Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,498   Posts: 1,543,116   Online: 1025
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,005
    Images
    65
    A custom run, with today's prices of raw materials and the development needed to insure that the emulsion and coating will work as intended will run between $50,000 to $100,000 US. This is just OTOMH. It will probably require about 6 to 18 months from a standing start to make it.

    PE

  2. #12
    dwross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Oregon Coast
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    818
    I suppose this is a good time to point out that we don't have to be dependent on factories to produce old-style emulsion film. An exact duplication of a specific old film might be hard-to-impossible -- even for factories (lost secrets and ingredients), and sprocketed 35mm will certainly be a diy challenge, but many of the sumptuous characteristics of old emulsions can be re-created in the home darkroom. I just made a dozen 120 rolls for less than $10 in materials. I do have a darkroom and a couple of pieces of lab equipment, but the equipment cost came in at less money than my Pentax K7 set me back and I predict that silver nitrate will always cost less than Epson ink cartridges .

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    734
    OK,I'm in! Who else wants to go in on a $100,000 run? Which old emulsion should we go for? I am willing to sell my old press camera to pay for my portion.
    People were longing for the "Old Emulsions" back when I took Photo 101 and digital cameras were just starting to come out.
    Bill

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lynden, Warshington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    74
    If I had the disposable income to do so, I would jump in head-first!

    Panatomic-X (I pretty much gave up photography the first time when EK DC'd it), Verichrome (pre-1956)... I'm drooling already...
    I would love to use the "FP" flash setting on my camera, but I cannot find "Flash Powder" anywhere... such is life.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    734
    P.E.,
    When we are talking about commercial "thick film" from the Good Old Days, just how thick are we talking about. If you can, I would like to know, wet as well as dry thicknesses. When people speak of the old "silver rich" films are they correct? Did these films contain a higher leval of silver than "modern films"? I have been told that they did not.
    For" thick" film film, was something added to speed up or, even permit, absorbing of pre-wet and developer?
    Like maybe starch?
    Bill

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,005
    Images
    65
    Bill;

    Silver rich has been described by me over and over here. Basically, early emulsions had a lot of "dead" grains. Grains of Silver which would not expose properly or develop properly! It therefore took a lot of silver in excess to get to a "normal" Dmax by today's standards.

    This was in excess of 300 mg / ft square for film and in excess of 100 mg / ft square for paper. (Approximate OTOMH).

    So, Silver rich was a name for "faulty emulsions" IMHO. Today, my own Azo type emulsion and others I read of here are using more silver than they need if they are properly sensitized.

    Thick also refers to gelatin. Today, we can use ISO wash or UF wash to concentrate an emulsion. 50 years ago, emulsions were diluted by washing.

    So, there are 2 factors in operation here!

    PE

  7. #17
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,067
    50 000 to 100 000 sounds reasonable I thought it would be more expensive unfortunately I don't have that kind of money lying around
    Dwross I agree with you,my question was a purely academic one. Btw I am about to try out Kevin Klein's emulsion from your Website thank you for that great ressource (the lightfarm).

    Dominik

  8. #18
    dwross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Oregon Coast
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    818
    Excellent, Dominik! I hope you have great luck and fun (Actually, I'm quite sure you'll have both.) Feel very, very free to contact me if you have questions or comments along the way. I don't know if you've seen this (http://www.thelightfarm.com/cgi-bin/...tent=03Nov2011) because I haven't gotten around to making a bunch of links between old info and new. I'd love to hear how it works with Kevin's emulsion. I haven't personally tried that yet.
    d
    Last edited by dwross; 12-02-2011 at 11:16 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typo. what is it with how easy typos have gotten?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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