New reality show for the learning channel.
"Doomsday Photo Preppers"
Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI
So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004
Does seem kinda silly to panic about major color chemistry at this point in time, unless you're just trying to learn alternatives for the hypothetical long-haul. RA4 is mainstream at this point - all the
high-volume print units other than inkjet rely upon it. C-paper and RA4 are still a lot more cost effective than inkjet for commercial work, and can be optically printed as well. Still multiple sources
for the chemistry. C41 won't die until color neg film does worldwide, and there's no evidence of that
on the near hoizon. Fuji is still making and selling chrome film, and distributing it here, so E6 is still
required. Just because some neighborhoods might not offer these traditional film and paper services
like they once did does not imply the cumulative need has been reduced to the point of imminent
danger. Plenty of commercial use of all the above in my particular neigborhood.
E6 chemistry might be in danger, but IDK for sure. It may change, now that it is in the hands of Fuji alone.
I think E6 is in real danger, with no new labs willing to consider it as a service line, and the big labs with the monster Refremas unable to run enough film through them to control the process consistently.
Toronto had 10 labs some better than others minimum doing E6 not just 10 years ago, today Toronto Image Works is the only place I would send my E6.
I will be surprised that they continue with it for 2 more years.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
How about "Doomsday Digital Image Preservation - with film!"?
I'm less concerned with availability than I am with price. And how will RA4 stand up to the newer "dry process" papers? And don't underestimate the probability that environmental laws will be tightened against chemical processes as digital processes take greater hold (and gain more lobbying power). I'm convinced such legal trends hastened film's demise.
As long as there's a steady stream of chrome film still going out, I don't see how the matching chem
would be in danger. Fuji wouldn't cut off their right hand to spite their left. And someone will still have an incentive to process it, even if film has to be shipped for processing. I wouldn't extrapolate
Toronto as a universal pattern! But it does seem logical that E6 would go before C41, that is, unless
Kodak totally tanks much sooner than expected. And even in that scenario, it would take a few years before neg film dries up (which Fuji could hypothetically revive). You can't predict just everything. For all I know, aliens could land and steal all the world's silicon chips, and then we'd
have nothing but film.
There are a couple of ways to do this, one would be to use a laser to write digital information on B&W film, probably work best with the tabular-grain emulsions, you would need a write density no greater then 4 grains, this means a 25ISO or even a 10ISO film would work best, because the grains can be smaller. A reader would then consist of a scanner type mechanism that would read the image, and confirm whether a grain is ON (dark) or OFF (light). Lossless compression would be required, to minimize the amount of data stored.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
The question becomes, how many grains could you get in a given size of film, it's easy to be a 40MB file from a modern digital camera, if you can compress that to half, it's 20MB, if your storage area is 24x36 mm that is an area of 864mm requiring 24,273 pixels per mm at 4 grains per pixel you would need 97,090 grains per square mm, I don't know if that is doable or not.
PE of all the people here, your most likely to know how many grains per mm a modern 25ISO B&W T-grain emulsion would have....
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....
We are writing back digital files to film, have been doing so for a couple of years. Our purpose is for contact alt and contact silver purposes.
What we cannot do is provide a negative that can withstand enlarging. But for example with the same negative we have printed to 20 x24 optically and as well scanned and made film then contacted at the same size with equal quality of print on Ilford Warm Tone which is a glossy paper and unforgiving.
There are differences but they are not deal breakers.
Our main purpose for this silver film is archival purposes as any of the pictorio negatives we have seen 1. change in a couple of years 2. do not have the same blocking power.
and for those doing alt processes who will at some point need a service provider, who not only can produce the film but also uses it themselves for different processes .
Drew .. I am interested in dry chemicals , as indeed I plan to purchase a large quanitity of colour negative film and chemistry to match for at least 5-7 years of work, and not be bothered with price increases over that time... we have invested heavily in film cameras, scanners and output devices and would like to keep our work consistent with the gear we have. This project may require travel with a darkroom trailer much like Bill Schwab's and I want to be in a position to process as I go. May even bring the Carnie act close to your home town.
My wife and I tend to overshoot each time we go out and thinking that we would send it out to a local vendor to process is not an option financially , so scratch C41 chems sound very appealing.. I scratch mix most every thing else and I did not think C41 scratch mixing was an option until the posts in this thread point otherwise.
Basically as a lab owner , we get pricing that is very competitive for film, so a large purchase only makes sense.