American Cinematographer - February 1985 - 91

Timothy Tigerman

Laboratory
Microfilm Test
What began many years ago as an
errand of curiosity, has finally developed
into a new application of an old idea.
When I first began developing and print¬

ing photographs, I tried anything that
was new, searching out obscure prod¬
ucts and formulas in my quest for excel¬
lence. German films, aerial film, high
contrast film
anything that would
yield fine grain. Push, pull, over- and
under-exposure, stain developers, pyro
made up from the raw chemistry.
Pyro developer was made
from a formula found by a photographer
I assisted when he got curious too. It
yielded better results, but with in¬
creased effort. I never limited my experi¬
ments, commercial projects were
always done with standard materials,
but the tests could involve anything.
Copy films with an A.S.A. of 0.5; would
produce an exposure wide open, aiming
at the sun, but little else. I tried using
print films taken from jobs done on my
optical printer with some success. The
industry seemed to be moving in the
opposite direction towards faster and
grainier.
-

Then
started

I

met

microfilm.

I

using it when the need arose to

have

high and medium contrast origi¬

a

nal for title work
standardize.

which

I

could

Looking for an inexpensive
make reversed 35mm slides to
insert into 16mm film on the optical
printer, I discovered microfilm filled the
bill. It held up to enlargement, and with
a change of exposure and developers,
would yield a continous tone image.
way to

The results at first were as
variable as the contrast. The tone devel¬

opment process was twice as long and
more critical than with standard films.
Because of this work I was hired at
Warner Bros., in the microfilm depart¬
ment where we shoot, process and print
microfilm. When it came time for War¬
ners to update their processor, I bought
their old Prostar to further my own
research.
This enabled me to expand

my

search to include 35mm motion pic¬
I believed the remarkable resolv¬

ing the words 'Warner Bros.' would
lend credibility to my request for sample
film and equipment. They did.
Kodak and Fuji both donated

samples and Howard Anderson Co.
would supply a camera and crew if I
could work around their schedule. A
crucial problem arose when the samples
arrived. They were both Kodak standard

perforations, and most rental

cameras
used Bell and Howell standard. Luckily,
the Mitchell camera Howard Anderson
had adapted by Fries Engineering to
take an electronic motor and video as¬
sist was built to operate using Kodak

perfs. These
ments,

saved

were

50-60

used for effects

year

old

cameras.

move¬

I

was

by the perfect camera.
Bad registration could have

cancelled some of the resolution needed
show a finer image. I had been told

to

only

an optical printer camera would run
Kodak perfs without jiggle that might

enough to
noticeable difference. By Kodak

destroy the resolution. Anyone who let
me run a printer camera at sound speed
might have to rebuild it shortly after.

standards, Plus-x will resolve 50 lines

Too much to ask. Howard solved that

millimeter. Microfilm would resolve
between 200 and 300 Ipm, better than
most lenses. I called around town, hop¬

problem.

tures.

ing

power

make

a

per

of microfilm

was

Meanwhile,

project I

was

working

on

a

short story

found

a

backer
Left: A

print from
negative.
Right: A print from <
microfilm negative.
the Plus-X

March 1985

American

Cinematographer

89
American Cinematographer - February 1985

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - February 1985
