|
Post by Richard Marple on Mar 10, 2014 18:09:12 GMT
I've heard it's best to keep nitrate stock in a metal can, & safety film in a plastic container.
|
|
|
Post by markboulton on Mar 10, 2014 22:40:16 GMT
So heartbreaking. And so stinky - gut-wrenching in more ways than one - I can just imagine it. Ewwww....
I can't help wanting to bury the film in a box full of silica gel and salt, vacuum packing the lot and storing in a warm cupboard for 15 years, then hoping that by that time some way is found of scanning through the gunk.
Unlikely, I know. But I hope it's kept in some way, just in case.
|
|
|
Post by Laura Ross on Mar 11, 2014 0:23:24 GMT
Amazng how emotional you get looking at an old film can. Must be so dissapointing for all of those involved in trying to find these treasures. No disrespect to M&W I loved them as a kid but if that had been a missing Dr Who I think I'd rather have not known.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Mar 11, 2014 0:33:41 GMT
Amazng how emotional you get looking at an old film can. Must be so dissapointing for all of those involved in trying to find these treasures. No disrespect to M&W I loved them as a kid but if that had been a missing Dr Who I think I'd rather have not known. You'll be pleased,then that we all agreed last week when you were off-line not to tell you the awful story of the last episode of The Tenth Planet and the accident with the cigarette, Oops.
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 11, 2014 19:48:32 GMT
I've heard it's best to keep nitrate stock in a metal can, & safety film in a plastic container. Yes -- that's because Nitrate when it goes unstable has a very low combustion temperature and it's much safer to have it in metal. This of course is a moot point for 16mm films -- there is no 16mm nitrate stock (well, almost - the russians had some at one point - but for all intents and purposes). And of course you can do whatever you want with Polyester based films.
|
|
|
Post by Dan S on Mar 13, 2014 2:36:35 GMT
Couldn't you soak the film in water for a long time (perhaps a solution of water & some chemical?), then pull a few feet off the reel every month, then scan it frame by frame?
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by RWels on Mar 13, 2014 11:58:45 GMT
Couldn't you soak the film in water for a long time (perhaps a solution of water & some chemical?), then pull a few feet off the reel every month, then scan it frame by frame? Yes, that's what I was thinking (and saying) too. The soundtrack exists off air, so that can be taken care of.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 13, 2014 12:05:20 GMT
If you soak film in water, you might as well incinerate it. All the emulsion would disappear in minutes.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by RWels on Mar 13, 2014 14:15:16 GMT
If you soak film in water, you might as well incinerate it. All the emulsion would disappear in minutes. OK, so not that. But it's gone anyway - nothing can be lost by a last ditch effort because there is nothing to put at risk. I keep thinking of this Dick Francis novel about a dead photographer who leaves a mystery behind and the hero eventually gets through to the man who has been in the photo chemicals business for decades and he knows about some odd, offbeat, and obscure ways to chemically fix images. Fiction, you say, and yes, perhaps that person is a stock character, but Dick Francis (rather uniquely) never made up small facts. Have chemists been consulted? Then again, that close-up shot of a strip of the film does NOT look good. Is there still a picture underneath that smudge, or is that smudge essentially what the emulsion (previously) containing the picture has turned into?
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 13, 2014 17:36:18 GMT
Imagine you go into the Louvre and spray white spirit* all over the Mona Lisa. All the paint runs and drips off the canvas into a puddle on the floor. What you have left on the wall is a canvas with paint smears and a puddle of mixed up paint. Could you even hope to restore it..?
It's the same thing here. The mess at the bottom of the film can is the paint, and the film itself is the canvas. You can see the smears of paint residue.
But the Mona Lisa is just one frame. Imagine if all the paintings in the Louvre were sprayed and all the paint from all the paintings ran into one big puddle. That's what you have in the bottom of this can.
*or whatever solvent would dissolve the paint
|
|
|
Post by Alex Dering on Mar 13, 2014 18:06:40 GMT
Rob (or anyone),
1. Has the whole reel been gone through then? By that, I mean, is there any chance that there's a "zone of stability" in there? 2. Judging by the degree of damage, by how much time did this film miss out on being saved?
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by RWels on Mar 13, 2014 18:26:35 GMT
Leave the Mona Lisa out of this!
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 14, 2014 9:37:09 GMT
Rob (or anyone), 1. Has the whole reel been gone through then? By that, I mean, is there any chance that there's a "zone of stability" in there? 2. Judging by the degree of damage, by how much time did this film miss out on being saved? No idea, Alex, but I imagine Paul et al would have looked at every possibility before writing it off.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Mar 14, 2014 10:27:46 GMT
Are the images are still on the film ? -if they are - then you could try giving it a bath?
A dunk for an hour or so in pure warm water will unstick it and absorb any moisture that has dried out and return its shape. Obviously how long you keep it immersed is critical before the water softens the images.The drying process is also critical to prevent water stains and the pick up of dirt- a blow dry and processors' squeegy tongs might be the answer?
A slightly more dangerous (because its highly flammable) process is to use a bath of naphthalene (moth balls) which has the advantage of doing no damage to the film,thoroughly cleaning evaporating and leaving no trace. Another possibility is a bath of Carbon Tetracholoride, this is a non flammable, highly efficient cleaner,the disadavantage is that it evaporates very quickly and thus fumes build up very rapidly that could engulf an operator in a confined space... also AFAIK there is no experience of using it on film.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by RWels on Mar 14, 2014 17:41:03 GMT
Rob (or anyone), 1. Has the whole reel been gone through then? By that, I mean, is there any chance that there's a "zone of stability" in there? 2. Judging by the degree of damage, by how much time did this film miss out on being saved? No idea, Alex, but I imagine Paul et al would have looked at every possibility before writing it off. That's an assumption. They probably did not try anything radical, but with all usual options exhausted, there is nothing to loose. Of course my previous disclaimer still applies: If there's nothing underneath the goo, then that's it.
|
|