8mm Forum: Dreaded VS again.

This is topic Dreaded VS again. in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008550

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 10, 2013, 05:24 PM:

Just come across this site which says that Magnetic soundtracks accelerate the process which causes VS.
http://www.afana.org/preservation.htm#Film stock basics

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 10, 2013, 05:34 PM:

Fortunately most striped S8 films are also polyester based, so they are immune to VS.

I had a used print from Derann which smelled a little pungent and I e-mailed Gary Brocklehurst asking what to do. He said in all his years there he'd never seen a VS Super-8 print.

-not sure what that was about, but it gradually un-stunk itself and 7 years later it's still fine.

Sound films shot with Kodak cartridge film and a few commercial prints are exceptions, of course.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 11, 2013, 04:02 AM:

I don't think the Super 8 films from the 70s were polyester based, which is what many would have in their collection. I once read that Polyester was so tough that the sprocket wheel on your projector would break before the film would.

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 11, 2013, 04:11 AM:

Had to ditch my fullcoast mag 16mm which went all at once VS. Touch wood all my Derann early 1970’s super 8 acetate with mag stripe is holding up very well indeed. Way back the I coated the black and white stuff with 2.22 which was popular at the time, no idea if this made any difference but it’s still OK. It will be a hard blow if my early 70’s films go off the boil.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 11, 2013, 04:20 AM:

Thanks Lee, thought it was Acetate. As far as I know all my films are in perfect condition. Dixons, under their other brand name Prinz, brought out a Polyester super 8 film; the colours were poor. I read in one of the Movie mags at the time that the sprockets on your projector would break before the film did.
The only polyester print I have is a Perry's short, Christmas Greetings (1938?), with George Formby among others.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 11, 2013, 04:21 AM:

Thanks Lee, thought it was Acetate. As far as I know all my films are in perfect condition. Dixons, under their other brand name Prinz, brought out a Polyester super 8 film; the colours were poor. I read in one of the Movie mags at the time that the sprockets on your projector would break before the film did.
The only polyester print I have is a Perry's short, Christmas Greetings (1938?), with George Formby among others.

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 11, 2013, 04:26 AM:

I know when I lifted the lid on the first can on 16mm acetate fullcoat mag it nearly blew my head off the smell was so strong. Every one I opened after was the same as well so all went to the tip sorry to say which was a bit of a shame. My main concern is the early Derann B&W sound stuff which is very precious to me particularly the Formbs. I like that little Perry’s special with the old stars in and have also seen pure black and white prints as well.

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 11, 2013, 04:58 AM:

If you coated your films like mine with 2.22 I don't think there will be a problem. I remember Dave West of D.C.R. Films used to send his features out already coated, he ran them through a bath.
I've got the Derann features 'No Limit' and 'Spare a Copper', as well as the shorts. Am I right in thinking that the TV show that Formby did shortly before he died was edited, maybe should have been 600ft?

Posted by Gary Crawford (Member # 67) on September 11, 2013, 07:29 AM:

I've been collecting 8mm since 1959....including standard 8mm sound and super 8 sound...and have never had any films with VS.
I've had a few VS 16 prints but they were showing signs when I bought them.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on September 11, 2013, 09:50 AM:

Whilst I wouldn't argue with the writers of the web page, I'd be surprised if magnetic tracks make a big difference. I have quite a lot of 16mm magnetic sound Scopitones and I don't think any have VS. In fact I've yet to hear of any Scopitone print with VS.

The comparative lack of 8mm sound prints with VS is also interesting, although as I suppose these started to appear around the early 1970s (can anyone confirm?), they are more recent than some of the VS prints on 16mm. Maybe the fact that there's less bulk to 8mm and less gasses to accumulate works in 8mm's favour. On the other hand that might suggest that 35mm prints are more prone than 16mm, but perhaps 35mm tends to be stored in cooler places.

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on September 11, 2013, 10:14 AM:

Robert's correct about DCR Films. Dave West always treated his new films with 2:22, they always ran smoothly first time.

This is a scan from the back of one his releases.

How I miss all the old dealers.

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 11, 2013, 11:03 AM:

Yes Robert. The film Derann released was indeed a edited version entitled 'Solo Performance' and it works out about 50% of the original full show. It also was still being released when Derann changed over from Acetate to Poly stock which is handy to know so you have a choice of Ace or Poly. It is a special release in as much as the original used was Dereks own 16mm print so another film I handle with great respect here.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on September 11, 2013, 12:14 PM:

There's enough discussion at this forum on VS to corroborate: all acetate film will eventually get VS; how acidic it is at time of manufacture, plus whether processing or use of striping cement added acidity, plus storage temperature, plus storage humidity, and finally if there is out-gassing ability (sealed cans are worst), will determine how many years you have until the dreaded smell comes. Remember, the A-D strips indicate rising acidity levels before the nose is confronted with the evidence.

We've all had a chuckle about getting serious in the extreme about this hobby, to the point of dedicating a refrigerator to storing film. But honestly, if indefinite storage is the goal, that's the way to go (if you can afford it). Otherwise, do like me and keep everything in the coolest, driest place you have access to.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on September 11, 2013, 12:35 PM:

2.22 was one of those "fixes" at the time designed to eliminate scratches.

Which it did.

Also ruined your films if you wanted to keep them; or will. [Frown]

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on September 11, 2013, 01:15 PM:

I treated my first film purchases from about 1976 with 2:22 and they are still OK. Why should it ruin my films?

Looking at all film treatments then ALL the stuff that is still available could be a problem too. No matter what they say, how good is this newer stuff?

Have you proof that 2:22 also ruined your films if you wanted to keep them; or will?

Posted by Robert Crewdson (Member # 3790) on September 11, 2013, 01:29 PM:

I'm with David on this, I got my first Cine camera in 1973 and the films treated with 2.22 are still fine.
I used to overwet the films because it dried quickly, but I've never had a problem with any film, and now some are 40 years old.

Lee, was the Solo Performance all that Derek Had, or was it edited. I think I saw this released on a DVD once.

I miss the old distributors and magazines as well: in this DVD age a lot of old films and shorts would never have surfaced because of their short running times. 'Christmas Greetings of 1938 is a good example.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2