PDA

View Full Version : A Christmas Cookie from Santa



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Ray Rogers
03-12-2011, 02:21 PM
What sort of problems might be present in a print that cannot be seen and why should it be of concern if it is not actually visable?

Ray Rogers
03-12-2011, 02:25 PM
Just consider the cost of Silver Nitrate today!

PE
Ok, Gotcha.

What do you pay for a pound these days?
Has it gone up that much?

Photo Engineer
03-12-2011, 03:08 PM
Well, I'll give you another specific example anyhow.

For production, you need LOTS of drying space to make a run worthwhile. For personal space you may need to only dry 1 or a dozen sheets. Drying space takes space that is dust, lint and chemical free and DARK for several hours. I can do that hands down here at home for my own needs of about 1 to 20 sheets per run, but doing it for 100 sheets or more would present me with a problem. Doing it for huge production type runs in large sheets would be a REAL problem!

And, it would have to be economical if you were to make any profit.

PE

Photo Engineer
03-12-2011, 03:10 PM
Ok, Gotcha.

What do you pay for a pound these days?
Has it gone up that much?

http://stores.photoformulary.com/Categories.bok or about $475 / #

JOSarff
03-12-2011, 04:31 PM
Photographs will examples of common mistakes would let the user realized that they are not alone and headed toward the right path.

Steve

Steve:

Photographs of good coatings would be betterI think. If yours doesn't look like that, something's wrong. Besides, Ron's book wil lhave something no other emulsion book has ever had, pictures of emulsions.

Joe

Athiril
03-12-2011, 04:55 PM
$22/10g here.. about 3x the cost of raw silver, over twice the cost as above ;(

Anyway, possible to dry quicker with an infrared lamp or circulated air?

Photo Engineer
03-12-2011, 05:37 PM
Athiril, any of that is possible as long as you have the space! That is critical. And it must be dark, dust free and lint free. So, assume that I coat 100 sheets of 30x40 film or paper, now where to put it and how high can I stack it. Well, it would stack from floor to ceiling in a 10 foot high room leaving about 1" between sheets for air to circulate. That isn't enough!

You guys are not thinking PRODUCTION and are not thinking PROFIT. You are thinking home DR work. Yeah, I can modify a room at great expense, make maybe 20 - 50 sheets at a time and hand cut them. Then I sell them for $1 / sheet and take a loss of about $10 / sheet in costs and labor.

PE

Athiril
03-13-2011, 03:36 PM
Given your other thread.. I was thinking 120 and 35mm (or even 16mm/S16mm). If it can dry quickly enough to be moved slowly and be collected onto a reel.

Friend bought a Super America 35 a while back and I was impressed with it enough to want one too.

Photo Engineer
03-13-2011, 04:12 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.

PE

Athiril
03-13-2011, 04:14 PM
IIRC it's available off alibaba.. in huge quantity though. Same from Lucky Film, you can get bopet and acetate film

Photo Engineer
03-13-2011, 04:22 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!

PE

Athiril
03-13-2011, 08:42 PM
couldnt you just cut down a larger format though?

Photo Engineer
03-13-2011, 08:47 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.

PE

hrst
03-14-2011, 02:28 AM
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.

Photo Engineer
03-14-2011, 12:15 PM
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.

PE

Athiril
03-14-2011, 02:34 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? :/

Photo Engineer
03-14-2011, 04:00 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.

PE

Photo Engineer
04-28-2011, 12:56 PM
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.

PE

Kirk Keyes
04-28-2011, 11:54 PM
Congratulations - that's certainly a landmark in your project! Keep up the great work!

Kirk

JOSarff
04-29-2011, 12:57 PM
I echo Kirk's comments and am looking forward to the book and DVD.

Joe