Old 05-15-2016, 08:57 PM   #76
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
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!
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2016, 09:56 PM   #77
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post

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?
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 03:27 AM   #78
Noct Foamer
Senior Member
 
Noct Foamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper1 View Post
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
Noct Foamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 01:00 PM   #79
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
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?
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 01:12 PM   #80
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
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.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 02:01 PM   #81
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 719
Default

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
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 03:32 PM   #82
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
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):
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0004.jpg
Views:	231
Size:	653.6 KB
ID:	9164  
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 04:54 PM   #83
Decapod401
Senior Member
 
Decapod401's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper1 View Post
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.
Decapod401 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 05:02 PM   #84
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,039
Default

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).
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2016, 06:16 PM   #85
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decapod401 View Post
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.
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2016, 02:41 AM   #86
Noct Foamer
Senior Member
 
Noct Foamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 571
Default

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
Noct Foamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2016, 01:26 AM   #87
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
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.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2016, 04:21 AM   #88
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
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.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2016, 11:55 AM   #89
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
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.
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2016, 02:57 AM   #90
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
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.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2016, 04:23 AM   #91
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
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.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.