Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,224   Posts: 1,532,568   Online: 1059
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lobsta
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    566
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertP
    I don't shoot 12.00 a sheet film but my cheaper negatives are just as important to me and I'm plenty comfortable with the Apollo tissue.
    First of all, please don't infer from my film price comment that I think my negatives are more important than anyone else's. My remark grew out of the idea that if you're going to all the trouble and expense of ULF, then don't scrimp with negative storage and risk the entire investment.

    Robert, your Light Impressions polyester film suggestion is a good one and I'll raise you. I called Light Impressions and they confirmed (by trying it while I waited on the phone) that the 3 mil polyester will take a hard crease fairly easily. So for 12x20 I could get the 20x24 sheets and fold them in half to get the size I need without having to tape it.

    But then I checked their "fold-lock" print sleeves. The 14x18 sleeves are a close fit to 14x17. They could be cut down to 14x17 since the crease and the fold-lock are along the long dimension. For 12x20 negatives if I don't want to use 16x20 sleeve full size, it could also be cut down. But being again as how the fold-lock is along the long dimension, I would loose that function and simply have a 12x20 folder open on 3 sides. But that's what I wanted in the first place! So it looks like this option is going to work for my needs. I plan to cut both sizes down to the actual negative size so I can use Hollinger's ULF envelopes and boxes. Even though I've griped about their cost, it's worth it to me, not only for protecting the negative, but also because I need all the help I can get staying organized. If the envelope cost turns out to be a killer, I can make an outer sleeve out of Apollo paper or similar.
    My Verito page

    Anyone can appreciate a fine print. But it takes a real photographer to appreciate a fine negative.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    621
    Quote Originally Posted by wfwhitaker
    Michael,

    To which "folders" do you refer? Are they the same as I linked to above or another product?
    I am not exactly sure if we are in fact talking about the same product. I called Catherine this afternoon and was told that she will be back in the office on Monday. When I get an answer I will let you know.

    Cheers!

  3. #13
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by wfwhitaker
    First of all, please don't infer from my film price comment that I think my negatives are more important than anyone else's. My remark grew out of the idea that if you're going to all the trouble and expense of ULF, then don't scrimp with negative storage and risk the entire investment.

    Robert, your Light Impressions polyester film suggestion is a good one and I'll raise you. I called Light Impressions and they confirmed (by trying it while I waited on the phone) that the 3 mil polyester will take a hard crease fairly easily. So for 12x20 I could get the 20x24 sheets and fold them in half to get the size I need without having to tape it.

    But then I checked their "fold-lock" print sleeves. The 14x18 sleeves are a close fit to 14x17. They could be cut down to 14x17 since the crease and the fold-lock are along the long dimension. For 12x20 negatives if I don't want to use 16x20 sleeve full size, it could also be cut down. But being again as how the fold-lock is along the long dimension, I would loose that function and simply have a 12x20 folder open on 3 sides. But that's what I wanted in the first place! So it looks like this option is going to work for my needs. I plan to cut both sizes down to the actual negative size so I can use Hollinger's ULF envelopes and boxes. Even though I've griped about their cost, it's worth it to me, not only for protecting the negative, but also because I need all the help I can get staying organized. If the envelope cost turns out to be a killer, I can make an outer sleeve out of Apollo paper or similar.
    Will, I wasn't trying to infer that you felt your negatives were any more valuable than anyone else's. My comment was meant to state regardless of film price it is what is on that film is what is of value. Be it a 35mm negative or a sheet of tmax 400 20x24 they all should be afforded the same treatment because it is your vision that is captured and of importance and not the initial investment of film. If film price scared me I would have never got into ULF. So any negative regardless of size or price is an investment. I suggested LI polyester material because it seems you want a clear plastic type material to store your negatives, like what is used in the smaller formats. I find it no more protective or even as protective than Apollo paper which is buffered and P.A.T. tested. I handle my negatives carefully so protective from atmospheric conditions is more important to me than protection from handling. When sliding the negative out of a film type folder you need to be concerned that the coners of the folder don't scratch the negative or any burrs that are on the edges after you cut them to size don't damage the negative also. This is not a problem with the soft Apollo tissue. I suggested the LI polyester film as an alternative for a 3.00 negative sleeve which I think is outrageous if you're exposing around 300 ULF negatives a year. But I was just trying to save you a few pennies so there is no need to "raise" me. A simple thank you would have been suffice but also not necessary.

  4. #14
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Will, If you go the polyester film route, run your burnishing tool down the edges after you cut them to size.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lobsta
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    566
    Robert,

    Oh, the limitations of electronic text media in expressing the range of human thought!....

    I'm going to try the Apollo tissue. I already have some of that on hand. Your comment about plastic sleeve corners scratching negatives is a good point. That's in part why I wanted to find something open on three sides. It can be opened like a book and the negative inserted or removed with little to no sliding as with other sleeves. The clear sleeve allows me to look at the negative on a light box less chance of scratching.

    Thanks for the note on burnishing the polyester film. I hadn't thought about it, but it does seem likely that it might need "deburring".
    My Verito page

    Anyone can appreciate a fine print. But it takes a real photographer to appreciate a fine negative.

  6. #16
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by wfwhitaker
    Robert,

    Oh, the limitations of electronic text media in expressing the range of human thought!....

    I'm going to try the Apollo tissue. I already have some of that on hand. Your comment about plastic sleeve corners scratching negatives is a good point. That's in part why I wanted to find something open on three sides. It can be opened like a book and the negative inserted or removed with little to no sliding as with other sleeves. The clear sleeve allows me to look at the negative on a light box less chance of scratching.

    Thanks for the note on burnishing the polyester film. I hadn't thought about it, but it does seem likely that it might need "deburring".
    Will, You just may need to do a check for burrs with each sheet of the polyester film, they may be fine. It depends on how they were cut and finished. Being open on three sides is a good point as it eliminates sliding the negative. You could actually just slide the clear film folder with negative, inside of the Apollo paper folder open end in first and it would give you the best of both worlds. Robert

  7. #17
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wooten
    Hello WF,

    I have just started using 16 x 20 clear open plastic envelopes for 14 x 17 negs, they are archival, they are folded and the open side-the 20" side seals with a small overlap that seems to work well. I like it because I do not have to slide the neg in....I am hoping to find an envelope to insert the 16 x 12 cover in...possible an xray envelope. I am also using them (the 16 x 20) for 7 x 17. I got them from Fred Newman at the View Camera Store, he is an APUG sponsor.

    I am hoping also that I can print through this for gum etc.
    Dave, I think it would print through the material just fine. I think the only problem would be with negative registration. Getting an accurate registration for multiple coats of gum may be a little tricky with the negative in a sleeve. Maybe by taping it down inside the sleeve before you use the registration pins on the outside. If it works please let me know how you do it. Thanks, Robert

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lobsta
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    566
    Not to sound brusque, but why would you go to all the trouble and expense of using ULF and then print through the negative sleeve? Am I missing something here?
    My Verito page

    Anyone can appreciate a fine print. But it takes a real photographer to appreciate a fine negative.

  9. #19
    Dave Wooten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vegas/mysterious mohave co. az, Big Pine Key Fla.
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,713
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by wfwhitaker View Post
    Not to sound brusque, but why would you go to all the trouble and expense of using ULF and then print through the negative sleeve? Am I missing something here?
    Will, for adding layers of gum etc it works fine and keeps from damaging the neg...Irving Penn used a similar technique on his platinum portraits-I think- for silver contact-and Pl Pal- usually just straight to the paper..

  10. #20
    RobertP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,130
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wooten View Post
    Will, for adding layers of gum etc it works fine and keeps from damaging the neg...Irving Penn used a similar technique on his platinum portraits-I think- for silver contact-and Pl Pal- usually just straight to the paper..
    Dave, I think if your Gum is properly applied and dry you won't need to worry about damaging the negative. Keep in mind if it is in a sleeve then you are printing through two layers of mylar (or what have you). That's not to say it can't be done. I just like to keep possible variables to a minimum.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin