Re: [Frameworks] 7302 vs 3302

[Mark Toscano]

Kodak has now discontinued 7302 acetate bw print stock at this point, which
is unfortunate primarily because we (and probably lots of other people)
used it for lightstruck leader too.

Mark Toscano

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Scott Dorsey  wrote:

> > So if polyester stocks are stronger, why do Kodak and ORWO make print
> > stocks with acetate base?
>
> 1. It's cheaper.
>
> 2. You can cement splice it, so it can be used to make intermediates.
>
> 3. It's not as strong.  The polyester stock is so strong that if you were
>to run it in a Mitchell and it jammed, the camera movement would fail
>before the film did.  This is a problem for optical printing.
>
> 4. The print looks different.  There is some light piping through the base
>of the polyester print which makes for a slightly different look on
> screen.
>If anything, the polyester looks more like a nitrate print than an
> acetate
>print does.  It's a very small difference, but it's something you can
> notice
>on a really good print on a big screen.
> --scott
>
> ___
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Re: [Frameworks] 7302 vs 3302

[Scott Dorsey]

> So if polyester stocks are stronger, why do Kodak and ORWO make print
> stocks with acetate base?

1. It's cheaper.

2. You can cement splice it, so it can be used to make intermediates.

3. It's not as strong.  The polyester stock is so strong that if you were
   to run it in a Mitchell and it jammed, the camera movement would fail
   before the film did.  This is a problem for optical printing.

4. The print looks different.  There is some light piping through the base
   of the polyester print which makes for a slightly different look on screen.
   If anything, the polyester looks more like a nitrate print than an acetate
   print does.  It's a very small difference, but it's something you can notice
   on a really good print on a big screen.
--scott

___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Re: [Frameworks] 7302 vs 3302

[Scott Dorsey]

The pitch on 7302 and 3302 are both long pitch, which is another reason
they can cause real problems in a cine camera.  They are both intended
for the same printing applications but as I said the estar base will give
you a much more rugged print.
--scott
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Re: [Frameworks] 7302 vs 3302

[Dominic Angerame]

Note that running estar base film stock could badly damage your camera if
there is a jam. I believe the pitch on the estar may be different than the
acetate. I have shot acetate high con thru my bolex and once in a while the
camera will jam because of the pitch difference. The people I know who have
used 7302 have not had many problems with jamming. I would be wary of the
estar based product.

On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Scott Dorsey  wrote:

> There is no difference other than the base, but you have to be pretty
> adventurous to run polyester film in a camera.
>
> The polyester base is WAY more rugged and for release prints you definitely
> want the polyester material.
>
> --scott
> ___
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Re: [Frameworks] 7302 vs 3302

[Scott Dorsey]

There is no difference other than the base, but you have to be pretty
adventurous to run polyester film in a camera.

The polyester base is WAY more rugged and for release prints you definitely
want the polyester material.

--scott
___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks