View Full Version : A Christmas Cookie from Santa
03-13-2011, 03:12 PM
I'll leave the coating of anything narrower than 120 to someone else. I may not even get into 120. IDK yet as the support supply is not huge, at least for me.
03-13-2011, 03:14 PM
IIRC it's available off alibaba.. in huge quantity though. Same from Lucky Film, you can get bopet and acetate film
03-13-2011, 03:22 PM
Well, I'll make the point more strongly then!
Since defects go up rapidly as the format becomes smaller, I will limit myself to what can be coated in the home darkroom. I have already determined that 4x5 can be coated with good results wrt defect rate, and I may also run the test on 120, but knowing the difficulties inherent in coating anything narrower, I will not be doing it. That leaves out 35mm, 16mm and 8mm!
03-13-2011, 07:42 PM
couldnt you just cut down a larger format though?
03-13-2011, 07:47 PM
I think you missed the point. A tiny dust speck on a 4x5 is a boulder in 35mm! The size of the format is what counts. In addition, the sheet sizes use a different thickness support than 120 and 35mm.
But you have lower number of those defects per frame when the frame is smaller ;).
Some people think that their image is wasted if there is a single dust speck or defect, regardless of its size. So, they would have higher probability of a "good" frame when the frame is smaller ;D.
Personally, defects don't bother me that much.
I had a defect in my first coating that was a 35 mm frame. It was a pinhole about 4 mm in size in the final 8x10" print. If it was a 6x7 frame, I might have four defects 2 mm each (again in a 8x10" print), or 4x5" coating might have seven defects 1,2 mm each. OTOH, bigger formats are often enlarged more and people expect more from them, quickly rendering the defects almost as annoying as in smaller formats IMHO.
03-14-2011, 11:15 AM
Interesting. I find that smaller formats are more often enlarged, but the enlargement at a proper viewing distance is about the same as perceived. In other words, I may make an 8x10 and hold it at arms length, but I mount a 16x20 on the wall and view it such that the image subtends the same viewing angle as the hand held 8x10.
OTOH, if almost every frame has one or more defect, and if you enlarge every 35, but only contact print your 8x10s then the 35 will appear worse.
03-14-2011, 01:34 PM
Far better than the project shot on Super 16mm where there was a hair in the gate at the very top, only a small part of the frame...but can you imagine fixing every single frame as opposed to a single photo? :/
03-14-2011, 03:00 PM
I'm afraid that what you would actually get is a whole roll of 35mm (or smaller) in which just about each frame was peppered with tiny random defects. Some of these would be due to the length of film to be coated. That is why I would also omit 220 film from my efforts.
I think it fair to say that I have tried it and it is very difficult to get defect free coatings and the defects become more apparent as the size of the film becomes smaller.
04-28-2011, 11:56 AM
Just an update.
A trial run of the DVD is being made on Monday of next week. I am having 20 sets made for evaluation by those of our GEH lunch group who wish to test it. I just signed off on the covers and disk labels.
Still working on the book though, but I have run tests on the new mixer for making larger batches of emulsions or better batches of smaller ones.
04-28-2011, 10:54 PM
Congratulations - that's certainly a landmark in your project! Keep up the great work!
04-29-2011, 11:57 AM
I echo Kirk's comments and am looking forward to the book and DVD.
04-29-2011, 12:59 PM
Disk 2 was completed this AM with labels and covers. The master from Disk 1 had an unrecoverable fault at 43 minutes. I had to take them a new master for Disk 1 this AM to fix things. I saw Disk 2 on the finishing line.
Thanks for your interest. So far, Kirk is the only APUG member that has viewed them. I hope to give my GEH lunch friends a chance to see it when we have lunch this Wednesday. I will have them at the October workshop at GEH.
05-03-2011, 12:26 AM
I'm certain the GEH fellows will enjoy the DVD as much as I did!
05-03-2011, 10:40 AM
I just returned from the plant here where they burn DVDs. I have 2 boxes of disks and I will be testing them out in a short while. I will be giving some out tomorrow at our lunch at GEH.
05-03-2011, 10:43 AM
Are these pressed discs or DVD-Rs?
05-03-2011, 11:42 AM
These are DVD-Rs. They have a complete "dress" for sale and are NTSC. The source is scanned and error corrected between layers using the scanning analysis and is stored on a hard drive. It is written at high speed to a duplicator about the size of an automobile. A former Kodak / IBM employee is product manager and I got to see the entire process personally.
I can get the disks in PAL format as well if sales justify it.
I just finished watching most of Disk #1 and it looks just fine!
05-03-2011, 12:01 PM
PAL discs are obviously an anvantage for European and UK purchasers; the quality can be higher as well depending on the origination format.
05-03-2011, 12:22 PM
I've been viewing Disk #2 and so far it looks just fine.
The original material was shot in HD, onto tape, and using a 3 sensor Sony camera. The quality is quite high.
The engineer at the duplicating service give me reason to believe that the NTSC disks can be viewed on any computer, but that it cannot be viewed on TV sets in Europe or England. So, there is some choice or option here and it will increase the cost of the PAL disks due to the conversion.
05-21-2011, 09:27 PM
No bluray edition? ;)
Most new TVs since 10-20 years ago here also have NTSC modes in them. Most DVD players should output the appropriate format to the TV anyway.