Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: LL Tonedeafness  (Read 3735 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #20 on: January 11, 2017, 02:56:38 PM »

Kevin,
When i read this, I swear my hands started pinching, inserting, and winding as if I had a Nikkor reel in my hands right now, even though it's been a dozen years since the last time I did. Th trick to doing it in the light, of course, is to close your eyes so you can imagine you are in the darkroom.   ;D

I used Paterson's plastic reels all my years, apart from the time in a photo-unit where I used the stainless steel stuff they had before I turned up and, I'm sure, forever afterwards.

That's an amazing and unsung innovation Nikon had: I didn't know that you could load their tanks in daylight, just close your eyes and all would be well! You see the beauty of nature's own safelight: you eyelids? Wish I'd know so long ago...

;-)

Rob C

P.S. Kids, don't try this at home.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12124
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #21 on: January 12, 2017, 12:17:41 AM »

I remember many, many years ago a photographer friend liked to do this trick: He would take a 35mm film cartridge, with the end of the film sticking out, and ask "I wonder if this is exposed."

Then he would pull a couple of feet of film out and stare at it and finally say, "Yes! It is!"   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

David Mantripp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 767
    • :: snowhenge dot net ::
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #22 on: January 12, 2017, 07:48:29 AM »

I think there are lot of people that are way too critical of what LL posts and how they post it. It is their site, they can post what they want and how they want. If I don't like something I just move on and look at something else. I am more interested in Hasselblad and Fuji than the fact they are bringing back Ekatchrome or even possibly Kodachrome. Big whoop. I don't go on a piss and moan because I thought it should be front and center, which I hardly care about film any more and I still have some in the freezer.

I think Kevin and crew do a fantastic job, I also think they get a lot of undeserved criticism and often from people who have not been here long or do not participate much. Just my opinion.

Alan


And I think there are far too many people who have the same knee-jerk, cheerleader reaction to every and any comment which does not include fawning praise of the proprietors.

I imagine Kevin & Chris are robust enough to take suggestions and indeed criticism onboard.

There is far too much messenger shooting on this forum.
Logged
--
David Mantripp
http://www.snowhenge.net

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #23 on: January 12, 2017, 09:00:01 AM »

No-one's shooting the messenger. Alan evaluated the 3 stories in a way that echoed my own feelings, which broadly agreed with how Kevin treated them.

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 681
    • APS Photography
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #24 on: January 12, 2017, 09:32:54 AM »


And I think there are far too many people who have the same knee-jerk, cheerleader reaction to every and any comment which does not include fawning praise of the proprietors.

I imagine Kevin & Chris are robust enough to take suggestions and indeed criticism onboard.

There is far too much messenger shooting on this forum.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of my interpretation of a series of statements that was mostly a knee jerk reaction rather than constructive criticism. It was not a criticism or suggestions but dismissal of the site and the content they are posting and the people that are reading the content. I am all for constructive criticism that is delivered as such as opposed to a series of dismissals and over generalized statements.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12124
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #25 on: January 12, 2017, 09:39:17 AM »


And I think there are far too many people who have the same knee-jerk, cheerleader reaction to every and any comment which does not include fawning praise of the proprietors.

I imagine Kevin & Chris are robust enough to take suggestions and indeed criticism onboard.

There is far too much messenger shooting on this forum.
Congratulations, David. You have now made it onto my small, selective "ignore" list.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

landscapephoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 436
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #26 on: January 12, 2017, 12:56:34 PM »

I think there are lot of people that are way too critical of what LL posts and how they post it. It is their site, they can post what they want and how they want. If I don't like something I just move on and look at something else.

Some people have already announced they will move on (cancel their subscription) after the article.

And I think there are far too many people who have the same knee-jerk, cheerleader reaction to every and any comment which does not include fawning praise of the proprietors.

Not only on lula. It is a general problem. Which makes me think I saw that picture this morning:


Logged

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5810
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #27 on: January 13, 2017, 03:57:47 AM »

Not only on lula. It is a general problem. Which makes me think I saw that picture this morning:



Is a uniformed opinion available only to members of the Armed Forces?  ;)

Jeremy
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12124
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #28 on: January 13, 2017, 08:28:27 AM »

Is a uniformed opinion available only to members of the Armed Forces?  ;)

Jeremy
+10.  :D
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Kevin Gallagher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 441
    • http://
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #29 on: January 13, 2017, 08:31:54 AM »

Is a uniformed opinion available only to members of the Armed Forces?  ;)

Jeremy


+100
Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1365
  • guest
    • working
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #30 on: January 13, 2017, 01:50:45 PM »


I have no idea if you have experienced life with a Hasselblad 500C or variant, but if you have, you would understand the beauty of the emotion. I do exclude the experience of a second-hand one, because by the time they became that way, they were usually worn out, and nothing lasts for ever, not even a 500C.

;-)

Rob

Well Rob, dust off your F3 cause Kodak is talking about bringing Kodachrome back.   

I know, the naysayers will say it's not possible and film is a hurdle for production if you travel by air, but there is more film shot for editorial than most people know.

Yes, most of the labs are gone, but for c-41 and e-6 they still exist and film does have a lot of color science behind it.

I was speaking to a LA  colorists that does commercials and feature films and asked what he prefers grading.  He said just 4 types of files, #4,3 and 2 were Sony F55, RED then Arri.  #1 was film as the grading effort on film is 1/4 that of digital, because the telecine is so close to where you want to be.

I think the most difficult part of digital is to give the image a film look as we're making it up as we go.  Also not every digital camera reacts the same.    In the film days once I learned a film I knew how it would react and the commonality of the look, whether it was studio, sunlight or overcast, you knew the film and where it was going.  Now we take our digital files to two labs.  One suite for base processing, another software (photoshop) for finishing the look. 

This looks like a simple image and with film it would have been. With digital there are hours to get it to look like film.



In regards to everything wearing out, sure . . . eventually, but there are a lot of cameras out there and I believe that if camera production stopped world wide, there would be enough cameras and lenses to shoot for two decades and I don't think anything would be lost.

Let's face it, 20 to 200 million dollar movies are being shot right now with cameras that are over 20 years old and nobody's complaining. 

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: January 13, 2017, 01:57:22 PM by bcooter »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #31 on: January 13, 2017, 03:13:36 PM »

Hi BC,

That would be good news if it happens, because I kept the faith and some Kodachrome all this time: have some deep in the bottom drawer of the freezer! (I have a brick of 120 Velvia 50 too, so if a good, local E6 outfit springs back up...)

Of course, there's always a bigger, broad question mark: will the costs of reintroduced film types make sense for anyone no longer doing it professionally? My bet is that it could make sense for Kodak to offer its own processing, even of Ektachrome. I base that thought on the fact that, as we both know very well, running lines, replenishing etc. is a precise science, and can't really be done at home by the average photographer without very deep pockets: it doesn't make sense, and beyond that, unlike printing in darkrooms, it's not the exciting work that you expect photography to be about: it's all about being a good lab technician and not making it up as you go along. Are small, commercial pro labs that reliable regarding replenishing and lab controls? I often used to wonder. If Kodak kept a leash on processing, then maybe price and quality might be in safer hands - or not! For a time there used to be Q-labs or something, where I seem to remember the film companies ran some sort of checking system on the commercial labs using their stuff; maybe they doubted the labs too!

Film look. Yes, that's important for those of us with the experience to know how the two differ, film/digital, but you'd be surprised how many younger guys think I'm nuts for trying to make my digital captures look 'distressed' by adding some tiny touch of almost invisible grain; truth to tell, I have even stopped doing any sharpening at all on some files, and both Nikons have that in-camera facility as far Off as it can be put. On other images I sharpen just tiny parts of them, and like them that way.

However, as I think I mentioned before somewhere in this thread, the convenience and cost factor of digital imaging is pretty unbeatable an argument in its favour for most non-pros; for me, I think the appeal of film has become a matter of camera-love: those 500 series things were just exactly where I had striven to be, and getting there was a dream come true. Rollei TLR cameras were certainly better hand-held animals than 'blads, simply because of no mirror-bounce, but once on a tripod, there was nothing I ever met better than those Swedes! I have also kept three meters: two old Westons and a Minolta Flashmeter 111, so if  can remember how I did it...

;-)

Rob

Martin Kristiansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210
    • http://www.mkdp.co.za
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #32 on: January 14, 2017, 07:52:35 AM »

I worked in labs small and large and in a Q Lab in South Florida for a short while.

The size of the lab was never a good predictor of quality when it came to process control and quality. My opinion of the Q Lab model is that it was more a system to sell paper and chemicals than anything else as to be listed as a Q Lab all paper and chemicals had to be supplied by Kodak. This at a time that both Agfa and Fuji made some very competitive products at a lower price. While it was certainly easier to control a dip and dunk E6 processor that was running reasonable quantities of film than one that was sitting idle it was more about an intuitive feel and years of experience when it came to quality. The manual supplied by Kodak listing out of tolerance errors for E6 and the recommended  fixes was filled with perhaps's and exceptions and maybes.

I don't miss it at all.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #33 on: January 14, 2017, 11:57:07 AM »

I worked in labs small and large and in a Q Lab in South Florida for a short while.

The size of the lab was never a good predictor of quality when it came to process control and quality. My opinion of the Q Lab model is that it was more a system to sell paper and chemicals than anything else as to be listed as a Q Lab all paper and chemicals had to be supplied by Kodak. This at a time that both Agfa and Fuji made some very competitive products at a lower price. While it was certainly easier to control a dip and dunk E6 processor that was running reasonable quantities of film than one that was sitting idle it was more about an intuitive feel and years of experience when it came to quality. The manual supplied by Kodak listing out of tolerance errors for E6 and the recommended  fixes was filled with perhaps's and exceptions and maybes.


I don't miss it at all.


I do remember Gevaert making some nice colour print stuff towards the mid-60s; can't say whether it was then connected to Agfa or not. My own time working in labs (for other people) ended at the close of '65. Then, come '66, I went solo and knew enough to avoid trying to run my own colour: never was going to have the throughput to make it worthwhile, and as a photographer, it was better to hunt clients than play at colour processing. You only have twenty-four hours in each day, however you slice 'em. I had no intentions of growing a 'studio' and finding myself to be responsible for finding work for other people too. However, I did do all my own B/White stuff - it was an essential part of creating a 'handwriting' that folks would maybe want to use. No outside printer can give you your own identity; at best and most dangerous he can make himself an essential part of your business life. I always believed in independence. In fact come to think of it, all of the very few photographic partnerships I ever knew personally broke up at one stage or the other: there was always one guy who ended up being the powerhouse, and the other a drag.

Rob

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2037
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #34 on: January 14, 2017, 01:17:41 PM »

Many years ago, I returned to the regional Kodak lab to pick up some twenty or so rolls of Kodachrome that I had shot in India the previous month.  I watched, curious as the  clerk began piling boxes of  Kodachrome on the counter.  Not boxes of slides, my slides, but boxes of new raw stock.  Twenty or so of them.

I asked why he was doing that and he said that I had used emulsion batch  XXX (I forget the number) and that Kodak was replacing my film, as it specified on the box label guarantee.

All 20 rolls were ruined.  Unusable.  This by Kodak, not some fly-by-night lab.

#filmisdead
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #35 on: January 14, 2017, 03:13:02 PM »

Many years ago, I returned to the regional Kodak lab to pick up some twenty or so rolls of Kodachrome that I had shot in India the previous month.  I watched, curious as the  clerk began piling boxes of  Kodachrome on the counter.  Not boxes of slides, my slides, but boxes of new raw stock.  Twenty or so of them.

I asked why he was doing that and he said that I had used emulsion batch  XXX (I forget the number) and that Kodak was replacing my film, as it specified on the box label guarantee.

All 20 rolls were ruined.  Unusable.  This by Kodak, not some fly-by-night lab.

#filmisdead


That's unfortunate, to say the least! But there's a problem: it's knowing what the fault was: stock, processing or even both. In your instance, if they felt able to offer the same number, then maybe it was a processing fault. Consequential damage limitation clauses are a bugger.

I was hit in similar manner with 120 Ektachrome, but that was processed by a local pro lab I'd used for a long time. Fortunately, it was an 'atmospherics' stock shoot in Spain, and not for another client, so no further ramifications and consequential disasters. The problem looked, to me, like reticulation. The Kodak rep got involved, of course, and the poor devil found himself between two of his own embattled clients. The upshoot, and I know I was very fortunate, was that my film was replaced, and I was given the cost of the travel tickets. Of course, the spirit of the gig was ruined, and I never got anything particularly worthwhile on the rerun. However, I did have full insurance on all trips for clients!

There's a story told by David Swannell of a time when he was Bailey's assistant, and Bailey and Terence Donovan were counting the ways in which a shoot could be ruined: I believe the count went into the three hundreds...

I guess some of today's top guns could figure out similar - if not more - ways in which it can happen with digital.

Photography is one of those ventures where a lot of thinking can bring about utter paralysis!

Rob C

David Mantripp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 767
    • :: snowhenge dot net ::
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #36 on: January 16, 2017, 04:03:48 AM »

Congratulations, David. You have now made it onto my small, selective "ignore" list.

I'm devastated.  My cornflakes are swimming in a pool of my tears.  To think that the great, no, awesome, Eric Myrvaagnes doesn't want to read my timeless prose and cultured words of wisdom.   

I suppose I'll get over it. One day.
Logged
--
David Mantripp
http://www.snowhenge.net

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1230
    • 500px
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #37 on: January 16, 2017, 08:13:36 AM »

All 20 rolls were ruined.  Unusable.  This by Kodak, not some fly-by-night lab.

I only once had films ruined by a lab. Pity they were of the birth of my friends' first child.

The film was physically mangled and creased... shit can happen, but it shouldn't have happened to more than one roll...

I think I salvaged two frames.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #38 on: January 16, 2017, 08:43:03 AM »

I only once had films ruined by a lab. Pity they were of the birth of my friends' first child.

The film was physically mangled and creased... shit can happen, but it shouldn't have happened to more than one roll...

I think I salvaged two frames.

So it both did, and don't come out, then?

Sorry: irresistible.

;-)

Rob

Martin Kristiansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210
    • http://www.mkdp.co.za
Re: LL Tonedeafness
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2017, 09:23:53 AM »

When something goes wrong in film processing in a commercial environment it usually affects more than one roll. A large dip and dunk can crash a rack and that can destroy two racks of film if you are very unlucky as one rack will crash into another. On a roller processor all the film being fed in behind the one that hops the rollers will usually be lost.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up