries (where paradoxically, there are a lot of emulsions to choose from) but it can be a pain in others. Currently, there is no 'real' (read: reliable and ready) source of BW film in Manila.

A recent shipment of a few BW materials from a fellow RFfer based in America is an example of this. The package contained non-commercial amounts of film (20 135 rolls, 5 bulk rolls, 4 packets of BW powdered chemistry, and a box of 8X10 bromide paper) was slapped a 100% duty by the local customs office. That made the landed cost of 1 36 exp roll of Lucky BW film (one among those in the shipment) as much, or even more, as Kodak Tri-X was when it was available.

Jay

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

ManGo: 60 pounds are equivalent to about $140.
That's 1000ft/$140, which is about 7 ft per Dollar.

This deal gives 1600ft for $200, which is about 8 ft per Dollar.😀 😎

These are very similar deals if the type of film were similar.

Raid

To paraphrase a world-famous linguist and philanthropist, "that's some fuzzy math" 😉 Go with yer gut!