Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,745   Posts: 1,515,656   Online: 761
      
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567
Results 61 to 69 of 69
  1. #61
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    time_t is a signed integer, so December 31, 1969 at 23:59:59 is -1, so it can handle any date back to about 1901. Sufficient for most purposes.

    While FAT does use a different format, what is the internal date/time representation within say a JPEG file? If it uses time_t then it becomes an issue in 2038. If it doesn't it does not matter.

    Funny thing is, my Konica FC-1 (35mm SLR) had no problem with Y2K and I doubt that 2038 will cause it grief either. I fully expect the FC-1 to still be in service in 2038.

    The time_t date/time process was adopted widely because it's a simple counter, most computers use an ADAC timer chip that advances the counter once per second, as a memory address. When you need a date and/or time software reads that address and simply converts it into a real date/time for display purposes, I would expect a lot of digital cameras do use it. I don't expect that any digital camera currently being used will still be in use in 2038 though (including my Canon Digital Rebel), so the point may be moot.
    wogster, on a related note, I've been hoping for an nstime_t for a while now. Purely nanoseconds since the epoch (let's say 2000:0101:0000). An 8 byte would give us huge amounts of range, even with nanoseconds (I think it was 500+ years or so). Would be nice not having to then monkey around with struct timeval/timespec, etc. and just use a flat nanosecond counter.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  2. #62
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    It would be nice to be able to figure out the type and age of some of my negative strips though that have the silly bar code thing along the bottom. While I do know how old most of them are due to my filing system, not so sure about the manufacturer and model for the colour stuff. The B&W I have mostly figured out, it helps that the film rebates today are largely the same as they were 30 years ago, when I started.
    The information on the other edge may be more useful, although it does vary by maker. There are charts which explain that bar code, which if I have read correctly contains a code for the film type, and also the frame number.

    US Patent 5,164,574 has some of the details.


    As afr as the Time_t, see the wikipedia entry, behaviour for negative time is system specific. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_t

  3. #63
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    wogster, on a related note, I've been hoping for an nstime_t for a while now. Purely nanoseconds since the epoch (let's say 2000:0101:0000). An 8 byte would give us huge amounts of range, even with nanoseconds (I think it was 500+ years or so). Would be nice not having to then monkey around with struct timeval/timespec, etc. and just use a flat nanosecond counter.
    Not that any of this has anything to do with analog photography what so ever, so we should stop now.....:rolleyes:
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  4. #64
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by cmacd123 View Post
    The information on the other edge may be more useful, although it does vary by maker. There are charts which explain that bar code, which if I have read correctly contains a code for the film type, and also the frame number.

    US Patent 5,164,574 has some of the details.


    As afr as the Time_t, see the wikipedia entry, behaviour for negative time is system specific. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_t
    I have some colour films that have a simple code like 54F2 and SA47, no manufacturer, no model number, nothing. Was hoping the bar code would be some help in figuring out what they were..... Mind you a few stored in good conditions are now so faded as to be pretty much useless, but.....

    At least Kodak had a couple of codes for Tri-X and a couple others for Plus-X, that were relatively well documented. Ilford was more helpful, FP4 simply said FP4, HP5 would say HP5. Some of the newer colour films do that now, as well. I don't shoot much colour film anymore, but am returning to shooting B&W again.....
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  5. #65
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    At least Kodak had a couple of codes for Tri-X and a couple others for Plus-X, that were relatively well documented. Ilford was more helpful, FP4 simply said FP4, HP5 would say HP5. Some of the newer colour films do that now, as well. I don't shoot much colour film anymore, but am returning to shooting B&W again.....
    Kodak did use the film code number for a while "Kodak 5031 film" but they usualy used the name or an abbreviation . The dot in the word "sa'fety" or "Ko'dak" indicated where the film was made - or at least packaged.

    If it is Back and white film, most have at least the name and or type shown somewhere in the edge code. It may be the brand name or just the speed particularly if you are dealing with private label stock. Fuji private label stock has something like 400-36 in small dot matrix type on both their color and black and white private label.

    AGFA for the last several years had a BIG edge print, which is now showing up on some Ilford stock as Harmon apparently bought one of AGFA's packaging lines out of the liquidation. the private label Agfa just had the speed (400/27) for example. (although I recall buying some COSTCO private Label AGFA which had the costco brand on the edge.

    If you are looking at colour film, the makers would put coloured bars in the perforation area to indicate what version so that the negative could be printed on the right settings. Ferrania went as far as symbols in that area.

    Forte put the emulsion number in the space between the perfs on the lower edge of the film, where you will see it on Classic Pan, Forte, or Arista edu Value Line.

    Once you identify one makers way - you can often spot it an other rolls. (but watch for things like the packing line changing hands.)

  6. #66
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by cmacd123 View Post
    Kodak did use the film code number for a while "Kodak 5031 film" but they usualy used the name or an abbreviation . The dot in the word "sa'fety" or "Ko'dak" indicated where the film was made - or at least packaged.

    If it is Back and white film, most have at least the name and or type shown somewhere in the edge code. It may be the brand name or just the speed particularly if you are dealing with private label stock. Fuji private label stock has something like 400-36 in small dot matrix type on both their color and black and white private label.

    AGFA for the last several years had a BIG edge print, which is now showing up on some Ilford stock as Harmon apparently bought one of AGFA's packaging lines out of the liquidation. the private label Agfa just had the speed (400/27) for example. (although I recall buying some COSTCO private Label AGFA which had the costco brand on the edge.

    If you are looking at colour film, the makers would put coloured bars in the perforation area to indicate what version so that the negative could be printed on the right settings. Ferrania went as far as symbols in that area.

    Forte put the emulsion number in the space between the perfs on the lower edge of the film, where you will see it on Classic Pan, Forte, or Arista edu Value Line.

    Once you identify one makers way - you can often spot it an other rolls. (but watch for things like the packing line changing hands.)
    Great information. I think I might be inclined to create a page with pictures of roll marker codes so that we can have more to correlate from. I'd figure all it will take are just scans or digital shots of a few frames from a strip along with the manufacturer/emulsion type.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  7. #67
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by cmacd123 View Post
    Kodak did use the film code number for a while "Kodak 5031 film" but they usualy used the name or an abbreviation . The dot in the word "sa'fety" or "Ko'dak" indicated where the film was made - or at least packaged.

    If it is Back and white film, most have at least the name and or type shown somewhere in the edge code. It may be the brand name or just the speed particularly if you are dealing with private label stock. Fuji private label stock has something like 400-36 in small dot matrix type on both their color and black and white private label.

    AGFA for the last several years had a BIG edge print, which is now showing up on some Ilford stock as Harmon apparently bought one of AGFA's packaging lines out of the liquidation. the private label Agfa just had the speed (400/27) for example. (although I recall buying some COSTCO private Label AGFA which had the costco brand on the edge.

    If you are looking at colour film, the makers would put coloured bars in the perforation area to indicate what version so that the negative could be printed on the right settings. Ferrania went as far as symbols in that area.

    Forte put the emulsion number in the space between the perfs on the lower edge of the film, where you will see it on Classic Pan, Forte, or Arista edu Value Line.

    Once you identify one makers way - you can often spot it an other rolls. (but watch for things like the packing line changing hands.)
    I don't know why if it's Fujifilm Superia 200 that they can't put that in the upper rebate which is often empty or just has some goofy numbers in it (too short for an emulsion number) that mean nothing to anyone other then the film's maker. Ilford has managed to put FP4/HP5/PanF/XP2 in the rebate forever.

    If it's a model number, why can't companies publish the numbers and what they correlate to? About the only way to do it, is to write down what the film is when you send it off, and then check the rebate on return and match things up, doesn't help if you took the photos in 1989 though....
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  8. #68
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    I don't know why if it's Fujifilm Superia 200 that they can't put that in the upper rebate which is often empty or just has some goofy numbers in it (too short for an emulsion number) that mean nothing to anyone other then the film's maker. Ilford has managed to put FP4/HP5/PanF/XP2 in the rebate forever.
    .
    Fuji Puts the speed and # of exposures in the edge print ie 100-24, 100-36, 200-24 etc.

    They do this even with "private label" film which of course they don't want to put their name on. Film sold under their own brand does say FUJI every few frames. They also put the emulsion number on the film.

    BTW1

    I just got a roll of Fomapan 100 bulk, and it has no edge print that I could detect.

    BTW2

    I noticed that the Legacy Pro 100 film looks to be Fuji made , (same cans, printing of expiry date on box, same general edge print) but the film base seems to be a different colour My darkroom work is not scientific enough to be able to spot other differences.

  9. #69
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by cmacd123 View Post
    I noticed that the Legacy Pro 100 film looks to be Fuji made , (same cans, printing of expiry date on box, same general edge print) but the film base seems to be a different colour My darkroom work is not scientific enough to be able to spot other differences.
    Aside from any minor base differences (why the sadness?), LP100 is *definitely* ACROS100.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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