So who's chasing N&W 611 this weekend? - just realized something

[Ron Flanary]

Originally Posted by JimThias

Part of me is glad that I have no idea what this means, but the other part of me is very sad for never finding out when I was younger.

I must have taken too much medication this morning, because that makes sense to me...

Sometimes the box would look okay until you went through the slides and found some drunken technician at the lab had ruined your slides. They would all have some strange green hue to them. I've rescued some of these slides in later years by scanning them and using Photoshop. So....never throw them away!

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary

Sometimes the box would look okay until you went through the slides and found some drunken technician at the lab had ruined your slides. They would all have some strange green hue to them. I've rescued some of these slides in later years by scanning them and using Photoshop. So....never throw them away!

The machine that chopped the film for mounting operated by seeking the narrow black strip between frames. Unfortunately, this machine wasn't smart enough to distinguish between dark image backgrounds and the black strip, and would cut the image sometimes. Who knew this would be fixable in 30 years or so?

[Noct Foamer]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Who knew this would be fixable in 30 years or so?

There is hope for me. Maybe in another 30 years all of my shots can become winners!


Kent in SD

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary

I must have taken too much medication this morning, because that makes sense to me...

Sometimes the box would look okay until you went through the slides and found some drunken technician at the lab had ruined your slides. They would all have some strange green hue to them. I've rescued some of these slides in later years by scanning them and using Photoshop. So....never throw them away!

The slides were created from the negatives, right? Back then, couldn't you just have new slides made from the negatives?

[Freericks]

Originally Posted by JimThias

The slides were created from the negatives, right? Back then, couldn't you just have new slides made from the negatives?

I think this is a tongue in cheek post, but making sure. That being said, there were actually negative films used to make slides at the time. These were Seattle Filmworks 5254 and then 5247. Idiots such as myself did use these awful films. True photographers such as Ron probably never even knew they existed.

[RobJor]

I maybe messing this story up a little but a friend of mine from the east knew an optician? who would duplicate faded color shifted Agfa, Ectachrome etc but would use color lenses to color correct and duplicate the slide. The results I saw looked OK for a slide show. Recently, My friend asked me if I could scan and improve the duplicate. Of course(to me) only so much you can do since when you duplicate you lose any extra detail of the original??. I asked about the originals but said he did not know where they were which could mean.....

CV etc steam stuff from the 50's so too bad but he has a lot of other good stuff in Kodachromes which made their way to books etc.

Bob

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Freericks

I think this is a tongue in cheek post, but making sure. That being said, there were actually negative films used to make slides at the time. These were Seattle Filmworks 5254 and then 5247. Idiots such as myself did use these awful films. True photographers such as Ron probably never even knew they existed.

Here's a slide that was shot on Kodacolor negative film (somewhat restored version):

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by Freericks

That being said, there were actually negative films used to make slides at the time. These were Seattle Filmworks 5254 and then 5247.

I remember seeing ads for that stuff. Fortunately, I have an older cousin who was my mentor, and taught me during my Instamatic phase that slides were superior to prints, and that prints were not the best way to share your work, get published, etc.

Originally Posted by RobJor

I maybe messing this story up a little but a friend of mine from the east knew an optician? who would duplicate faded color shifted Agfa, Ectachrome etc but would use color lenses to color correct and duplicate the slide. The results I saw looked OK for a slide show. Recently, My friend asked me if I could scan and improve the duplicate. Of course(to me) only so much you can do since when you duplicate you lose any extra detail of the original??. I asked about the originals but said he did not know where they were which could mean.....

My biggest transgressions in the "Mercurochrome" (you younger guys can look it up) family were Agfachrome and push-processed Ektachrome. I haven't yet scanned one that wasn't very grainy and color-shifted.

In the late '80's, I put together an all-color book about the L&NE. Some of the rarest images were on non-Kodachrome transparencies, and the color shift was major. The process at that time was to make saturation adjustments to the four color separations (negative enlargements of cyan, magenta, yellow, and black) that would be used by the printer. It was very analog, and very similar to what your friend did with the color filters. The problem is, once a dye for a given color has faded away, it's nearly impossible to restore.

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Here's a slide that was shot on Kodacolor negative film (somewhat restored version):

Do you still have the negative (I assume you shot print film and then did a duplicate image, again on negative film)? It should scan better than the slide.

[Freericks]

Luckily on all of my 5247 I have both the slides and negatives still and can scan the negatives. The slides are so badly faded I am seriously considering just tossing them. The negatives are grainy, but have held up (90% of them - I think processing could be bad and some negatives have turned too).

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Do you still have the negative (I assume you shot print film and then did a duplicate image, again on negative film)? It should scan better than the slide.

Good question! I definitely haven't seen them lately. Nor have I seen the Kodak box with my oldest favorites. It should be a treat to re-discover what's in that one.

[Noct Foamer]

When I went back to college for a degree in medical science, I worked at a high volume commercial Fuji TruColor processing plant. We would splice about 250 rolls of 35mm into one big roll and then send it through for processing all at once. We had to be vigilant that only C-41 film was added to the roll. The Seattle film was actually movie film, and had some sort of anti-halonation coating on it. During C-41 processing this coating would come off and totally foul up all the other 249 rolls! The film could be processed as either transparency or negative. There were other films out there like that too. The only one I ever used (and very little ) was Agfa Scala. This was a b&w film, ISO 200. It was cool stuff! You can also process C-41 as slide film as well, using another process (DR5 I think it is.) In the 1990s this had a cult following.

I mostly shot transparency film for the places that bought images from me. The color was a bit more intense, but I think it was just easier for publishers/printers to deal with. The plus side was they had more intense color, but the downside was E6 has a very narrow dynamic range. Today, I only shoot C-41 the few times I want a color film (mostly only shoot b&w). The C-41 has a broader dynamic range and produces a better scan. There is virtually no market for E6 film any more. The choices are becoming more and more limited, and few places process it any more. I think Congress should give it "endangered species" status.


Kent in SD

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Freericks

I think this is a tongue in cheek post, but making sure.

Not at all. I have little to no knowledge of how slides work or how they are created. The only people I've ever met in my life who talk about slides are railroad photographers having slide shows. I've just never asked how the whole process works, hence my inquiry.

[Freericks]

Originally Posted by JimThias

Not at all. I have little to no knowledge of how slides work or how they are created. The only people I've ever met in my life who talk about slides are railroad photographers having slide shows. I've just never asked how the whole process works, hence my inquiry.

Most slide films were a positive film, meaning that the film itself is the slide. The slide was processed and then cut into frames and the frames were mounted. In an analog world this is why original slides were so much more desired. There is quality loss in every duplication, be it slide or print.

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Freericks

Most slide films were a positive film, meaning that the film itself is the slide. The slide was processed and then cut into frames and the frames were mounted. In an analog world this is why original slides were so much more desired. There is quality loss in every duplication, be it slide or print.

And for those who enjoyed tedious and exacting activities, you could buy a chemical kit and do it all yourself. But not for Kodachrome, which was much too complex to process in a home darkroom.

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Freericks

Most slide films were a positive film, meaning that the film itself is the slide. The slide was processed and then cut into frames and the frames were mounted. In an analog world this is why original slides were so much more desired. There is quality loss in every duplication, be it slide or print.

See, I never knew that. I guess I always thought slides were mini photos that were created from negatives and intended to be viewed with slide projectors. I may have held a slide or two in my hand at some point in my life, but I guess I never really looked at them to see that they were actually negatives.

[Freericks]

Originally Posted by JimThias

See, I never knew that. I guess I always thought slides were mini photos that were created from negatives and intended to be viewed with slide projectors. I may have held a slide or two in my hand at some point in my life, but I guess I never really looked at them to see that they were actually negatives.

Well, they were positives, but yes, the were the film itself.