8mm Forum: Fast fade

This is topic Fast fade 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=010161

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 24, 2015, 02:54 AM:

Here's a cynical question for you.
In the 70s-early 80s when this cheaper film stock became available to dealers to use for release prints, does anyone else out there ever wonder that someone in the industry must has had an idea of how short a life this hopeless stock would have had?
After all, for many years Kodak colour stock used for home movies has proven itself to be so good for decades, we have home movies taken when i was just 8-9 years of age on standard 8 and early teens on super 8 yet not one has any sign of any colour fade. So why fix something that broken and let other companies produce all this trashy stock for what was then very expensive package movies for mass sale?
Or, am i completely off course & not fully understanding? [Confused]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 03:07 AM:

I guess the filmstock manufacturing companies knew what they were doing Tom even if they didn't let onto the labs and distributers.
I guess they figured none of these package movies would still be In use by 2015 so the same emphasis for longevity wouldn't apply in the manner it does for people's personal home movies with memories for life stored on them.

What was the saying again...."keep it with kodak!"

Maybe not if it's on Eastman SP!

[ August 24, 2015, 04:11 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on August 24, 2015, 03:28 AM:

In Belgium, in the eighties two makes of super 8 cartriges were available : Agfa and Kodak. I asked once the difference between both as Kodak was more expensive. The seller told me : if you want to keep your films buy Kodak. If you just do films without long term purposes you can buy Agfa. I did something crazy : I wrote to Kodak and Agfa (no e-mail at that time :-), told them what a seller stated and asked if it was true. They surprinsingly both answered. Kodak gave some technical spécifications and said that they would be better that what competitors offered. Agfa sent me a leaflet with the technical specifications of their film but without any comment...

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on August 24, 2015, 03:40 AM:

I've always felt that 8mm printed stock was sometimes carefully chosen with a known user life in mind in order to protect the rights perhaps. The digital arena is another story..

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on August 24, 2015, 06:11 AM:

Whilst I accept that film stocks will eventually fade I still think where films are stored and conditions surrounding them have a large role in their survival. I was aware of pink films but it wasn't such a big issue as it seems to be today. I have to say as a collector apart from the odd reel you got from a dealer pink film syndrome tended to originate from countries which had more extremes in climate in my case primarily US. I believe you will have more longtivity with Super 8 were the climate is moderate air conditioning is not used and films are stored in dry dark location. The fact that nitrate film sources are still is being discovered in useable conditions in the like of Northern Europe well after logically it should have become unusable years earlier would tend to support this argument. Only a theory but the fact that I had U8 Ken MGM prints up until a couple of years ago with virtually undamaged colour and I stored in ideal conditions makes an argument that it is inevitable in our lifetimes that all pre 82 colour film will fade.
One other thought does film cleaning help or hinder film preservation. One final thought Iis coating film with a cleaner as soon as it was bought part of the reason why my films didn't turn pink. I know I was in the extreme minority to do this as most collectors wouldn't spend the money and there must be a certain health risk to the person using these chemicals.

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on August 24, 2015, 06:35 AM:

I think Mike is correct to an extent. That's why the BFI store film in ideal climatic conditions. But I also believe that Kodak stock is/was superior. Like Tom has said, I too have some old Standard 8 film and the colour is near perfect. I also have some 9.5 colour film, which is even older, and the colour on that is very good. The production of Eastman stock was a disaster. It seems to go red whatever the storage conditions.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 24, 2015, 06:44 AM:

Mike, that's all very true but stocks were used which,(as with all business),was offered to companies in mass production of cine films which were cheaper for the reason being what Derek of Derann once described as being fast fade. I think it was Eastman but i cant be too certain.
Once Mr Simmons saw a problem looming they changed to the well known Low fade LPP.
I myself am lucky to have what i believe are almost perfect conditions for my film room, it is very cool all the year round, in the summer it actually feels like its air conditioned, and it is totally 100% dark with no window, yet unfortunately over the last few years i have noticed that a couple,and it is only a very few, of our films we show after the last viewings 2-3 years previous have early signs of fade.
It is of course true to say that the very nature of cine films they will all one day fade, but those supplying companies in the 70s-early 80s that created this cheaper low fade stock were nothing short of scamming the cine collector whilst maximising there profits. Clearly back then the industry would have surmised that super 8 was going to be no more on 2000s onward. How wrong were they?
I just get so annoyed just thinking that if they all stuck to a proven film like the old Kodak, films today would be so much better. If you take Mr Pope selling all those great titles he has but see how red many of the marketing full features are, the Godfather, Rosemary's baby, these titles cost someone a small fortune, there should have been a minimum standard.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 08:07 AM:

To answer Tom's question in today's situstion is similar with the situation why there are novels printed on hard cover and soft cover. They both have its own markets.

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on August 24, 2015, 08:20 AM:

It is actually a problem for the whole film industry. The rush to cheaper film stock has created a restoration problem of mammoth proportions which we are just one part.

http://www.afana.org/preservation.htm#Storage%20and%20Preservation

http://ian-partridge.com/fade.html

Posted by John Hourigan (Member # 111) on August 24, 2015, 08:32 AM:

Add to this that Super 8 films, particularly digests from the commercial outfits, were being mass produced in the late 1970s without, what appears to be, a high regard for print quality. My films bought during that time generally suffered from soft focus and subpar sound quality -- sure signs of a "crank'em out" process. It doesn't appear that there was much thought given to aligning the quality of the product to the (high) price of that product.

Ironic that the late 1970s were thought of the halcyon days of Super 8, but it certainly wasn't the best in terms of print and sound quality (as evidenced by those faded/red prints, etc.)

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 24, 2015, 09:02 AM:

Just think if Derann had carried on with fast fade stock and put all there big releases on it, Disney features,Terminator,die hard Alien to name but a few. The second hand market would be in a right pickle. I wonder at point Derek Simmons did know something bad, i do remember reading about this years ago and seeing in print that Derek did realise a massive problem for the future and switching to the superior low fade stock.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 09:13 AM:

Tom, I am afraid you were thinking the current condition for the 1970s scenario. Derann's Disney, Terminator etc were made after 1980s when low fade stock had been in market. But in 1970s it did not exist yet, so the companies needed to use whatever available stock at that time.

As per today, we cannot be asking why cars in 1970s used leaded fuel while it was known dangerous to our health, just because we are using unleaded fuel now.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 24, 2015, 09:22 AM:

Thats very true, what i actually meant was, had Derann not been the good company they were when LPP came out, they could quite have easily carried on useing the cheaper fast fade stock simply to maximise there profits, fortunately for the collector quality played the bigger role so they switched to the better stock at the earliest oppertunity. [Wink]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 10:12 AM:

But I think in 1985 the fast fade stocks were no longer available in the market, Tom. It is about the time.

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on August 24, 2015, 10:31 AM:

Eastman color ceased production in 1982. So estimating a two year life span before the supply was used up I would say anything produced 1984 onwards by Derann should likely be low fade. Very lucky for film collectors. Hawk the Slayer was one of the first Derann releases after video decimated the 8mm market. I remember watching it in a friends home cinema in 1986 and it was talked about as the first of new releases. Terrible film but apparently a great seller. Available in 600' digest and full feature length.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 24, 2015, 10:45 AM:

Good info, thanks Winbert & Mike. Bit of relief. [Wink]

Such a shame about those Marketing full length films,they had such good titles.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 11:17 AM:

Again though Tom, a lot as has been said,must surely be down to storage conditions and climate of the country it's stored in etc as I have quite a lot of the marketing features and mini features and whilst by no means perfect, with the exception of the full feature of Murder On The Orient Express, they don't look like many i see being sold here and elsewhere, where the film has turned totally red. In fact even "Murder..." isn't that bad by comparison.

Same with the ELvis Viacom prints. The ones from the Uk can be still ok I've found where others I've seen from around various points in the globe can be far worse or even totally red.

[ August 25, 2015, 05:45 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on August 24, 2015, 12:02 PM:

If the cine market was stronger, someone would probably have invented a kind of electronic filter to put in front of a projector lens. The classical blue or green filters have varaible effects, depending mostly of the the state of fading. Wittner has a pricey filter on its catalogue and the illustarting pictures you can see on their site are promising but it is expensive to try in cas it dosn't give you best results than a filter you can find for a fraction of the 179 euros asked.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on August 24, 2015, 01:01 PM:

I agree with Andrew. They must have known the longevity of the stocks they were manufacturing, and just figured that no one would still love these films after decades of video and digital.

A shame, but we have our Agfa, LPP, Fuji and a few other great film-stocks that are holding up fairly well.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 01:24 PM:

Anything after 82 on the stocks you mention Osi, I would expect to go on for decades yet before any real noticeable fade issues emerge.

Obviously optimum storage conditions with anything like ideal temperature and humidity, will give even greater longevity to our valued prints.

Camera stock from 60's and 70's is still going strong in anything I have in my own collection or in fact have seen of others. Beautiful vibrant colour still.

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on August 24, 2015, 03:13 PM:

I imagine that the stocks were originally made for cinema release prints which would be expected to have a short life, once or twice round the circuits before dumping, but were carried over to the "sub standard" (less than 35mm) gauges. We all know the problems that that caused for the industry as some negatives (inter-negatives?) had the same problems.

Kodachrome for home movies had a completely different construction to all others offered so was almost as fade free (if not equally) as imbibition printed Technicolor.

I also remember talking to Derek about some new Kodak print and pre-print stock that was advertised, but he said he was happy with the Agfa that the labs were using. From the prints on Agfa that people here say haven't faded much he was right.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 03:23 PM:

Agfa from the later era is very good, just have to put up with a bit more of the bluish cast associated with films like "The Sound Of Music", "Die Hard" and "Fantasia" etc to name but three.

It shows up best when you intercompare prints that were printed on both LPP and Agfa like "Calamity Jane" for example.

Here you can clearly see the difference in colour temperature between the coldish Agfa stock versus the warm LPP varieties.

The good thing with Agfa stock I'm finding is, the colour permanence seems to be about the same, so far at least! [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on August 24, 2015, 06:08 PM:

Well since the Agfa prints have a pretty strong blue bias, maybe they will actually get better (warmer)as they fade! [Smile]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 06:18 PM:

Paul, I dont think if bluish prints get faded (warm) it will bring to neutral color as you think. No, I think it will leave the blue tone alone giving the sense of blue and white color. I can say this because I have greenish print that has faded and now becomes green and white print [Razz]

Btw even 1982 Eastman has ceased the production, it iwas already Eastman low fade (Eastman LPP). I have some prints denote with this mark or only Eastman (without LPP) and still no fade. So the fast fade Eastman may be ceased in 1980.

Cheers,

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 06:43 PM:

????????????????????????
Sorry Winbert, I'm just not getting it....
Ps, Yes I agree Paul

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 08:13 PM:

For those who want to see what AGFA prints when it gets faded you can see from my pictures below:

This is my Raiders of the Lost Ark print from Marketing which is on AGFA. So AGFA will gets faded too and it will fade to bluish/purplish side.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 08:18 PM:

its before 1982 When produced Winbert. So only to.be expected

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 24, 2015, 08:29 PM:

Are we talking of prints get fade or what???

Look at what Paul wrote:

quote:
Well since the Agfa prints have a pretty strong blue bias, maybe they will actually get better (warmer)as they fade!

So I am focusing on the fade side. So we are supposing the AGFA will fade no matter the prints were made before 1982 or after. So IF the AGFA prints will fade too (as to Paul's) the excessive bluish tone will not help the print to become neutral because others colors will fade too leaving the print into monochrome tone and this is not good.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 24, 2015, 08:37 PM:

The prints so far printed beyond 1982 look exactly the same as when they were printed here in the Uk. (Well at least mine do anyhow)

Therefore far beyond me to even begin to speculate how on earth they are going to look once they finally begin to fade.

Presumably, in a warm country, yours are already showing signs of fading?

Though dark Winbert,your Raiders print doesn't really look that faded to my eyes looking at those screenshots. All colours appear to be there and looks how I'd expect from the era it was printed in.
Not very saturated admittedly, but perfectly acceptable to my eyes.

[ August 25, 2015, 05:52 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on August 25, 2015, 11:27 AM:

People have stated here that there were various Agfa emulsions and code numbers and some are better than others. IIRC 2S is a good one that I have The Rocky Horror Picture show 400ft on.

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on August 25, 2015, 01:41 PM:

LPP prints are generally stable if they change at all they will tend to go greenish. Some are nearly 30 years old so the next number of years will start to show any damage. It will likely be films stored in warmer climates or exposed to air conditioning or extremes in temperature that are more likely to fade or change.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on August 26, 2015, 02:10 PM:

I think it's hard to generalise about the look of faded AGFA. The 16mm AGFA prints I own that show some fade don't resemble Winbert's 'Raiders'. Some scenes can still look very good but there's less contrast, with darker blacks becoming reddish and the overall look becoming warmer. A lot better than typical Eastman, though.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 28, 2015, 03:31 AM:

When we watched our last train from gunhill feature a couple of weeks ago this one had a strange fade to it.
It was very good news for us because we expected it to have gone all together but all the indoor and night scenes were very good. the blacks are very black and all the yellow and greens are all great and the whites are still very white, we were wellness leased,however,reel two outdoor. Scenes were the one that had some fade. In our experiences its always been the other way around and this particular title most of the movie is indoors, the final reel had no noticeable fade at all. With some screenshots shown on ebay by some other copies we were expecting to have been red.
I wonder what the first LPP print title will be to begin fading.

[Wink]

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on August 28, 2015, 03:31 AM:

When we watched our last train from gunhill feature a couple of weeks ago this one had a strange fade to it.
It was very good news for us because we expected it to have gone all together but all the indoor and night scenes were very good. the blacks are very black and all the yellow and greens are all great and the whites are still very white, we were well pleased,however,reel two outdoor scenes were the one,s that had some fade. In our experiences its always been the other way around and this particular title most of the movie is indoors, the final reel had no noticeable fade at all. With some screenshots shown on ebay by some other copies we were expecting it to have been completely red as we hadn't projected it in over five years.
I wonder what the first LPP print title will be to begin fading.

[Wink]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 28, 2015, 03:41 AM:

Posted twice???

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 28, 2015, 03:41 AM:

No idea Tom but let's hope we never find out! Not unless you're planning on getting a letter from Wills. [Big Grin]

I know I won't be ha ha.

Joking aside, perhaps our 60's 70's and even 80's camera stock, will in time, give us some indication of when we can expect the dreaded day.

Once that begins to fade, anything is possible and highly likely I'd say.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2