Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Tri-acetate film

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Tri-acetate film

Author

Topic: Tri-acetate film

Richard Quesnelle
Film Handler

Posts: 67
From: Penetang, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-24-2000 05:51 AM

Do any companies use acetate film today? Or does almost all films come as polyester. Are there any other benefits and cons between the two (ie. acetate film on end leader)? Is there a preferred type of film that many of you would prefer having?

Thanks

Richard

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 08-24-2000 07:51 AM

I wish they would switch back to acetate.

I'm sure that if NATO decided it wanted the old stuff back, it'd happen. From what I've heard elsewhere on this forum, they're the ones that requested the change to begin with.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-24-2000 09:33 AM

I personally prefer triacetate stocks. Should something go wrong, the film will just snap and every normal failsafe in the world will stop the projector. There was also hardly ever any static. My main reason for preferring it is because it just looked better. The labs never have seemed to have gotten the "green" out of polyester film stocks (not counting the dye transfer process prints).

It'll never happen though. At least on the plus side, vinegar syndrome is a thing of the past.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-24-2000 12:32 PM

Triacetate-base film is still used for camera stocks (if you think projector movements are expensive, you haven't seen the prices for camera rebuilds), but, yes, the majority of release print stock is currently available only on polyester base. I'm sure that John P. can elaborate here, but I believe that Kodak no longer sells 5386 (the standard acetate-base LPP color release print stock for the past several years until the switchover to ESTAR).

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 08-24-2000 03:31 PM

Although 99% of release prints now seem to be on polyester, we do get the occasional acetate one. These are mainly showprints and special copies made for film festivals and premieres which are put into general circulation afterwards.

Most of the CTA prints I get nowadays are of French films (usually Eclair prints), which have the added advantage that the subtitles are burnt into the emulsion, with the result that you can focus both the picture and the subtitles. For some reason they don't seem to be able to do this with polyester and the subtitles are on the base - so you can focus the picture, or the s/ts, but not both.

Incidentally, all the CTA prints I've had recently have been on Fuji stock, suggesting to me that Kodak have stopped producing it.

| IP: Logged

Tom Kroening
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 214
From: Janesville, WI USA
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 08-25-2000 03:29 AM

I'm going to have to agree with you guys. I really hate this polyester film, even though its all i've ever worked with. I'm sick of fixing bent parts when people mess up. I don't even know why they call it a film break anymore... it should be a film-streach. 3....2...1.... MELTDOWN!! Oh well, all the more reasons you should always check your work so your audiance won't be treated to the sight of bubbling film.

| IP: Logged

Bernie Anderson Jr
Master Film Handler

Posts: 435
From: Woodbridge, New Jersey
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 08-25-2000 09:54 AM

As a projectionist in a mutliplex I rather use Acetate for the fact that it will break if there is a brain rap or a misthread and shut the machine down properly. The most film you'll lose is maybe about 2 frames compaired to the 2 feet that gets chewed up in the projector. As a collector, I rather have estar film for the fact that it can't get vinegar syndrome.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-28-2000 11:37 AM

In 1992, the NATO Technology Committee recommended that all prints be made on polyester film, primarily for durability and to allow thinner film. Kodak publicly noted many concerns with regular polyester print film, including static, dusting and its very high tensile strength (e.g., my report to Inter-Society Committee at the March 1994 ShoWest). While other film manufacturers rapidly converted to polyester (early US releases included "The Fugitive", "Free Willy", "The Secret Garden", "The American President", "Scream", "Michael" and "The English Patient"), Kodak continued to supply both triacetate and ESTAR base print film and began an intensive development program leading to the introduction of VISION Color Print Film. Kodak invested over $200 million in a new base making machine, which began operation in 1998. Old triacetate machines have been de-commissioned, leading to the conversion of all print film to the new VISION Color Print polyester film base.

Here is the original May 9, 1996 press release regarding the new base-making machine:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr19960509-01.shtml

Technical information about KODAK VISION Color Print Film is on Kodak's web site:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2383.shtml

Kodak has consistently recommended the use of tension-sensing failsafes (not just film break detectors) to immediately shut off the projector in the event of tension buildup. Read my article about polyester concerns in the October 1994 issue of "Film Notes for Reel People". Polyester film is MUCH stronger and more durable than triacetate film, and high tension causes it to stretch, rather than simply break.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-28-2000 04:25 PM

So the good old 5386 is definitely no longer, eh? That was my favorite stock.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-29-2000 06:40 AM

Change is sometimes difficult, but it does provide opportunities. Kodak welcomes ideas and suggestions for making further improvements to any film. But for print film, NATO, the distributors, and labs have made it clear that they prefer polyester base.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.