Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: Neg film for scanning



Woah! What about RGB Color Labs in the world's film capital, Hollywood, 
CA.? So far as I know, their address is still 816 No. Highland Ave., 
Hollywood, CA 90038.

At 05:00 PM 03/26/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>>Richard,
>>
>>Thanks for the updating of my information on the subject and for filling in
>>some of the holes while correcting the errors.  From what you have said I
>>take it that the movie film is no longer used by these processors; does this
>>mean that they are now using standard still films which any regular C-41 lab
>>can process?  How does the current film scan, resist scratching, etc. - if
>>you know.
>
>AFAIK the film industry continue to use this type of film, although it now 
>has advanced to (in 1994) a finer-grained EXR 500T stock, 5298/7298 and 
>"ultra-latitude" EXR 200T film, 5287/7287. All are tungsten balanced. As 
>an incidental, since I was focused on skintone fidelity and low contrast - 
>- when Kodak invented the "T" type crystal allowing them to go to finer 
>grainsize, they correspondingly increased the contrast. A law of physics. 
>So, I preferred the original non T type versions; .i.e. 5247 rather than 
>the 5248 T type. Sorry, drifting off topic.
>
>So a great many labs (here in the US) continue to handle and process 
>5247/8 type film (CN). As I said, I love it - and managed to secure 
>quantities of the 5247 version as it was phased out. But you can call 
>Eastman and inquire about 400 foot reel purchases of current types. Dale 
>will custom spool, so will Seattle filmworks,
>
>I am assuming that the same ruggedness is built into the current versions, 
>aka 5298 et al. All because of the need for high speed processing, and the 
>obvious huge economic penalty imposed if a re-shoot of a scene had to be 
>made because of a lab imposed scratch. Can't speak for scan ability, but 
>would assume the same.
>
>This type of film must be handled by Dale, or Seattle. A few local labs 
>will handle it, but they don't like to because of set-up costs and the 
>protective backing. Dale prices development/processing, etc. same as 
>regular C-41, etc. types. So does Seattle.





 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.