|
Author
|
Topic: "Film Renew"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 525
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted October 31, 2004 02:50 PM
quote:
However one concern is whether the product contains materials which might have a long term effect on degrading the dyes used in color films, and also whether the product contains water which is not so good for film. I know that Armorall is patented but what is in it? Can you answer my concerns about suitability for film cleaning and lubrication.
Paul, I shouldn't have to point this out, but do remember that the people at Armorall are not film people, and know nothing about film. As such they are wholly unqualified to answer whether that product will cause long term damage or not. I'm afraid you're on your own in regards to testing.
Everyone please remember that just because something looks great right now, does not mean that you won't unbox a reel you cleaned with something a few years back to find out it is unplayable anymore. Long term testing is absolutely mandatory. Just look at the old Eastman film stocks. They had no idea the colors would naturally turn red over time...and that was coming from Kodak!
FilmGuard has been in testing for about 15 years now with no long term problems. I think FilmRenew has been around for a similar amount of time. Plus there are more options than just those two film cleaners which have stood the test of time you can use, so I am in no way trying to push one particular product here. Just remember, 5 years down the road the films you clean today with some random chemical you find at the hardware store or under the kitchen sink may be unplayable...and unreplaceable! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) It's at that point you have to ask yourself if it is worth the gamble of trying to save a couple bucks on a substitute product to clean your films with vs. potentially damaging your prints in the long term.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 525
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted October 31, 2004 11:54 PM
Is there no film cleaner product available in the UK that has a long track record of testing that is reasonably priced? Obviously once US manufactured items leave the country, it starts to get real expensive.
My only concern that I just wanted to make clear to the readers was that random chemicals which were not formulated for film cleaning such as WD40, or Armorall, or Raid bug spray, or whatever has not had long term testing on film and users could unbeknownst to them be destroying their films. I know Kodak has specifically named the product WD40 as a no-no because it leeches the dyes from the film over time.
I'm sure you can understand where I am coming from. Take for example a reader skimmes through this post and gets out of it that they can throw any ol' chemical on their films...but what if they turn around a few years later and find out that their films have been damaged by it??? Obviously it's a gamble each person has to weigh and make their own decision on.
Let's just please word the posts carefully so it is made clear that items like these have not had long term testing and using them are "at your own risk", then of course feel free to report your findings on it thus far. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
EDIT - I decided to do a quick search over on the Film-Tech Forums since I knew this had been discussed before over there. I suggest everyone click on this link and read about using WD-40 straight from John Pytlak (the Kodak man). His post is about 2/3 down the page.
[ November 01, 2004, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul Adsett
Film God
Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted November 01, 2004 08:15 AM
Thank you Brad. Your words of caution make a lot of sense, and everyone needs to heed them.
I certainly do not want to recommend that everyone go off and apply ArmorAll to their entire film collection- and I certainly hope that they do not. As you say so well, you dont know what will happen 5 or 10 years from now. But here is my experience, for what it is worth:
About a year ago I aquired 3 black and white features off ebay. These were acetate based prints, very nice quality, but were scratched and almost unprojectable because they were so dry and shrunk, chattering and jumping up and down on the screen. I thoughI had nothing to lose by trying something, and seeing and reading the ArmorAll directions while cleaning my car one day, I thought I might just try it on one roll of these films. Using the protectant wipes, I saw an immediate improvement in ease of projection, much quieter and much more steady. So I repeated the cleaning operations a few more times over a period of a couple of weeks, by which time the print had eventually settled down to a normal level of noise and steadiness in the projector. I also noticed that the film scratches were less noticeable, and the quality of the mag track sound was much better. In fact the first few rewinds thru the wipes produced lots of loose oxide crud on the cloth. I have concluded that the stripe gets cleaned and polished during this operation, thus the better sound. I also think that maybe the Armorall penetrates the film base, producing slight swelling, which offsets some of the shrinkage. It also seems to make the film a little more flexible and shiny after several applications.
So far, as I have said, I have not seen any adverse effects after 12 months. But so far, I have only used this product to "Rescue" prints which were otherwise very unsteady and chattery ,due to shrinkage or drying out. (None of the prints which I have owned myself are like that). I am sure that Filmguard or Filmrenew would provide similar beneficial effects on the film, but I do not like the exposure to the volatiles in these products.
I have not used this product(ArmorAll) on every film that I posess, and will only use it if necssary to rescue a print from the trash can.
--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jean-Marc Toussaint
Film God
Posts: 2392
From: France
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted November 01, 2004 08:40 AM
Lads, another input from France:
I juste received an email from Mr Antoine Orsero, a very respected collector over here. He skimmed through this thread but, not being too confident with writing in English, he asked me to relay the following information to you:
Mr Orsero has been using, for the past 7 years, a silicone-based car care product from the brand "Abel Auto", apparently very similar to ArmorAll, with great success, without any glitch. However, he only uses it with extreme precaution on acetate prints that need to be saved from shrinkage.
I suppose that these products could be used wisely and lightly for cleaning/lubricating the projector's film path...
--------------------
The Grindcave Cinema Website
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael De Angelis
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1261
From: USA
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted November 01, 2004 06:37 PM
Years ago, I tried a product which was sold by Derann called Renofilm.
It cleaned and lubricated. A little drop went along way.
Most notably, it smelled like moth balls or camphor.
At first, I thought this was strange, until a long time collector friend of mine
told me that very old ancient film prints did have that smell, especially
when they were stored in a can, which had a small sponge inside which was a placed as a wick to keep the films moist for long storage. I guess a similar concept to what is found in the Bonum spools boxes.
Nevertheless, the films treated with Renofilm went through the projector gate as if their was not any film passing through the machine.
Had anyone ever tried this product?
This is something which I used prior to understanding MSDS fact sheets.
Best,
Michael
P.S. Kev, I have to date about 500 posts to catch up to you! Hopefully I will be as lucky, if I don't drop from exhaustion. How do you do it? Cheers!
--------------------
Isn't it great that we can all communicate about this great
hobby that we love!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Paul Adsett
Film God
Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted November 03, 2004 09:44 PM
Well guy's, it's time for your's truly to eat humble pie. I got the following response from the ArmorAll Company:
Dear Mr. Adsett:
Thank you for contacting The Armor All Products Company.
The ARMOR ALL Protectant Wipes are water based silicone specifically
designed to protect and beautify polymeric materials such as rubber,
plastics, vinyl and automotive-grade finished leather. This product is
not recommended for lubricating film reel.
We will be happy to provide the material safety data sheet(s) you
requested. We will be sending this material by regular mail, so please
allow 7 to 10 working days. At this time, we send material safety data
sheets by regular mail only. I hope this information is helpful.
Again, thank you for contacting us.
David N. Mills
Product Specialist
004368166A
I guess Brad know's what he's talking about.
--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael De Angelis
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1261
From: USA
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted November 04, 2004 09:49 PM
Tony,
I do not intend to interfere, but I have found water to be very damaging to film.
Last summer, I received a film which was delievered to me with a very stong mildew smell. Instead of using a Film Cleaner to remove the mildew odor, I aired the film out on my open air screened porch for several weeks. Selecting only days which were low in humidity, and making sure that the film was not in the direct path of sunlight, where it would bake and turn vinegar.
I worked this for several weeks, and the film was practically free of the odor. One night I did not realize that it was going to rain, and as I turned in to go to sleep, I hear a misting and blowing of the wind, and realized that the film was getting wet.
I rushed out, snapped up the film and began to pat the moiture off of the film with a dry cloth, rotating the cloth to absorb the wet areas.
Then slowly I unspooled the film between rewinds, and noticed that the film was beginning to stick together. Carefully, I would dry the film with a dry cloth tissue, and waited for each area to not feel sticky and to wind to the next area that was wet until the sticky areas were dry.
The areas that became wet did swell somewhat.
After intensive work of 800' of 16mm film, I believed that I saved the film, and I did not get to sleep until 1:45am during a work week. - What we will do for film!
I am curious if Paul's film will reveal scratches in the future.
Last but not least, never use a hair dryer to dry off films, Because the heat can turn the film vinegar, and vinegar syndrome can affect an entire collection to turn vinegar and useless.
Best,
Michael
--------------------
Isn't it great that we can all communicate about this great
hobby that we love!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Adsett
Film God
Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted November 05, 2004 08:35 AM
Well we now know that ArmorAll is a water based silicone product, and that water is reportedly bad for film. Obviously it is the silicone which provides the lubricating effect and the water swells the film very slightly, offsetting any shrinkage, and diminishing some of the scratches.
Maybe the key here is how much water may be detrimental to the film. A situation where a film has water settling on it for a long period of time is probably totally different from what you get with the ArmorAll wipe applied during a high speed rewind, where the amount of fluid which gets on the film is pretty small.
I am not advocating that everybody go off and ArmorAll all their films. But I would be interested to see if anybody else feels that high speed rewinding thru ArmorAll wipes is beneficial to film handling during projection and reduction of scratches. So somebody else, give it a try, and let us know what you find.
As far as I am concerned, as I said, I have not seen any problems after about 1 year of useage, and I will continue to use this product on troublesome films which would otherwise be unprojectable.
--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) but I did not know about hair dryers.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
