Author Topic: More "stored in a desert" film! (Read 3488 times)

Indofunk · « **on:** September 02, 2016, 10:45:12 PM »

As you all know, I like to take my chances with way out of date, questionably stored, off-brand, unlabeled films. I just got a couple of said films off of the 'bay, and I'd like some advice on how to expose them.

Here is the auction. The pictures don't show all of the text on the canisters, so here are the relevant details. (side note: why have manufacturers never written the expiry date on the roll itself? would save a lot of hassle on these unboxed films)

Roll #1
Clearly it is respooled Kodak 5247. It says that it can be exposed at ASA 100, 200, 400 without filter for negatives, slides, and prints. FOR: daylight blue flash, strobe, tungsten. When processed through MSI [insert addresses here]

Roll #2
3M color slide CS20. ASA640/29DIN. Artificial light 3200K. Process E6.

So ... what am I looking at here? I found a spec sheet on 5247 that seems to indicate that its natural ISO is 125, so I assume that if one shoots it at 200 or 400 it would have to be push processed at MSI. Since I tend to like movie film underexposed by a stop, I may try exposing it at ISO 100 to maybe make up for poor storage conditions and age.

The 3M color slide film looks to be high speed E6 film, which I tend to hate. Also, I usually overexpose E6 film 1 stop and then develop it normally in C41. I know that some high speed E6 films are meant to be push processed when shot at box speed, and I'm wondering if this is one of them, and if so I'm happy to shoot it very slow so I can develop normally in C41. Unfortunately, no real bracketing possible here because it's one isolated roll and only 20 exposures.

Francois · « **Reply #1 on:** September 02, 2016, 11:24:45 PM »

The 3M stuff is definitely pretty old. I wouldn't be surprised if it came with a long Leica compatible leader!
Pretty much all companies stopped making 20 exposure rolls in the early 80's. I would definitely be tempted to overexpose it a lot... like at EI 50 or something.

Indofunk · « **Reply #2 on:** September 02, 2016, 11:43:38 PM »

As a side note, I've never overexposed expired film. I've shot film from the 60's at box speed and stand developed it and it looks fine. Anything from the 90's onwards I shoot at box speed and develop normally. I think the only exception was some Dacomatic that Peter (?) gave me and told me to shoot at EI 50. I don't know what it was originally rated at.

So for the 640 stuff, if it is really and truly 640 speed film (and not, say, 80ASA film meant to be pushed 3 stops), I may try shooting it at 200. MAYbe 100. Actually, probably 100 because I can't even conceive of shooting slide film faster than 100

Francois · « **Reply #3 on:** September 03, 2016, 01:20:09 PM »

Fwiw, the only constant when overexposing film is the grain. It doesn't get smaller.

Terry · « **Reply #4 on:** September 03, 2016, 01:44:23 PM »

If I remeber rightly, 3M slide film was Ferrania. Maybe some info out there on that; you could probably find out whether they ever made a super-high-speed film.

I, too have tended not to compensate expired film. I usually shoot at box speed and develop normally, especially color stock. I did compensate on some TMX pack film from 1972 that I shot, but anything less than 40 years old....

edit: a quick goggle search indicates that they did make a tungsten slide film with a native ISO of 640. Looking at your stuff, it does clearly say it's tungsten balanced. 3M sold Ferrania in 1996 so it's possible the film is no more than 30 years old

Indofunk · « **Reply #5 on:** September 03, 2016, 04:14:09 PM »

Ah yes, 3M = Ferrania. Correct. And I actually just remembered that I had some old 3M chrome film with a native ISO of 400 (actually intended to be pushed to 1600) that was pretty horrible actually. HUGE grain (in a very bad way) whether overexposed and C41'd or exposed properly and E6'd. Hmm. Hoping that this won't be so bad, but no way to know but to try!

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** September 03, 2016, 09:07:02 PM »

Actually, I'm not entirely sure that in those days the 3M film was made by Ferrania...
These were possibly the days before Scotch film.

Terry · « **Reply #7 on:** September 05, 2016, 04:10:15 PM »

There's a history of the two companies' relationship on the Film Ferrania website. 3M actually took over Ferrania in 1965 and retained control of it until 1999, under 3M's subsidiary Imation. Some of Ferrania's output was labelled Ferrania, some of it was Scotch and they sold a lot of unbranded film for other sellers to put their name on. I read somewhere that there were only five or six color film maufacturers in the whole history of film--Is that true? Kodak, Fuji, Agfa, Svema, Ferrania and one other....did Orwo ever make color?

Bryan · « **Reply #8 on:** September 05, 2016, 04:35:00 PM »

According to Wikipedia Konica made film.

Quote

Konica was a major producer of 35mm film and related products, including film development processors and printing technology. While never equal to giants like Kodak or Fuji, recognized quality of Konica film ensured general presence on market. Originally Konica film and paper was sold under the brand name of "Sakura" meaning Cherry Blossom in English.

In the mid 1980s, Konica launched its SR range of film, then SR-V (1987), SR-G (1989), Super SR (1991), Super XG (1993), VX and finally "Centuria" in 1999.

Francois · « **Reply #9 on:** September 05, 2016, 04:39:48 PM »

Konica definitely made film. I still have a few rolls in the freezer. And it was pretty darn good too.
They even made the only 3200 ISO color film ever!
While color was not all that great on this last one, it was still pretty darn sensitive.

Terry · « **Reply #10 on:** September 05, 2016, 08:54:59 PM »

Wow. So that 46mm stuff I got on evilbay was actually made by Konica! I just assumed it had to be rebranded Fuji.

Francois · « **Reply #11 on:** September 05, 2016, 09:12:46 PM »

If it says Konica on the label, it definitely was.

I find it a bit sad that they shut down this part of the company when they merged with Minolta.
But then again, I could also say that I was a bit sad when they sold the camera division to Sony...

Ahhh... konica. Too bad their products were so underestimated. And too bad so many of their fantastic products never made it out of Japan.

Terry · « **Reply #12 on:** September 05, 2016, 10:13:37 PM »

I posted this a couple of weeks ago, but here it is again. Says Konica on the tin, expired March 2006. Held up pretty nicely!

station and moon par Terry B, on ipernity

Francois · « **Reply #13 on:** September 05, 2016, 10:25:10 PM »

Pretty good for 10 year old film...
2006 was the year they said that they would withdraw from the photography business to concentrate on business machines, mainly photocopiers.

Terry · « **Reply #14 on:** September 06, 2016, 12:45:53 AM »

Like Ricoh. Sad--my first real camera was a Ricoh.

Francois · « **Reply #15 on:** September 06, 2016, 01:54:27 PM »

Well... At least Ricoh was bought by Pentax and still used as a brand... But fwiw, now they only make the ugliest point & shoots on the market...

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #16 on:** September 07, 2016, 07:56:42 AM »

Actually, I think it was the other way round. Ricoh bought Pentax!

AJShepherd · « **Reply #17 on:** September 07, 2016, 09:45:43 AM »

Quote from: Francois on September 06, 2016, 01:54:27 PM

Well... At least Ricoh was bought by Pentax and still used as a brand... But fwiw, now they only make the ugliest point & shoots on the market...

Ricoh bought Pentax from Hoya five years ago.
Also, the GR is a lovely thing marred only by the lack of a viewfinder.

Francois · « **Reply #18 on:** September 07, 2016, 02:29:44 PM »

But that's the only nice one I've seen.
Anybody seen their sneaker sole inspired rugged camera?
What an ugly piece of kit!

LEAFotography · « **Reply #19 on:** September 26, 2016, 01:28:12 AM »

Quote from: Terry on September 05, 2016, 04:10:15 PM

There's a history of the two companies' relationship on the Film Ferrania website. 3M actually took over Ferrania in 1965 and retained control of it until 1999, under 3M's subsidiary Imation. Some of Ferrania's output was labelled Ferrania, some of it was Scotch and they sold a lot of unbranded film for other sellers to put their name on. I read somewhere that there were only five or six color film maufacturers in the whole history of film--Is that true? Kodak, Fuji, Agfa, Svema, Ferrania and one other....did Orwo ever make color?

Yes Orwo made a range of colour film, both positive and negative films, with a tungsten negative film. I've wasted a few of their positive (UT18, UT21) and negative films (NC19), but have yet to try the tungsten film (UK17). One of the few photographs I've bothered to print over the last few years was made with an Orwo film.

tkmedia · « **Reply #20 on:** September 27, 2016, 04:36:04 PM »

Quote from: Francois on September 05, 2016, 04:39:48 PM

Konica definitely made film.

Not only did Konica made film, they started in the 1920s! This was before Fuji started making film.

tkmedia · « **Reply #21 on:** September 27, 2016, 04:37:58 PM »

Quote from: Francois on September 06, 2016, 01:54:27 PM

Well... At least Ricoh was bought by Pentax and still used as a brand... But fwiw, now they only make the ugliest point & shoots on the market...

i still wonder why Ricoh still bother making cameras when all their money comes from copiers and related document services.

tkmedia · « **Reply #22 on:** September 27, 2016, 04:39:21 PM »

Did Mitsubishi make their own colour film?

Francois · « **Reply #23 on:** September 27, 2016, 08:34:48 PM »

That's a very good question... I have absolutely no idea.

Gimenosaiz · « **Reply #24 on:** September 28, 2016, 11:40:58 PM »

Hi!

I like the colors of Konica-Minolta film. I have a roll (220) in the fridge, the last one from a set of four that I bought some time ago.

-- Mamiya C220 + Sekor 80/2.8

More samples ...
https://flic.kr/s/aHsjZ3K4PV

By the way, I've more "stored in a desert" film .. hehe.
I purchased a Lloyd bulk film loader in USA. It came with a roll inside: Kodak Safety film 5063 aka KODAK TRI-X Pan Film.
I've found this table in the web:
http://www.taphilo.com/Photo/kodakfilmnumxref.shtml

And this one in the web "archive":
https://web.archive.org/web/20150919064145/http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/faqs/faq0034.shtml

It seems that there are more than 30 meters left ... it weights more or less the same than the loader I have with 30meter of HP5+
I shot some pics and developed the roll with rodinal 1+100:

1.

2.

3.

I've some canister left if someone wants to try :-)

Best regards
Antonio

Indofunk · « **Reply #25 on:** October 07, 2016, 06:17:52 PM »

Here's the 3M CS20. I ended up shooting it at 200, and of course cross-processing in C41. It really does look like it was stored in a desert!

gsgary · « **Reply #26 on:** October 07, 2016, 08:00:21 PM »

I'm hoping to get my new Ferrania film soon machines are up and working

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

jharr · « **Reply #27 on:** October 08, 2016, 05:53:25 AM »

Quote from: Indofunk on October 07, 2016, 06:17:52 PM

Here's the 3M CS20. I ended up shooting it at 200, and of course cross-processing in C41. It really does look like it was stored in a desert!

It reminds me of the filter set used for Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

Author Topic: More "stored in a desert" film! (Read 3488 times)

Terry

Terry

Terry

Terry

Terry

Gimenosaiz