-
November 9th, 2001, 06:56 PM
#31
MovieStuff
Guest
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chas_ucla:
It only takes 20 minutes to dry?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes. This caught my eye, as well. I've processed a lot of still film and, even using a drying cabinet, it took longer than 20 minutes! 50 feet of film in 20 minutes? I think the processing would take longer than that.
Hmmmmmm.....
Roger
------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html
-
November 13th, 2001, 12:29 AM
#32
Mercutio
Guest
I use an industrial strength photo drying booth and pretty much crank it. This doesn't seem to hurt the film, but I am pretty sure that the emulsion is still pasty when I project it. God I should be more patient. Its all a mess anyhow.
Mercutio
Jeez, you guys don't miss anything.
------------------
-
November 14th, 2001, 04:41 AM
#33
chas_ucla
Guest
I thought maybe you had some special technique! ;]
Yeah, I remember printing and processing still film and the waiting time was always the worst...
so your film is ruined now?
------------------
-
November 14th, 2001, 06:24 PM
#34
Mercutio
Guest
Chas;
Was the film ruined? Who the hell can tell. I generally handprocess to get cool effects; sprockets running amuck, solarization, and other artifacts of the process, but its generally a bit murky since I don't have a processing tank, but just kind of stuff them into the same canisters for the still film. One thing I have noticed though is that if I hand process film that is ill-exposed or out of focus, hand processing seems to exacberate those conditions.
did I just state the obvious?
But your query did make me think about what I was doing-so hastily. Yet, sometimes these mistakes and shortcuts lead to interesting results, i.e. a film I hand tinted in a tub that had LOTS of leftover emulsion from someone who tinted a bunch of rolls - and much of that emulsion stuck to my film, with a very striking look, alas, never to be replicated.
------------------
-
November 14th, 2001, 06:26 PM
#35
Mercutio
Guest
Chas;
Was the film ruined? Who the hell can tell. I generally handprocess to get cool effects; sprockets running amuck, solarization, and other artifacts of the process, but its generally a bit murky since I don't have a processing tank, but just kind of stuff them into the same canisters for the still film. One thing I have noticed though is that if I hand process film that is ill-exposed or out of focus, hand processing seems to exacberate those conditions.
did I just state the obvious?
But your query did make me think about what I was doing-so hastily. Yet, sometimes these mistakes and shortcuts lead to interesting results, i.e. a film I hand tinted in a tub that had LOTS of leftover emulsion from someone who tinted a bunch of rolls - and much of that emulsion stuck to my film, with a very striking look, alas, never to be replicated.
------------------
-
November 15th, 2001, 08:56 PM
#36
tespo
Guest
Hello all. Does Walmart process Ektachrome super 8 film? What are the advantages of using Kodachrome instead of Ektachrome?
Thanks in advance for the answers.
Tony Esposito
------------------
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks