Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,907   Posts: 1,555,874   Online: 960
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 567891011
Results 101 to 102 of 102
  1. #101
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Croubie View Post
    Or, translated, that means "We bought two 1000' cans and loaded them into 35mm canisters". A few 1000' cans are hardly going to diminish the worldwide supply too much, something tells me that it'll be back as another "limited edition" every year or so, to keep the prices up...
    well 4000 rolls at 5.5 ft each would take 22 1000ft cans. (assuming that they are 36 exposure rolls.)

    Perhaps the cinestill guys got a few 200T short ends in their last batch of film....

    BTW, I was a great fan of using ECN film back in the days when there were many suppliers who would provide it. Here in Canada there was a place called C+L labs in Richmond hill. Biggest in the states were Dale Labs in Florida and RGB in Hollywood. These labs would run the film in real ECN-2 Process and print on mostly eastman colour print, although some used Fuji or Agfa Print film. I even shot a bit of AGFA XT Negative which was AGFA's Movie Negative.

    Looking at them now, some of the early ones have bad fading in the slides as the Kodak stock at the time was made with the assumption that it only had to last a year in the Theatre circuit. But then the LPP stock came out and it has held up.

    I also played with home developing using a mix it yourself chemistry using CD-4. but never too seriously.
    Charles MacDonald
    I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville

  2. #102
    Dr Croubie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Multi Format
    Quote Originally Posted by cmacd123 View Post
    well 4000 rolls at 5.5 ft each would take 22 1000ft cans. (assuming that they are 36 exposure rolls.)
    Yeah, I missed a factor somewhere in my mental maths. Still, not many rolls in the grand scheme of things. In fact, the more there are of places like Cinestill and now Lomography who repackage cine film for stills, the more of a market there might be overall.
    Although, from what I'd think about the size and number of the coating lines for Cine film compared to the size of the lines for Ektachrome, they've already killed Ektachrome for being uneconomical so using Cine film for stills is not going to save that market by any means...
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 567891011



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin