Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Is the force with me?

This is topic Is the force with me? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000769

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-13-2002, 05:11 AM:

I've noticed that I now seem to have become a 'Jedi master film handler'. Many thanks for the compliment, Brad! I was afraid you were going to put 'boring git who goes on about nitrate all the time' in that box one of these days!

The ironic thing is I haven't been able to get my (latex-gloved) hands on any film for almost a week now and am starting to suffer withdrawal symptoms...

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 03-13-2002, 05:28 AM:

So Leo the closet rubber fetishist is finally outed

Posted by Stan Gunn (Member # 554) on 03-15-2002, 09:51 PM:

Leo should you require a fix of nitrate fumes, you are welcome to come over here and check a few thousand feet of mine.

------------------
KALEE FOREVER. CARBON ARC, THE ONLY LIGHT FOR THE STARS!
ALL PARTS FOR VICTOR AND KALART VICTOR 16MM PROJECTORS.SERVICE TO 35 AND 16MM PROJECTION EQUIPMENT.
35MM sprockets made to order.

Posted by Darren Briggs (Member # 1071) on 03-16-2002, 03:50 PM:

Leo, you know you can bob in anytime to touch the film or lick the platter!
Darren.

Posted by Andy Muirhead (Member # 712) on 03-16-2002, 06:46 PM:

I took the guys from our local fire station round the place recently for our regular monthly check. While looking for the 'No Smoking' sign in projection room one, the sub officer jerked a thumb at the platter (and the film) and said "That stuff isn't flammable anymore, is it?"

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-17-2002, 03:58 PM:

Filmguard, yum...

BTW, at this risk of coming out with something blindingly obvious, acetate and polyester film is flammable. Is has similar ignition and combustion characteristics to paper. There seems to be an urban legend out there that 'safety' film means 'film that will not burn'. Wrong - it really means 'safer than nitrate'. Paper is a fire risk, and buildings that store large quantities of it (e.g. record offices or corporate archives) are required to have fire detection and control systems (e.g. Halon or Inergen).

Whilst films are probably not the biggest fire risk in a modern projection box, they are a source of fuel - especially, for example, in a large multiplex booth where there may be 20-30 prints sitting on platters - and should be indicated on the H & S risk assessment sheets as such.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-19-2002, 07:19 AM:

Some links to information on the Kodak website:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/faq/combustable.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/faq/autoignite.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/technical/storage3.shtml

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-19-2002, 07:59 AM:

Two things I'd take issue with in the article on the bottom link.

Firstly...

quote:
If you store it [nitrate] in large quantities of about 5,000 feet or more and in non approved storage cabinets without proper ventilation, it becomes a fire hazard.

Surely any nitrate is a serious fire hazard. If 5,000 feet were to ignite in a vault that also contained other film elements it would place the cans around it at risk from heat damage. I have seen a film of a 1,000 foot reel burning in an oil drum: afterwards that drum was buckled in places. Multiply the volume of fuel by five and bear in mind that film cans are made of much thinner and softer metal than oil drums, and I would not like to see the effects of even a small nitrate fire on anything else it was sharing a vault with. Furthermore, if those cans around it were vented, the highly toxic off-gases would surely affect their contents.

It's certainly true that there are some film archives which are forced, due to lack of space, to store small collections of nitrate in a vault with other elements, but I have never seen this described as recommended practice.

BTW, I'm also a bit sceptical about the mantra which says that all film cans should be vented. If you have separate vaults for different film bases, all at the ideal temperature and RH and all with high volume air circulation (i.e. at least X changes of air per hour) then I can see that it would do a good job in getting rid of the offgases from decomposition. But if you have to keep different types of stock in the same vault, then with vented cans I wonder if there could be the risk that the gases from decomposing elements could accelerate the decomposition in elements that started out in a much better state.

quote:
After nitrate base films have been duplicated, they should be destroyed.

Most archives do not do this, because if you destory the original you're denying yourself the chance to produce a better quality dupe if and when more effective copying techniques become available...

quote:
Even after such copies have been satisfactorily made, the nitrate material, which may be the best photographic material available, is not discarded. If it is still in a usable condition, it is stored in a controlled environment awaiting further use - perhaps for copying on a second occasion, for instance, after improved preservation techniques have been developed.

Source: Henning Schou (ed.), FIAF Preservation Manual, 1st ed. (September 1989), 5.2.1a (p.20).

Again there's a financial issue here - only the larger and well-funded archives have the money to make new preservation dupes of the same nitrate originals twice - but I'd still feel cagey about destroying an original element in good condition. Over here, the British Film Institute will look after nitrate from the smaller public sector archives (such as the one I work for) on their behalf so thankfully we don't have to make such a stark choice.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-19-2002, 10:12 PM:

Leo:

Thanks for the comments. I believe the Kodak nitrate publication was written several years ago, when the value of archives trying to keep the original nitrate material after copying (assuming it was still in reasonably stable condition) was not fully recognized.