Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,546   Posts: 1,572,948   Online: 1023
      
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 65
  1. #21
    Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    779
    Images
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by railwayman3 View Post
    but why oh why did we lose the modern plastic mounts and boxes which Lausanne provided?
    Interesting about the plastic mounts, as when Kodak Canada and latterly Kodak US did the processing they always used card mounts. I've never seen Kodachrome in North America mounted in anything but cardboard mounts.

    Unlike some of the others here, I've never had a problem with Dwaynes processing either, but then I send my films in through Kodak who forwards them to Dwaynes, rather than using the mail.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,601
    ^^^Craig

    Kodak UK used card mounts right through until sometime in the 1980's-ish(?). They were quite durable, easy to handle and didn't seem to shed any significant dust....some photographers didn't like the later plastic mounts which had a waxy feel, and I believe that the Pro versions of the films continued to be returned in card mounts. Dwaynes card mounts seem very flimsy and fiddly at the side of the old Kodak cards.
    Lausanne used (IMO) a better form of plastic mount.

    All Kodachrome regularly sold in the UK has always, so far as I know, been process paid by Kodak, and, again SFAIK, there has never been an independent service. Until the closures, the supplied mailers carried a long list of the Kodak labs in all the various countries and could be used anywhere in the world. They now have only the Lausanne address, and, oddly enough, say "Kodak Processing not available in the USA".

    Kodak E6 has never been sold processing-included. Some of the "amateur" Fujichromes are sold with or without "official" Fuji processing.

  3. #23
    Aurum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Landrover Central UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    923
    Certainly the UK market for slides has always been more receptive for process paid film for the non-pro side.
    Kodachrome and Agfachrome were always process paid, and the Fuji E6 products just carry on the tradition.
    Its only the states that forced Kodak to stop doing process paid Kodachrome, which IMHO was a retrograde step for the amateur market in that territory.

    I always preferred the agfachrome slide carriers to the kodak ones, as they were much better made and being colour coded (one side navy blue, the other white) easier to put into slide viewers in subdued lighting
    "Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by railwayman3 View Post
    ^^^^MMfoto
    Others have written that Dwaynes are receptive to customer queries and comments....have you taken the problems up with them direct? And would Kodak Customer Service be interested, after all Dwaynes are their "Official Licencees"?
    I've been meaning to write a letter actually, cc'd to Kodak. After my last order arrived I was a bit too hot for a phone call, frankly. Also, my only experience with customer service has been Dwayne's calling to question a "special" request I made:

    I sent in the above mentioned nine rolls with a note saying that two rolls were images of the night sky and to please not cut if the frames are not visible. Someone called me, I'm still not sure why, sounding terribly irritated saying repeatedly that this would "slow production," and that they'd have to pull my film from "production" and have "someone" inspect it. The phrase "slow production" was used repeatedly. Honestly, the correct response from any lab worth it's salt is: of course, we would never cut the film if we can't see where the images begin and end.

    So I haven't been exactly inspired to pick up the phone. I'll eventually write a letter, but it is just a tad frustrating that the only K-14 processor, worldwide, appears interested only in "production."
    Last edited by MMfoto; 09-05-2008 at 05:58 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #25
    accozzaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweet home Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    By default, I request that any film I have processed anywhere not be cut. This goes for KR64 rolls I had sent to Dwayne's. There were no problems: the Dwayne's rolls were returned with a paper lining the length of the film strip, and then coiled within a 35mm-fitted cardboard tube segment.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    East Rutherford, NJ
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    40
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kodachrome64 View Post
    Their scan CDs suck terribly though, so don't even bother. And they take an extra 3 days to do scans if you select that option, so I can do it myself in much less time.
    Are the scans really that bad.. I plan on sending them a couple rolls shortly and I don't have a scanner readily available..

  7. #27
    accozzaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweet home Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    Just take them to your local pharmacy/chemist photo lab. Find out if they have a Noritsu machine that can scan your Kodachrome rolls. One caveat: you can only get this done if you ask Dwayne's not to cut your roll. The upside is better access to consistent scanning results if you use the same place you trust, and you can cut your own if you've had bad experiences with them in the past. The downside is you'll have to get your own slide sleeves if you plan to use them that way.

  8. #28
    AutumnJazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Fairfield, Connecticut
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    730
    Find a local pro lab or mail them out to one.

    I've seen the way 1-hour labs handel photos...I would never, ever, ever use them for anything.

  9. #29
    accozzaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sweet home Toronto, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    I guess I'm fortunate: my local pharmacy photo lab manager has been working at this for about a dozen years and actually enjoys it when I bring in rolls for scanning. And it's decently priced: $3 for the first roll in a batch, and $1 for each subsequent roll (until the CD-R media is full). He also sometimes brings in some of his darkroom work of fibre b/w prints to show, which clearly supports that he loves what he does. Were it not for that, I'd be taking my rolls for scanning to the pro place where I have my E-6 processed and spend twice to thrice what I would around the corner. As a uni student, I look for the best value for the quality whenever I can!

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,601
    Quote Originally Posted by MMfoto View Post
    Also, my only experience with customer service has been Dwayne's calling to question a "special" request I made:

    I sent in the above mentioned nine rolls with a note saying that two rolls were images of the night sky and to please not cut if the frames are not visible. Someone called me, I'm still not sure why, sounding terribly irritated saying repeatedly that this would "slow production," and that they'd have to pull my film from "production" and have "someone" inspect it. The phrase "slow production" was used repeatedly. Honestly, the correct response from any lab worth it's salt is: of course, we would never cut the film if we can't see where the images begin and end.

    ."
    That's poor service.

    Astro-photos can't be that unusual for Dwaynes....I've done them myself, and it can be difficult to see the framing on 35mm, both on slides and negs.

    I could (just about) understand their issue in pulling out an individual film from a continuous process, but surely their correct response should have been to simply suggest returning the whole film uncut to avoid any problems.

    And, in my own business experience, "slowing production" would be an inexcusable excuse to make to a customer....production is important, of course, but customer satisfaction is the priority in service industries. No customers, no production, no profit! And I don't have the impression that Dwaynes are "snowed-under" with K-14 work.

    There is no excuse for mis-cutting or mis-mounting slides of everyday subjects. I've seen modern slide-mounting machines operating in a pro-lab, and any semi-skilled operator could work them successfully...always assuming that they are interested and/or not asleep! The machines even pick up uneven film spacing, e.g. a camera problem or re-loaded film.

    I'll be interested to know the response you get from Dwaynes and Kodak.
    Last edited by railwayman3; 09-07-2008 at 04:27 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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