Mystery 35mm Film Stock
About a year ago I picked up a 2,000 foot can labeled Kodak Vision 2383. It had been opened, but the film in it is not, I don't think, 2383. I'm trying to identify what it might be. Here's what I know:
- no edge markings (at all)
- ISO 1.6
- blue emulsion on one side only (unlike x-ray films I read about online)
- no anti-halation layer (I snipped a short unexposed section off and it's translucent)
- wrapped on a lab core
- standard 35mm film perforations (not the shape used for motion picture stock)
- slightly thinner than standard Kodak bases, but not as thin as polyester
- easy to cut with scissors (as opposed to polyester, which is not)
- film base is a slightly gray-brown color and the image is somewhat low contrast
- extremely fine detail
- no funky smell like old or nitrate films can get
I've developed this in D-76 and Microdol-X and both delivery fine results.
Here are a couple of sample pictures (Microdol-X):
I've thought variously that it may be x-ray film, microfilm, 2383 (because it was in the box and has no remjet backing), or Eastman 5234 that has lost a couple of stops with age, or something I've never heard of. I'm hoping someone here knows enough about obscure film stock to point me in the right direction. I have XTOL and Dektol (XTOL made up) and can run a test of this exposed at ISO 6 and developed in XTOL, as Digital Truth suggests for 5234 this weekend, if that would be of use.
If it is 2383, would the magenta edge markings be lost during development as black and white negative film? Is it worth asking my local photo lab to run this as either E-6 or C-41? There's no remjet to muck up their machines.
Thank you, everyone, for help and suggestions. I'm hoping I can identify this film so I can use it better than I have been.
There are two types of perforation holes in 35mm cine film:
standard 35mm film perforations (not the shape used for motion picture stock)
-) those used for camera films
-) those used for print films (those are used on films for still photography)
Your description sounds likes some B&W movie print stock that I was given about 20 years ago. IIRC, the perforations were the same as film for still photography.
I used some of it to contact print transparencies from 35mm B&W negs, although the results were only mediocre....I assumed it was probably a long outdated offcut.
As you might well know KODAK VISION Color Print Film / 2383/3383 is a Print Stock for release KS (1870) perforation as opposed to B&H perforations for Camera Use. It's neither C41 nor e-6 it should be developed in the ECN-II process. It's also coated on a new an improved ESTAR Base that requires no rem-jet backing. quote from Kodak:
"2383/3383 Film is coated on a new ESTAR base featuring proprietary Kodak technology that replaces rem-jet with a process-surviving, anti-static layer, and scratch-resistant backing layer. This film has an efficient antihalation layer under the emulsion layers, using patented solid particle dyes that are decolorized and removed during processing.
Read more: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Produ...#ixzz2WZzfoKzZ
Might this be one of the Kodak Duplicating Microfilms? Certainly all of them were available in long roll 35mm.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I don't think it is one of the microfilms in the data sheet linked above. I do not believe they are perforated. I have some of the 2462 Duplicating Microfilm. It has no perforations, is yellow, and has a perfectly clear base once developed. The other two films on that sheet are direct-duplicating; they'd not the give OP a negative. Also, the OP's images don't seem have the contrast of microfilm.
sounds like 2383 all right. I sometimes get my 15mm movie film back where the lab has used waste 3383 16mm print stock as a leader. Semi translucent bluegreenish. Iridescent on the back side.
If developed as B&W the edge print would be black, and would for current stock just say Kodak and the year it was made, ie "Kodak 12" older stock would say Eastman Safety Film. The edge print may be Microscopic as the Sony SDDS sound system used the very edge of the film. they solved the conflict by eventually only putting the edge print in one layer.
If you were to run a sample though c-41 with some images with about the right exposure you should get some sort of colour.
BTW, the print stock has it's own process, ECP-2 (Eastman Colour Print two)
I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville