|  IP: Logged

Grain structure and range is better in modern films. Part of what you might be noticing as a difference in nitrate is a shift in the sensitivity to blues and reds from ortho to panchromatic film. I've never seen the true "nitrate look" to pass even through one generation of copying to a different media. However, I'll be pleasantly surprised if someone proves this wrong.

About 3 years ago I saw a nitrate IB print of 'The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp' at the NFT in London and remembered thinking that the characteristic crisp and dense look which characterises b/w nitrate just wasn't there. In fact, the print was very soft and flat, and the explanation I was given was that IB printing was such an expensive process that (especially in wartime) they couldn't just discard the prints where the matrices didn't register quite right. Instead they were designated as 'North of Watford' prints [Watford is a suburb in North London], i.e. they went to the provincial and second-run venues. Getting back to the point, none of the IB nitrate prints I've seen have had the characteristic 'glow' of the b/w ones, which leads me to believe that this look does not come from any intrinsic property of the base.

As for orthochromatic vs. pan, the studios made the change to pan in the late 20s (i.e. 20 years before nitrate was phased out), so would anyone really think that the 'nitrate glow' was a characteristic of ortho stock? I don't think I've ever seen any nitrate prints projected of anything as far back as the 1920s.

I've also noticed older IB prints that have a "soft" look. It seems more common with films shot on the old three-strip negative cameras, as opposed to films shot on color negatives.

I'm guessing that either:

o the three-strip cameras produced negatives that weren't as sharp as color negatives, due to the extra optics involved in splitting the light, or

o Improvements in the dye transfer equipment over time resulted in sharper prints, or

o The dye transfer process at the time was designed to allow the dyes to slightly migrate, thus concealing the film grain at the cost of a slight loss in sharpness.

If so, I would think that ambient light would have a greater effect than it does. I remember showing some nitrate short subjects at a drive-in, where there is plenty of stray light, and the image was still outstanding compared to normal fare.

I wonder if the printing process might have more to do with it than I had previously suspected. Was the printing of nitrate done differently? Did a high-speed dupe process come in at about the same time nitrate was phased out? The crispness of the image is a definite difference AFAICT.

I also wonder how panchromatic the early pan films actually were, and if filters were in greater use to "pop" the sky or contrast in some scenes.

FWIW, with a well-exposed color negative, it is certainly possible to obtain black densities higher than 4.0 (10,000:1) on KODAK VISION Premier Color Print film, which would likely exceed the d-max of any B&W print film of that era:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2393.shtml

Another thing to bear in mind is halation. Modern film stocks have much better protection against halation (light reflecting from the backside of the film after it has passed through and exposed the emulsion) than films of that era. Halation can look like a "glow" around light objects in the scene.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

I always loved the extra rich colors that were common of nitrate films! It really leads to the ambviance of the picture! I had some questions about this and e-mailed you some time ago but never heard back. Wonder if you got my message? I am glad that this topic was brought up!

I did run a newly restored, fresh out of the lab Clara Bow silent two years ago. It was on mylar and from the original negative.
It looked great.

Dennis

Master status elements - Can only be used to make printing status copies. Examples: the cut camera negative of a major feature film, or a fine grain dupe pos of a nitrate original which has been lost through decomposition. If a release print is all that survives of a title, then it will also be assigned master status.

Printing status elements - are used to produce viewing copies. Example: an interpos made from a surviving camera negative, or a dupe neg made from a master status fine grain pos. The use of these elements is less restricted than master status ones.

Viewing status elements - are release prints used for projection and telecine. There is no need for any technical restriction on the use of these at all, becuase the master status elements are already doing the job of preservation and printing status elements ensure that you can make further release prints as needed.

Surplus status elements: where you have acquired multiple elements of the same title and selected the best for preservation (and so assigned master status to it), the remaining elements can be categorised as surplus (i.e. they're not needed to ensure the long-term survival of the film). Let's say for example that an archive acquires five release prints of the same film, but no pre-print elements are known to survive. These prints range in quality from very good to quite worn. The very best print is used to re-record a new sound negative, and then sections from the three best prints are combined to produce a new master element. Preservation dupes will be made from this, and at the end of the whole process the cut original element plus a preservation dupe neg are assigned master status. Now there are two uncut prints left, and because these are not needed to safeguard the film, they can be used for access purposes and so are assigned surplus status.

Following recommended archival practice, this is the only scenario in which I could envisage a nitrate element being put through a telecine (or projected in a cinema). Doing so with a master status element is just too risky: if the stock accidently tears during the transfer (e.g. if there is a mechanical failure in the telecine machine) then the only surviving film element is damaged forever. And if the very unlikely event happens that it does ignite, then you've lost a whole reel of the film forever and can never get it back.

 |  IP: Logged

Yup. Same nitrocellulose used for nitrate film base. Note that it is "select optical grade" and only 2 micrometres thick. Doubt it would be subject to ignition. If it did catch fire, a 2 micron pellicle would go up like magician's flash paper.

Of course carbon light also ads to the glow,even if it is only 45 amps. Look at nitrate made in the 50s the silver content is much less as what was black is very dark gray, carbon arc in my open air theatre rules supreme even with 16 mm.

Arc is the best light, HELLZAPOPPIN leaps of the screen as it gently waves in the summer breeze.

------------------
ALL PARTS FOR VICTOR AND KALART VICTOR 16MM PROJECTORS.
SERVICE TO 35 AND 16MM
PROJECTION EQUIPMENT.