Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

flavio81 · Nov 17, 2016

Poisson Du Jour said:
Use E6 now, whatever is available and avoid chasing windmills. Once it's gone, it's gone. If you don't think that is true, ask any of the New Zealand labs that have discontinued E6 just why they chose that course of action.

I'm following your advice! Today i loaded Provia on my camera for a trip. I haven't shot E6 since more than a year ago.

flavio81 · Nov 17, 2016

twelvetone12 said:
Also, you should remember that Ferrania said e6 will be their first product, not the only product.

Yes, but i want them to have a resounding success with CorradoChrome 100.

kb3lms · Nov 18, 2016

Here is a short article on E6 processing at home that was published just today. Promoting some articles like this is another thing that can be done.

http://emulsive.org/articles/a-guide-to-developing-your-own-e6-film-by-kikie-wilkins

skorpiius · Nov 18, 2016

FILM Ferrania said:
Hello all,

We very much hear and understand your concern about E-6 labs. We have had a form on our website for over a year now that is slowly collecting info on labs around the world.

Feel free to fill it out if you think we missed someone!! Dead Link Removed (note - not all labs in our list process E-6, and we haven't updated the map in several months, but we will soon...)

We will do as much as we can to support the remaining E-6 labs, but of course the volume of film we will produce, scattered around the globe, will hardly convince them to redouble their efforts to keep E-6 alive... Those that do, we will promote vigorously in our communications, on our site, etc. We will also encourage home processing, kits, Jobo co-ops, non-profit workshops - whatever it takes to ensure people that there are options available to use our color reversal film.

Thanks I just submitted the London Drugs chain in Canada. Although I believe only 2 stores have a slide processor, the main website mentions slides at all stores, which leads me to believe all 78 stores can send slides to the 2 processing stores. So hopefully that can add 78 more labs to your list!

Nzoomed · Nov 18, 2016

Poisson Du Jour said:
Yes that's true, but these folks are commonly using C41; E6 is poorly understood by many people, especially students who are going into film. The thing they are told about, what they learn, is that "slides are for projectors". Not necessarily so! But it's an instant turn-off because they say, "well stuff it, I don't have a projector" and others still chirp in saying "nobody makes or sells projectors anymore" (they may not be made, but you certainly can buy them second hand!).

Thats crazy if students are told that!
Makes me wonder if these tutors even have any analog photographic experience!

For example, there is only one main application for shooting Velvia, and its not for projection!

1L6E6VHF · Nov 18, 2016

Nzoomed said:
Thats crazy if students are told that!
Makes me wonder if these tutors even have any analog photographic experience!

For example, there is only one main application for shooting Velvia, and its not for projection!

Not for projection? Works well for me! (though I prefer Provia if any of the roll could be pictures of people).

IMHO, the best application for slide film is viewing through optics directly, especially stereo viewing.

So what is the "main application" for Velvia?

iandvaag · Nov 18, 2016

1L6E6VHF said:
the best application for slide film is viewing through optics directly, especially stereo viewing.

+1
I agree completely. There's nothing comparable to seeing well exposed medium format stereo slides in a handheld viewer. A regular photo might leave you thinking "I remember being there", whereas a backlight MF stereo slide can make you feel "I am there right now!". Most folks don't know what they are losing with the impending demise of slide film. Not to get off topic, but this is one area where digital can't compete. Digital capture is fine and dandy, but there's no display medium that can hold a candle to MF stereo slides! Get yourself a Sputnik camera off eBay for $200, a 3D world slide viewer for $100, shoot some slide film and you will be astounded! There's nothing like it, it's truly the apex of the photographic experience; you owe it to yourself to try it out before slide film is no more. Long live slide film, godspeed Ferrania!

Photo Engineer · Nov 18, 2016

I want to go back to a previous post on old chemicals and chemical longevity.

Open a bottle of asipirin and sniff it. Leave it for a month or two and sniff it again. Keep doing this for about 6 months. It begins to smell like acetic acid and this smell increases over time.

Now, asipirin is one of the simplest of organic chemicals and most common. It goes bad gradually over several months to a year releasing salicylic acid and acetic acid. Ok, now consider the more complex chemicals used for photography. They go bad as well. We had expiration dates on everything and tested what we called "t" power which measured current activity of a batch of chemicals. The statements about old chemistry above by Ferrania just do not make sense in terms of real quality assurance.

I'm sorry to bring this up, but I think that fresh chemistry should be used, or re-purified chemistry should be used to assure that the first batch of film is acceptable. I'm sorry, but this is my first "negative" post here, but I felt obliged to bring it up after a bit of consideration. Consider the length of time from those post until now......

Sorry.

PE

FILM Ferrania · Nov 18, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
I want to go back to a previous post on old chemicals and chemical longevity.

Open a bottle of asipirin and sniff it. Leave it for a month or two and sniff it again. Keep doing this for about 6 months. It begins to smell like acetic acid and this smell increases over time.

Now, asipirin is one of the simplest of organic chemicals and most common. It goes bad gradually over several months to a year releasing salicylic acid and acetic acid. Ok, now consider the more complex chemicals used for photography. They go bad as well. We had expiration dates on everything and tested what we called "t" power which measured current activity of a batch of chemicals. The statements about old chemistry above by Ferrania just do not make sense in terms of real quality assurance.

I'm sorry to bring this up, but I think that fresh chemistry should be used, or re-purified chemistry should be used to assure that the first batch of film is acceptable. I'm sorry, but this is my first "negative" post here, but I felt obliged to bring it up after a bit of consideration. Consider the length of time from those post until now......

Sorry.

PE

I tried to make it clear that we are, in fact, producing new chemistry, but maybe I didn't give the full story here in this thread...

It's in the post: Dead Link Removed - scroll down to the photo of the old bottle and read on.

I totally understand that what I posted is counterintuitive. Organic stuff decays. Entropy and all that. I accept this as fact - so thankfully, I don't need to sniff aspirin for the next six months.

But a bonafide genius, Marco Pagni, got quite excited and more animated than I've ever seen him when he described his somewhat recent discovery of the long-term stability of much of the chemistry we "inherited" from the old buildings. I'm pretty sure Ivano's arrival had something to do with these discoveries. The techniques used were unique to Ferrania, and supposedly one of the big reasons 3M bought them.

Also, way back in March of last year, we posted a piece about the purification process: Dead Link Removed

Back then, we had little idea about the yield we would get once we started purification. As it turned out - most of the chemistry we tested is viable to a FAR greater degree than we knew when we wrote this post.

So yes, if we use the old stuff, it must be purified. But for now, our small "kitchen" that you saw in the video about Ivano is perfectly adequate for us to begin production with all new chemistry.

FILM Ferrania · Nov 19, 2016

I'm really happy to see the passion about color reversal on display here in the thread.

This kind of passion has kept film going through one of the most devastating blows in the history of human industry. What industry has lost 99% of it's market and survived? (seriously, I'd love to see a list!)

Regarding slide projectors - and now speaking personally - I think they are due for a bit of a revival. I'm not saying they're going to make a comeback on the scale of turntables, but the digital age has created a deep need for tactile sensory experiences, and young people especially are often looking to the past for inspiration...

RPC · Nov 19, 2016

Nzoomed said:
Thats crazy if students are told that!
Makes me wonder if these tutors even have any analog photographic experience!

If true, I think that is a generalization, since slides were intended for projection and that is what the majority did with them when they were more popular. There are other uses, of course, and I am sure beginning film users are made aware of them. But in their heyday it was projection that kept sales up until the masses switched to that other medium.

Photo Engineer · Nov 19, 2016

I am aware of the methods available to a chemist for purifying old chemicals and I am aware that some chemicals go bad faster than others.

One must remember that recrystallization (purification) of a chemical always results in less material at the end. This means less available for "production".

In any event, this is meant as a cautionary note and not a criticism.

PE

FILM Ferrania · Nov 19, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
One must remember that recrystallization (purification) of a chemical always results in less material at the end. This means less available for "production".

Didn't mean to sound too harsh PE (I really wish this forum used real names...). I very much appreciate your cautionary note (and any others!) - especially for things that seem very much at odds with your own experience. If nothing else, it keeps ME on my toes and asking the right questions to the team in Italy.

Of course you're right - less comes out of purification than we put in. But for some materials we have a 50+ year supply, and it was all essentially free for the taking - so even if we salvage only 10 years worth from a barrel, it's fine.

But with just 3 people on our chemistry team and with our needs in terms of liters, not barrels, it was decided earlier this year that their time was better spent on synthesis than purification.

Diapositivo · Nov 19, 2016

Regarding laboratories, I think we should not underestimate the potential of thousands of small "in-house" developers who could offer their services through eBay and similar.

If slide film begins being "trendy" and regains a certain interest in the market (in the way vynil, or mechanical watches, resurrected after having being considered dead) then the lack of labs is much less worrying, to me, than the potential lack of chemistry.

flavio81 · Nov 19, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
The statements about old chemistry above by Ferrania just do not make sense in terms of real quality assurance.

I'm sorry to bring this up, but I think that fresh chemistry should be used, or re-purified chemistry should be used to assure that the first batch of film is acceptable.

Ron, at the ferrania website they explicitely said they are repurifying chemicals as needed. Also, if they put out a bad batch of film, the whole business goes down, so I don't think any of your chemist colleagues at Ferrania will ignore common sense when dealing with chemical stocks.

Also, consider that the people right now at the Ferrania plant were the same people that worked doing full scale production back when Ferrania was operating, so they must have a clear idea of what will work correctly and what will not.

Photo Engineer · Nov 19, 2016

Flavio, granted all you say, I am merely stressing that need, and pointing out the reasons for it.

PE

flavio81 · Nov 19, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
Flavio, granted all you say, I am merely stressing that need, and pointing out the reasons for it.

PE

Agreed, no problem.

After the first Ferrania chrome is released, It would be fantastic if the Film Ferrania team could hire you as a consultant for engineering a new film!!

For example, a ISO 25 or 64 film that has certain color non-linearlities built in, so it emulates the look of THAT Kodak film many people keep asking you about...

(half joking, half seriously...)

Nzoomed · Nov 19, 2016

flavio81 said:
Agreed, no problem.

After the first Ferrania chrome is released, It would be fantastic if the Film Ferrania team could hire you as a consultant for engineering a new film!!

For example, a ISO 25 or 64 film that has certain color non-linearlities built in, so it emulates the look of THAT Kodak film many people keep asking you about...

(half joking, half seriously...)

I actually think it would be great if Ron was able to make a trip there to see their operations!
Im sure there would be a great wealth of information shared from both ends!

Nzoomed · Nov 19, 2016

1L6E6VHF said:
Not for projection? Works well for me! (though I prefer Provia if any of the roll could be pictures of people).

IMHO, the best application for slide film is viewing through optics directly, especially stereo viewing.

So what is the "main application" for Velvia?

Personally, i like the visual effects of slide film that are not found in c41 films.
Yes projection can be fun, but it exposes your slides to dust, dirt and potential scratches if your not careful.

I personally dont like Velvia much and have not shot it, but it does have some great applications for those who like the punchy colours from that film.
Velvia, AKA disneychrome is probably the main reason Fuji still produce slide films, it still has a huge cult following.

Provia would be my choice personally, but i may give Velvia a go sometime soon. For my type of photography im into its not really the sort of film i want to shoot with, thats all.

Speaking of stereo images, yes, this is of huge interest to me, and i want to get a viewmaster camera and make my own view master reels.

Only problem for me is finding the cutting tool to punch the film out for the reels.

If there was enough people in New Zealand who wanted a go at it, i may offer a service to make the reels for shooters and invest in a cutting tool.

Prof_Pixel · Nov 19, 2016

One of the major uses of transparency film in the pre-digital days was display advertisements for print. If you needed a color ad printed in various locations around the world, there were no digital standards and the only way to insure the printed colors were correct was to have a color transparency to compare them to, so every publisher got a 'chrome.

cmacd123 · Nov 19, 2016

Prof_Pixel said:
One of the major uses of transparency film in the pre-digital days was display advertisements for print. ... so every publisher got a 'chrome.

even more than that, the chrome films were considered to have much better grain and other properties, and were much easier to make colour separations from. so the original photo would be taken on (medium or large format) transparency film, and the camera original would be used to make the colour separations to be used to make the final plates. extra separations could be made if the final printing was to be done in more than one place, and the margin oft he separations would have reference marks for the printer to use in making the plates. Sample of the ink could also be used to keep everything consistent.

Nzoomed · Nov 19, 2016

Prof_Pixel said:
One of the major uses of transparency film in the pre-digital days was display advertisements for print. If you needed a color ad printed in various locations around the world, there were no digital standards and the only way to insure the printed colors were correct was to have a color transparency to compare them to, so every publisher got a 'chrome.

I used to send in C41 prints to the publishers, and even then they would often say they preferred slides.

Not that i can see much difference between scanning a print and a slide, as you still have a reference photograph, but thats what we were told back in the day lol

ME Super · Nov 19, 2016

NZoomed, do give Velvia 50 a try. My first Velvia was Velvia 100, and the ISO 50 version of the film is very different from the ISO 100 version of it. The ISO 50 version is magical!

That said, all of Fuji's current slide film offerings are good quality. I trust that Ferrania's will be as well, and we know that they are doing everything they can to be the right size for the market.

Poisson Du Jour · Nov 20, 2016

Nzoomed said:
I used to send in C41 prints to the publishers, and even then they would often say they preferred slides.

That was very often a rule, not an exception. Prints would be rejected outright: if they wanted prints, they'd do it themselves. Publishers had a better view of the quality of a shoot viewing slides on the lightbox than squinting at the inverted colour of negatives.

Sal Santamaura · Nov 20, 2016

FILM Ferrania said:
...I really wish this forum used real names...

Currently, that's up to individual members. One can freely use one's real name as a user name.

If, on the other hand, you intended to communicate that you wish this forum would mandate use of real names, I wholeheartedly agree. I'd extend that to all other Internet forums and commenting systems. In my opinion, doing so would go a long way toward returning civility to the world.

Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency