Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,450   Posts: 1,570,114   Online: 929
      
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 81
  1. #61

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,188
    Ha... me too. I'm glad to still be getting film!

    WRT "waste" I guess I'm much less worried abou thte possibilities of optimizing waste (maximizing efficiency) only becuase I knw that there is much more waste that happens further up the chain. Although 75% of the fuel in our cars may get wasted... that is a small portion of the waste that occurs during delivery, manufacturing, and mining the raw products that beome gas. Same with film.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boston
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    140
    It depends on how you frame the 'issue'. I capture on 4x5 image on 12,900 sq mm when I shoot large format, and only use 2,150 sq mm of film (including the waste) when I shoot 35mm. So large format seems wasteful, but I intend to keep shooting it.

  3. #63
    C.poulton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    23

    35mm film and how much we are required to waste

    I've often wondered how much wastage there is in the manufacture of film, be it 35mm, 120 or sheet? My understanding is the you start off with large sheets of film which is cut to suit different formats at the end of the coating process. How much film is 'lost' during the cutting process?


    Christian

  4. #64
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,917
    You also have wastage in in the emulsionmaking and coating stage. Anyway, all wasted materials go to a recycling system, which even in case one could extract all material and re-use means costs.

  5. #65
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,303
    zsas: Thank you for correctly elucidating my points and you do have a point of your own: NO, probably the rapid-fire exposures of the eighties and nineties would have had to have been compromised. The large, double sprocket holes mattered with this.

    And von Hoegh: surely we are not 'required' to waste this much film if we do not use 35mm film. That 'requirement' becomes a moot point; I was inferring 'given that we use it'.

    Seriously, folks, is there anything really wrong with innocently 'noticing' the rather amazing fact that almost half the film in 35mm does not form an image? That assessment does not have to mean that I am imparting lamentation along with real tears and angst or threatening revolution! It's simply a fact that I thought would be interesting to 'notice'. There is nothing that now has to change as a result ot 'god' David bringing this to unversal attention. And, as an advantage, productive analyses of just what constitutes 'waste' were forthcoming. Thus, we all learn and widen our horizons. Nothing ill intended. - David Lyga

  6. #66

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,188
    Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post
    ... Seriously, folks, is there anything really wrong with innocently 'noticing' the rather amazing fact that almost half the film in 35mm does not form an image? ...
    No there isn't. Neither is there anything wrong with pointing out a different opinion. It is all discussion... which is good.

  7. #67

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post

    And von Hoegh: surely we are not 'required' to waste this much film if we do not use 35mm film. That 'requirement' becomes a moot point; I was inferring 'given that we use it'.

    Seriously, folks, is there anything really wrong with innocently 'noticing' the rather amazing fact that almost half the film in 35mm does not form an image?
    But all the 35mm film is neccesary to the film functioning properly in the camera and thereby forming an image that we can project, scan, or enlarge.

    The engine in a car wastes at least 75% of the gasoline we put in the tank. This inefficiency is inherent in Otto cycle engines, and according to the specific fuel consumption curves of dynamometer tests published in the 11th edition Brittanica, it hasn't changed in over 100 years, because it can't change. I find that appalling from an engineering and conservation standpoint. But I don't find it prevents me using a car when I need one, because there's no other option. Same with 35mm.

    It seems to me you're putting a lot of energy into remarking upon the very very obvious, while ignoring the point that there's no other option if you want to use that type of camera.
    Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 01-17-2013 at 12:44 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #68
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,917
    But our minds are flexible, so can a type of film be changed, as has be done in the past. As one can ask why still type 120, a film quite nasty in some respect, is still manufatzured, one can also ask why the industry stuck to type 135 in spite being to their disadvantage. This is a valid question to me.

  9. #69
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    It took me a awhile to figure out what was so grating about David's post, I've finally figured it out!!

    Rhetorical Tautology
    A rhetorical tautology is defined as a series of statements that form an argument, whereby the statements are constructed in such a way that the truth of the proposition is guaranteed or that, by defining a dissimilar or synonymous term in terms of another self-referentially, the truth of the proposition or explanation cannot be disputed. Consequently, the statement conveys no useful information regardless of its length or complexity making it unfalsifiable.
    Per
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(rhetoric)
    Andy

  10. #70

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by zsas View Post
    It took me a awhile to figure out what was so grating about David's post, I've finally figured it out!!

    Rhetorical Tautology

    Per
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(rhetoric)
    Thank you, I was trying to recall that term.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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