Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,759   Posts: 1,484,011   Online: 1176
      
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    967
    Images
    1
    It's a place that was touting their willingness to do such short strips, on Flickr. They do sound concerned that if all they get is one-off 36-exposure rolls it would be too much hassle. Sending them lots of rolls at once would be better, and my offer to send them 100-exposure rolls from my Canon bulk back had them even more excited.

    Sending them the film in cartridges would be no problem. When I expressed a desire to get the cartridges back I did get some pushback but hey, those reloadable carts aren't cheap and probably won't be made forever! So maybe using used carts from a minilab or something might be a better plan.

    Still trying to find time to shoot a bunch of test rolls so we can go through this whole process and find out if it's viable... from both a technical/hassle standpoint, and a cost standpoint.

    Duncan

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    967
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by thegman View Post
    Sounds like excellent fun to try out those movie films. I've got no interest in bulk loading though, so if they could also provide a service in which they sold pre-made 135 canisters loaded with that film, I'd certainly buy some.
    There's a guy selling exactly that on That Auction Site right now. 4 rolls for $30 plus shipping. That seems high to me relative to the cost of the actual raw film, but if it saves you having to deal with a bulk loader, etc. then maybe it's worth it. Sounds like this is film he had kicking around for a while, not an ongoing service he's providing, but it's not the first time I've seen someone selling similar stuff there.

    Duncan

  3. #23
    michaelbsc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,090
    Images
    5
    Walgreens and CVS locally will give me as many cartridges as I can stand. Problem is that it is cut short enough that reloading just by taping the butt ends together is difficult at best.



    When I cut my own film in my darkroom I usually leave a long enough tail that reloading that cartridge is simple.
    Last edited by michaelbsc; 05-13-2011 at 10:01 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Michael Batchelor
    Industrial Informatics, Inc.
    www.industrialinformatics.com

    The camera catches light. The photographer catches life.

  4. #24
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,400
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    Not to discourage you, but that seems to point to DPUG to me, since the information about this service is of no possible use to anyone except hybrid printers.
    There's really no need to go out of one's way to hunt down and destroy any mention of hybrid technology. If that was the subject of the entire thread, then your concern would be totally justified, but to have no elasticity in being able to read 5 words menting the word "scan", which by the way is completely unique to film, is really frustrating.

    You could create a mask to control contrast and you could make analog separations for alternative proceses. To say it is of no use to anyone but hybrid printers is false.

    I've posted a thread that has the intent of increasing film shooting and processing; would you prefer we have the moderator's remove it?

    Please don't mention it again.

    frobozz, I think you could liquidate a lot film if you wanted to. I'd even send you some bulk cannisters.

  5. #25
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    The OP said the stuff is not designed for printing, but scans well. That firmly positions his intended method of printing this film, and the method he intends those interested in this process to use. One could do many things. But who will? And why, then, was only scanning mentioned in the OP?

    What is so hard about putting the post where it belongs, on DPUG? Everything that is OK here is OK there, but not the other way around. It would also help DPUG to grow with new unique content.

    I specifically tried to be polite about stating the obvious, yet you basically told me to shut my mouth and accused me of going out of my way to engage in a witch hunt, which is not true. I opened the thread because I was interested, not to seek and destroy digital-oriented content.

    As for what I'd prefer the moderators to do, that is obvious. IMO, it should be moved to DPUG if it is going to be presented as written. If not, then the OP should remove his caveat in regards to the usefulness of this process. But it's their Website, not mine. And it is not like I am raising a stink about it and making demands. I just mentioned it. It would be fine to me if it was five words, or even a paragraph or two as an aside within the body of the thread, but within the OP, framing scanning as the pretty-much the way to use these films, I don't think it belongs. Why is it so hard to hear that I think this?
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North America just north of that sharp right turn North America makes on the Atlantic coast.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    Not to discourage you, but that seems to point to DPUG to me, since the information about this service is of no possible use to anyone except hybrid printers.
    This thread is about getting the film loaded and processed, and also says that one method of getting prints is to scan, not the only method. If this thread is moved to DPUG the information on getting the film processed might be lost.

    Now this whole thing about getting Slides made from the negatives, I love slides, in fact that is what I shoot the most! Where can I get this film converted to slides? Beyond that, can they also convert regular C-41 negatives to slides? I would love to see a slide made from Portra.
    "Would you like it if someone that painted in oils told you that you were not making portraits because you were using a camera?"
    "Shouldn't it be more about the joy of producing and viewing the photo than what you paid for the camera?"

    Me

  7. #27
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by bblhed View Post
    This thread is about getting the film loaded and processed, and also says that one method of getting prints is to scan, not the only method. If this thread is moved to DPUG the information on getting the film processed might be lost.
    I disagree that the statement regarding scanning states that "one method of getting prints is to scan, not the only method." The statement clearly positions scanning as the way to use these films, making this whole ECN-II thing primarily a hybrid process.

    Getting the film loaded and processed is indeed what the thread is about...which is why the statement about scanning is so frustrating to me. The statement is brief, but it sets the stage for the entire process being discussed; it sets it as a hybrid stage, not an analog one; it makes it futile to me, in a way. So, IMO, either cut out the statement so it is not an issue, or move the discussion to a true hybrid stage: DPUG.

    Unfortunately, they quit doing it a few years ago due to extremely low demand, but A and I lab here in L.A. used to sell pre-spooled short ends of all the MP films, and they would process them with the negative and print strip as standard procedure. The F64D and 500T were the particularly interesting emulsions to me. And yes, I scanned to print them! But if I ever wanted to talk about any aspect of it, I'd have gone to DPUG.

    Anyhow, my initial statement was brief, and intended as a "just sayin'" type of comment. It did not warrant such an extreme response ("don't mention it again" and "go out of one's way to hunt down and destroy") simply due to one's personal annoyance with it.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,498
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    The OP said the stuff is not designed for printing, but scans well. That firmly positions his intended method of printing this film, and the method he intends those interested in this process to use. One could do many things. But who will? And why, then, was only scanning mentioned in the OP?

    What is so hard about putting the post where it belongs, on DPUG? Everything that is OK here is OK there, but not the other way around. It would also help DPUG to grow with new unique content.

    I specifically tried to be polite about stating the obvious, yet you basically told me to shut my mouth and accused me of going out of my way to engage in a witch hunt, which is not true. I opened the thread because I was interested, not to seek and destroy digital-oriented content.

    As for what I'd prefer the moderators to do, that is obvious. IMO, it should be moved to DPUG if it is going to be presented as written. If not, then the OP should remove his caveat in regards to the usefulness of this process. But it's their Website, not mine. And it is not like I am raising a stink about it and making demands. I just mentioned it. It would be fine to me if it was five words, or even a paragraph or two as an aside within the body of the thread, but within the OP, framing scanning as the pretty-much the way to use these films, I don't think it belongs. Why is it so hard to hear that I think this?
    99.9% of this thread is about analogue movie film and the (very interesting) possibilities of using and processing it. I don't think that this would be of much interest or use to the average digital enthusiast.

    And, yes, I freely admit that I scan and inkjet print all my own negs and slides (wash my mouth out...lol)...that's because, until our house move, my darkroom is in storage so I can only currently do the film processing, B&W, E6 and C41. Are you going to banish me to the dark side?

  9. #29
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,400
    Images
    2
    2F/2F, I understand what you're saying, but I would like to think that there's kind of a understanding between APUG'ers that a passing mention of hybrid technology can be tolerated, if it's not expounded upon beyond reason. I feel like I'm living in a police-state, but we're all adults here, and these aren't dirty words.

    I'm not trying to shut you up, but I did request that we not discuss it anymore. You and I are the kind of posters that have to have the last word, and I don't want this thread to go off topic... that's why I said that.

    So, can we please just leave it at this? I will post this thread on DPUG.
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  10. #30
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    "99.9% of this thread is about analogue movie film and the (very interesting) possibilities of using and processing it. I don't think that this would be of much interest or use to the average digital enthusiast."

    And, as the OP stated with the sentence in question, nor would it be of much interest or use to the average analog enthusiast. That is exactly the alarm bell that threw the stage for this discussion off kilter in my thinking.

    I don't know if you are aware that DPUG, though poorly named IMHO, is home to analog, digital, and hybrid discussions, not just digital. Hybrid Photo dot com was incorporated into it. As such, given your statement above, and mine below it, this discussion is not only A-OK there, but is actually in a much better place there, for it's own sake.

    I am not hunting anything down or destroying anything or banishing anyone, so please reconsider the accuracy of those statements. I simply mentioned my belief that this is off topic, and got a foul response that deserved a rebuttal.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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