Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)

[flavio81]

It is a pity that Ferrania film was not more aggressively marketed a Ferrania, at least in Italy. All the photographers I know thought the factory shut its doors in the 60s.

Perhaps they had got such a good revenue making films with private labeling, that they simply didn't care too much for selling Ferrania films as "Ferrania"!!

I also read that back then when 3M wanted to go break into the professional film market (against Agfa and Fuji and Kodak), they made some marketing mistakes.

 

[cmacd123]

...somewhere on the Internets I was researching old super8 film and it seems 3M in Ferrania did make a K11 or K12 compatibile film in the early 70's!

3M did make and sell Dynachrome film. which was "Kodachrome like" I only ever shot about 2 rolls of it and one of those was for a High School project where I had to illustrate a talk. Ron did at one time mention that DynaChrome had an operation in Rochester, so this may have started before Ferrania came into the 3M fold. The Film may also have been coated in Rochester with the secrets not in the italian files.

When I was starting out taking pictures in the early 60s the local photolab gave "free replacement" B&W film when having one processed, in the form of 3M Dynapan ASA 160. which I was led to believe at the time was the equivalent of Ferrania P33. I only ever saw P33 for sale once, and the packaging looked the same as Dynapan inside the carton, But I am not sure where it was made or packaged. (3M had a conversion and possibly a coating operation in the US at one time. - hard to tell because they also coated magnetic tape)

 

[Nzoomed]

Nzoomed, my suggestion was to make an E6 compatible film with the same color response. I think this could be a hit with people who, for days and months and years are wishing to be able to see K25 and K64 colors again. PE has mentioned that this is doable.

The Kodachrome processes are way too long and complex to be a good choice for a film in the XXI century... As for making the actual Kodachrome-compatible film, i am no photo engineer (pun intended), but I could bet that is easier to make a K14-compatible film than to make an E6-compatible film, since the structure is simpler.

And Photo Engineer has said in the past that of all films (B&W, C41-type, E6-type), the E-6 films were the most difficult to design due to various factors. So if our heroes at Ferrania can engineer a E-6 film, then they can engineer any other film.

Curiously, i was reading some back issues of Pop Photo on Google Books and found a test of 3M ColorSlide 640T against Kodak Ektachrome 160T. It is the year 1980 and with this film 3M (made by Ferrania, Italy) is now the undisputed fastest slide film:

https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=txFmVbE2EoUC

From the test, the conclusions are that the colors are really good, "realistic", and that it can be pushed to ISO 2560 (!!), which is amazingly fast for a tungsten balanced film even today. The downside is that it was noticeably grainier. Of course that is expected, if it is 2 stop faster than the Kodak product. But i would love to have this stuff in 120 format, where grain would not be a problem, in fact, it could be an asset (sometimes medium format looks too clean!)

So in 1980, the engineers at Ferrania were able to compete against Kodak... That means they had pretty good resources, at least in 1980.

It is curious and surprising than in 2016 the ones who will "save" color film did not come from Rochester nor Leverkusen nor Japan, but from Liguria. Perhaps Wolfen will also want to come to the rescue and produce color film as well?

Yes i do remember PE mentioning that it would be possible to make an E6 film that behaved like Kodachrome, but there would be other issues in regards to sharpness and grain IIRC.

 

[Photo Engineer]

You had whiteboards back then?

This was years after my graduation. I was asked to return to give a seminar on the organic chemistry of photography, and my former professor and undergraduate guidance councilor met in his office for an hour or so beforehand.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

The dye that made Kodachrome unique was the cyan dye. The method of incorporation enhanced stability of the image and keeping of the film. It was also a major factor in the sharpness, as this process creates a relief image.

The film is so thin though it is very hard to coat evenly in a slide or curtain coater. Thinness is what gave it some sharpness as well.

PE

 

[1L6E6VHF]

The dye that made Kodachrome unique was the cyan dye. The method of incorporation enhanced stability of the image and keeping of the film. It was also a major factor in the sharpness, as this process creates a relief image.

The film is so thin though it is very hard to coat evenly in a slide or curtain coater. Thinness is what gave it some sharpness as well.

PE

Interesting. I was just talking to a friend about this last night. Many slides, other than Kodachrome, went to ruddy orange as they faded, especially slides done through those 5247/5254/SFW type ventures (they are actually negatives of negatives), and, to a lesser extent, old Ektachromes.

In contrast (no pun intended), (pre-E6) Agfachromes have largely shifted to purple, while the very few Anscochromes I possess (shot by other people, before I was born) went cyannish.

One thing I noticed about old Ektachromes is that slides from the same era and stored the same way may differ vastly in their degree of decay.

 

[Molli]

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.

Sorry, I do have to respond to this. Have you ever been 'cyber stalked'? Had an ex follow you around from one forum to the next? It's not pleasant. Even using a nickname, I try to be careful of how much personal information I leave lying around on the 'net. I've seen silly girls and boys posting their phone numbers, exact location, photos of their expensive new toys and when they're going to be home alone or not home at all. In fact, just specifying one is female on the internet seems to invite all sorts of unwanted attention.
I try to ensure I'm not saying anything, more or less anonymously, that I wouldn't say to someone's face; it's not cowardliness, merely caution. I, too, find it difficult; being unsure of how to address people in a well mannered way when one only has a nickname, which may not even be a noun, to make use of on forums.
All that being said, I'd be happy to send you a private message with my full name - you're probably safe, you live on the other side of the world!

 

[Photo Engineer]

Dye stability is a very controversial subject. See the threads on this here.

As for anonymity, one must consider my case as well.

PE

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...I'd be happy to send you a private message with my full name - you're probably safe, you live on the other side of the world!...

I don't want to know your name or anyone else's. My point was that the Internet is replete with huge quantities of incivility. Much, if not most, of it is perpetrated from behind anonymous 'user names' Certainly not all, but the vast majority of such, what's the word, crap would be eliminated if real identities were mandatory. I'd consider the improvement worthwhile even if it dissuaded those who are afraid that their actions/activities might invite trouble from participating.

 

[Nzoomed]

The dye that made Kodachrome unique was the cyan dye. The method of incorporation enhanced stability of the image and keeping of the film. It was also a major factor in the sharpness, as this process creates a relief image.

The film is so thin though it is very hard to coat evenly in a slide or curtain coater. Thinness is what gave it some sharpness as well.

PE

I remember you talking about this regards Kodachrome 25. IIRC, K25 was made on such a coater?

 

[Prest_400]

I was reading about private labelled films, specifically the Lomo CN which was Ferrania and now suposed to be Kodacolor.

As Dave and others commented a while ago, old Ferrania had excellent products but they took a part of the market that did not exhibit the maximum. Like eg. the test formulas of LRF that were not passed to consumer production.

World's a circle and ended up at a p.net thread where PE commented about how he worked on Kodak 400 and they surpassed the wanted improvements. I may throw a question here at PE:
I wondered that there must be a heavier difference (BoM) between product generations. Like how Colorplus 200 vs Gold 200 vs Portra 160 are. R&D and markups aside. Older 'tech' just for being older may not have lower costs in production.

And also how it is a bit unrealistic to talk abiut certain kinds of film when the priority is to do these initial production steps with limited capability.

BTW it is also really nice to think how Ron was behind something that's now in Portra and how the team at Ferrania is doing their share for a meaningful product!

 

[Photo Engineer]

Several answers here:

1. Yes, Kodachrome 25 used a special coater to achieve very thin layers. Several other products shared this coating line.

2. Emulsions come in 3 types namely T-grains, K-grains and specifically formed grains. T-grains can be triangular, octahedral and etc and they can be thick or thin. K-grains are a mix of anything and everything and formed grains are exactly that. The maker makes cubes, octahedra and t-grains are a major subset of these. Ektar uses a mix of cubic grains and t-grains to achieve its unique characteristics. A very similar formula is found in ECN - Vision films.

3. Each product generation uses a different BoM. For example, the film I worked on (400 Gold) used a new stabilizer for the emulsion and a new green sensitizing dye to improve color reproduction. The generation after mine had t-grains.

4. I use my full name on Photo Net.

PE

 

[flavio81]

I don't want to know your name or anyone else's. My point was that the Internet is replete with huge quantities of incivility. Much, if not most, of it is perpetrated from behind anonymous 'user names'

All i can say is: "Welcome to the internet"

Here is a subset of the classic "rules of the internet" list. After years of posting on internet forums you will get a laugh out of this list.

RULES OF THE INTERNET (subset)

3. We are Anonymous
4. Anonymous is legion
5. Anonymous never forgives
6. Anonymous can be a horrible, senseless, uncaring monster
7. Anonymous is still able to deliver
8. There are no real rules about posting
11. All your carefully picked arguments can easily be ignored
12. Anything you say can and will be used against you
13. Anything you say can be turned into something else - fixed
14. Do not argue with trolls - it means that they win
15. The harder you try the harder you will fail
16. If you fail in epic proportions, it may just become a winning failure
17. Every win fails eventually
18. Everything that can be labeled can be hated
19. The more you hate it the stronger it gets
20. Nothing is to be taken seriously
25. Relation to the original topic decreases with every single post
26. Any topic can easily be turned into something totally unrelated
28. Always question a person's gender - just in case it's really a man
29. In the internet all girls are men and all kids are undercover FBI agents
30. There are no girls on the internet
32. You must have pictures to prove your statements
38. No real limits of any kind apply here - not even the sky
39. CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL
40. EVEN WITH CRUISE CONTROL YOU STILL HAVE TO STEER
42. Nothing is Sacred.
43. The more beautiful and pure a thing is - the more satisfying it is to corrupt it

Full list:
https://archive.org/stream/RulesOfTheInternet/RulesOfTheInternet..txt

 

[flavio81]

4. I use my full name on Photo Net.

Me too, and i've seen you there! But i think i used my real name because P.N. required it. Thus, i seldom post in P.N.
And to be honest the forum system on P.N. is far inferior to the one in APUG.

 

[cmacd123]

3. Each product generation uses a different BoM. For example, the film I worked on (400 Gold) used a new stabilizer for the emulsion and a new green sensitizing dye to improve color reproduction. The generation after mine had t-grains.PE

I am not sure you would be able to answer -either because of not being privy to the information, or being in the area of confedentiality, but where these "newer" materials more or less expensive to make? (longer more complicated synthesis stage, more exotic ingredients)

Supposedly some of the "value priced" lines of private label and promotional film used older formulas, but were the older formulas cheaper to make?

 

[cmacd123]

Interesting. I was just talking to a friend about this last night. Many slides, other than Kodachrome, went to ruddy orange as they faded, especially slides done through those 5247/5254/SFW type ventures (they are actually negatives of negatives)

the 5247 slides were printed on the same stocks used for projection in theatres. Theatre prints generally get a 6 month run and then were destroyed. the Kodak print film used in those days did not have marvellous long term stability. Although they did say that it was designed for better colour. Perhaps it was tweaked for resistance to fading under the Xenon Arc lamps used in projection. (Kodachrome has great DARK keeping properties but fades in the light, while Ektachrome is the opposite.

The same basic stock was used for 16mm prints which were used in education and also had the fading problems. if you google Eastman LLP you will find laments from Film collectors about those stocks.

(some of the lab who did the 5247 "thing" used AGFA or Fuji print stock which has different fade characteristics.)

The Eastman colour Negative film itself was fairly fade resistant and so may be a better source if attempting to extract an image by Non-analog means. the current EASTMAN colour Print stock 2383 if I recall) is also claimed to be extremely stable. But printing individual negative strips may not be simple or cheep. EASTMAN colour Negative gives a low contrast image when printing on Still materials.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I am not sure you would be able to answer -either because of not being privy to the information, or being in the area of confedentiality, but where these "newer" materials more or less expensive to make? (longer more complicated synthesis stage, more exotic ingredients)

Supposedly some of the "value priced" lines of private label and promotional film used older formulas, but were the older formulas cheaper to make?

It was about a wash. Due to greater automation and the use of lower amounts of more active chemicals, things turned out well. Here is an example: one particular antifoggant was used at up to 25 grams / mole of silver whereas the new one was used at up to 25 mg / mole of silver. The latter one was more expensive, but used at a vastly lower rate. (Yes, grams vs milligrams - and I wish we had known that earlier.)

PE

 

[Sal Santamaura]

All i can say is: "Welcome to the internet"

Here is a subset of the classic "rules of the internet" list. After years of posting on internet forums you will get a laugh out of this list...

I need no welcome to the Internet. I've been participating in photography forums since 1998.

The list elicited no laugh from me. I stand by the position that real names ought be required.

 

[railwayman3]

I need no welcome to the Internet. I've been participating in photography forums since 1998.

The list elicited no laugh from me. I stand by the position that real names ought be required.

If a forum requires "real names", what's to stop someone signing up with any random, but real-sounding, name, e.g. Richard Smith or Simon Brown ? Not being awkward, but just wondering?

 

[alanrockwood]

Why are we still discussing whether to register with real names or not? Isn't that a topic for another thread, or perhaps for no thread at all?

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Why are we still discussing whether to register with real names or not?...

Because in post #888 Dave lamented that he didn't know the real name behind "Photo Engineer" and wished he did. Every post on the subject since then has been follow up.

Any other questions?

 

[flavio81]

Why are we still discussing whether to register with real names or not? Isn't that a topic for another thread, or perhaps for no thread at all?

It's an expected side effect, already mentioned in the rules 25 and 26 of the internet, Alan:

25. Relation to the original topic decreases with every single post
26. Any topic can easily be turned into something totally unrelated

We will get back to Ferrania once they post another update! (I love their updates)

 

[flavio81]

If a forum requires "real names", what's to stop someone signing up with any random, but real-sounding, name, e.g. Richard Smith or Simon Brown ?

Or "Sal Santamaura", which sounds more musical.

I posted a review of 3M ColorSlide 640T (A ferrania product) but seems that nobody commented on it...
Meanwhile the only italian photo product in my house is the Durst enlarger.

 

[kb3lms]

Ektar uses a mix of cubic grains and t-grains to achieve its unique characteristics. A very similar formula is found in ECN - Vision films.

I've also seen many statements saying similar about Portra and it's relationship to the Vision products

OT question for you Ron, if you know or care to speculate, are the Visions, Portras and Ektar tweaked versions of essentially the same basic product aimed at different applications?

On-topic, the latest updates from FF have been great. Would love to spend a day with Ivano in the "kitchen".

-- Jason

 

[flavio81]

I've also seen many statements saying similar about Portra and it's relationship to the Vision products

OT question for you Ron, if you know or care to speculate, are the Visions, Portras and Ektar tweaked versions of essentially the same basic product aimed at different applications?

Note that Vision is ECN-2 process, not C41 process, and that is a lower contrast material.

I would guess that Ektar is different as well due to requirements for higher sharpness compared to Portra, perhaps it has some sort of measures to achieve greater sharpness.

As for Portra, that's the greatest thing that has happened to C41 photography since the Kodak VR film (first T-grain neg consumer film if i recall correctly.)