We don' need no stiinkin' Kodachrome. We got jets, man, we got jets.

http://www.jemof.com/epfp.html **

So, who's the first to convert his jpgs to
Carrousel Compatible Media?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

** web site on making 8/16mm movies by ink-jet
printing on overhead transparency media.

 

Not me, I still use film and film cameras.


--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/


"Nicholas O. Lindan" <> barfed in message

 

Beware the "One-Size-Fits-All" mentality. Someone switches to digital, and
then declares to the world that "film is dead," and that film shooters
should see the light and move on.

There are millions of superb film camera and lens systems out there.
Contax. Pentax. Nikon. Leica. Zeiss Ikon. They produce incredible
images. Zeiss has recently introduced their ZF (Nikon mount) and ZS (Pentax
Screw Mount) lenses for older SLRs. I looked at KEH's site yesterday and
some of the Contax bodies and lenses made my mouth water.

Is all that gear headed for the trash bin? I doubt it. I, for one, am not
about to dump all my bodies and lenses in exchange for some lightweight
plastic junk that will be obsolete in 18 months. Just give me my film
scanner, and I'm as "Digital" as I want to be.

And heads turn whenever I'm out with my Honeywell Pentax ES-II, with its
black enamel paint finish and that incredible SMC Takumar 50/1.4 lens. Even
people that know virtually nothing about photo gear ask me what kind of
camera that is. Everyone is amazed when I tell them that I've owned it for
a third of a century!

And we are all expected to chuck our classic gear, just because some moron
chucked his? Methinks not.

 

That's ok: you can scan the film; print the jpgs as
24x36mm images on overhead transparency stock with
an inkjet printer; Mount the images in 35mm slide
mounts; Load in a slide projector; Invite the
neighbors over; Project.

 

While I've not seen just that camera set up, I window shop on e-bay in the
35mm SLR listings and I have to keep my keyboard covered when I do that or
I'll get it wet from all the ones I see that I would like to have. Heck
eveny now and then I throw a ceap bid in just to see how fast the snipers
will jump on it!

--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/

 

Even Better deal is that I send my film into snapfish.com who not only
delv's the film but also prints it and mails both back to me and before
mailing it while doing prints, they make a .jpg copy and put it in my
account in a folder named by the date of the printing. Then I get a notice
of the new folder that same day and within a week I get my neg's and my
prints and then if I want to do anything fany to an image or make a bigger
one, I can then use my scanner to scan the print of Neg with, heck I stil
scan my slides too. But I've seen a lot of the old B/W photos and they'd be
poor in normal color image.

Heck I sill have some of that 100FT roll to use up too. and it's all B/W :}


--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/

 

On a slightly similar note, in cases where I've got a digital B&W (scan and
photoshop fix from a neg, image shot digitally etc), I've often pondered a
way of getting a real B&W print. RA4 digital minilab prints from frontiers
etc just don't do it for me, and inkjet B&W prints look just disgusting. The
method i've considered is using an inkjet printer to print a negative onto
transparency paper at the final size (5x7, 8x10) and then contact print that
onto true B&W paper. I suspect it should go ok, because B&W inkjet prints
look horrible because of the mix of shades of colour. If it is then printed
onto B&W paper that won't be an issue.
One of these days I'll do some experimentation and actually try this. I've
added it to the "one of these days" list, which is getting things added to
it faster than things get ticked off :-(

 

Its too bad no one makes panchromatic paper any more.
Perhaps Ilford could be talked into making some, I suspect
there would be enough of a market to justify a couple of
runs a year. Panchromatic paper makes excellent prints from
color negatives and can be used for making paper negatives
for printing from color transparencies although its probably
better to make an enlarged interneg using something like
T-Max 100.

 

Ektacolor and Ektachrome were notorious for color
fading. Kodachrome has excellent resistance to fading when
stored in the dark but will fade when subjected to strong
light as when its projected. Ektachrome actually has better
resistance to intense light but fades in the dark.
Eastman color negative film, on which a great many
feature pictures were photographed, also faded pretty
rapidly, the original Anscocolor was even worse. A lot of
old color movies exist now because of frame by frame
computer restoration. Some producers had color separation
master postives made from the original color negative.
These, of course, are B&W with a very long life, but not
many producers had the forsight to spend the extra money to
do it.
The original Technicolor process made three color
separation negatives directly in the camera. These have
survived pretty well other than the usual problems with
nitrate film. Also, Technicolor used quite stable dyes in
their dye transfer prints so many Technicolor prints from
the 30's and 40's are still in good shape, at least as far
as color. Again, the nitrate film of the time has mostly
decomposed to the point where it can't be projected.

 

Hi Graham,

Try http://preview.tinyurl.com/h4tgh .

(This is a previewable link to the Ilford Photo/Harman Technology Ltd.
site.)

You'd need to find a Durst Lambda or Océ Lightjet lab to do this, but it is
now doable.

Ken

 

Nicholas O. Lindan spake thus:

One of the comments on this technique from one of the video clips echoes
my own reaction: " Oh my god you cut all the sprocket holes by
hand?!?!?! holy shit."


--
Any system of knowledge that is capable of listing films in order
of use of the word "****" is incapable of writing a good summary
and analysis of the Philippine-American War. And vice-versa.
This is an inviolable rule.

- Matthew White, referring to Wikipedia on his WikiWatch site
(http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

 

Seems like a huge amount of work for an incredibly poor result.

Scott

 

Scott W spake thus:

You might be missing the point of the exercise, which is certainly not
the development of a commercially-viable process. It's something called
"fun".

I wrote the guy and suggested he might try 16mm as a medium (4x the
image area).


--
Any system of knowledge that is capable of listing films in order
of use of the word "****" is incapable of writing a good summary
and analysis of the Philippine-American War. And vice-versa.
This is an inviolable rule.

- Matthew White, referring to Wikipedia on his WikiWatch site
(http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

 

Follow up...

Here's a Lambda lab in Toronto, Canada offering the above technology. They
were also active as a "pre-launch trial" test site for the new Ilford
product.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2q87r6

(This is a previewable link to Elevator Digital's Photographic Services
page.)

Click on the "Lambda Premium Digital Printing" link to load a price list in
a PDF-formatted document.

Ken

 

You know that hardware to do this has been available commercially for
quite some time? In fact it's less common now than it was 10 years ago.
Here's a source a quick search came up with:

http://computergraphicsgroup.com/filmrecs/laser.htm

 

I looked at this as an absurdity: taking a digital movie, converting
it to stills, pasting the stills up with the graphics outline of
movie film, printing out on overhead film, cutting the strips of
'movie film' out by hand, making the sprocket holes with an exacto
knife, gluing the 10" strips together, projecting them, and then taking
a digital movie of the projection screen.

Surely you jest ...

That's a relief.

* * *

Seeing the movie result I thought: you can scan slides, print the
files with an ink-jet printer on to transparency media, mount it
as 35mm slides, project the slides, take digital pictures
of the screen, and use a film-recorder to make slides again.
And wouldn't the result be a pointless mess?

Computer film recorders have been around since before the
laser was invented. Google "Whirlwind I".

And electronic image transmission, the fax machine, since
1843.

 

I spent this morning doing color digital on the street, and this evening
doing black and white film still lifes at home.

Dumping my film cameras is unthinkable.

SW

 

Here in Rosamond there are a lot more film cameras in use than the dig's,
and the two 30min film places do 20 to 40 rolls a day.

--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/

 

http://www.jemof.com/epfp.html**

"What is the toughest thing about making a film? Putting in the
little holes. The sprocket holes are the hardest thing to make.
Everything else is easy, but all night you have to sit with that
little puncher and make the holes on the side of the film. You
could faint from that work. The rest is easy: the script is easy,
the acting is easy, the directing is a breeze...but the sprockets
will tear your heart out."
--- Mel Brooks

Looks like he was right. The first thing the described process needs
is a better way to make the perforations! Apart from that, the idea of
printing film with an inkjet or laser printer seems appealing.

 

Surely you jest ...

That's a relief.[/QUOTE]

I've been in the computer business a LONG time. Before video projectors
(and PowerPoint for that matter) business presentations were done with
Kodak Carousels. So much so, it was assumed there would be a projector
at your destination; you didn't have to bring one.

When these new-fangled "digital images" became available, the film
recorder was born; they'd "print" the images onto 35mm Ektachrome. With
well done subject material, the results were quite impressive, but the
devices were a bit pricey; I recall them starting at about $6,000 in
late 80's dollars.