Jump to content


Photo

Will this work at all??


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Kyle Geerkens

Kyle Geerkens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Toronto, Canada

Posted 09 November 2005 - 07:30 PM

Hi i just got 2 cans of 5218 back from a commercial shoot that the company I work for didn't want anymore.

why?

It says the film was spun into reverse.

What does this mean? and if I shoot some fun test with it, will it expose at all? if so, what sort of image will I get?
  • 0

#2 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 November 2005 - 11:20 PM

Sounds like it means that it was wound off a larger load onto a core but not rolled back, making it "tails out," which means that the keycode numbers will be in reverse but even more of a problem is that it will be A-wind instead of B-wind (the sprockets will be on the wrong side). Easy to test: send it to a lab and ask them to snip test the rolls, which means they cut off the first few feet and procxess it to see if it is in good shape (fogged, exposed, whatever). They could easily rewind the roll if that's what is necessary.
  • 0

#3 Clive Tobin

Clive Tobin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 402 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Spokane Valley, WA, USA

Posted 10 November 2005 - 08:20 PM

even more of a problem is that it will be A-wind instead of B-wind (the sprockets will be on the wrong side).


Um... he said 5218. This is 35mm so the holes are on both sides.
  • 0

#4 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 10 November 2005 - 08:57 PM

Um... he said 5218. This is 35mm so the holes are on both sides.

But the keykode numbers will still be on the wrong side (as well as running in reverse, or "downhill".)

Since "spun into reverse" isn't clear, you should also be careful that it hasn't been rewound with the emulsion out. This would really stuff up your images.
  • 0

#5 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 10 November 2005 - 09:45 PM

It must be a roll that an assistant or an operator prepared for a "reverse" shot, but didn't use. Often happens on commercials. So it's like a short end (not "brand" new), but still the original footage (400' or 1000', you don't tell us), "loaded/unloaded".

You should make a sensitometric test, since it was loaded/unloaded, and wind it back in the good "order", what you could do at a camera rental house, in a dark room, with a winder, for free, just as well, if you feel at ease with that, or ask an assistant operator to do it. It should be possible to have this done in a lab as well, but mind that you should get this for free...

As to figure out if it ever was wound the emulsion out, it's quite easy to find out as well, if you have a changing bag or a dark room : the emulsion side is brown, not shiny. It would stick to a wet finger. The other side is black, shiny, and would slip under a wet finger.
  • 0

#6 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 10 November 2005 - 09:49 PM

Since "spun into reverse" isn't clear, you should also be careful that it hasn't been rewound with the emulsion out. This would really stuff up your images.


I was picturing the core being turned the wrong way, and loosening up the film, with the posible danger of CINCH marks (or a film Slinky if you try to take it out of the can.)
extreme case would have some backfolding which would cause presure fogging..

Emulsion out might not be a big deal depending on the design of the magazine, I suspect that some of them would work just find unwinding from the wrong side. You could rule on that eventuality by taking a small clip of 6 inches of film , and marking it with a pen before you set it down to see what side you marked.

Since we are talking about someone is apperently a student here. HE could also cut 6 ft off in the dark, and load it into a 35mm still cassette, shoot s few stills and send it to Dale labs for CD only. If the negatives look OK, the film might work.

If he is friendly with a lab, he might even be able to get them to run a fog test on a short snip off the roll.
  • 0

#7 Kyle Geerkens

Kyle Geerkens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Toronto, Canada

Posted 11 November 2005 - 10:36 AM

thanks for the info everyone

i believe these are 2 recan 400'

they're not properly labelled but the weight seems to suggest that its not a short end.
  • 0

#8 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 11 November 2005 - 01:21 PM

You can always "soup" a few feet (even in a B&W developer and fixer) to get an image of a few KeyKode numbers to verify that they are incrementing in the correct direction. Again, any short end or recan should be tested for fogging before using for anything critical.
  • 0


Tai Audio

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Opal

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

The Slider

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS