Another one bites the dust

David Nebenzahl <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>So that makes two (in this thread) so far. Maybe someone should compile
>a list of current extant color printers ...

I'm amazed that it sounds like there's more than a very small handful, as
I'd thought it was basically a dead business! Though for an established
lab that's processing RA4 anyway, keeping an enlarger with a color head
around for the oddballs who want it isn't much of an investment.

It's basically just morbid curiousity on my part, though; if I care
enough to want to do a direct enlarger print instead of scan+digiprint, I
care enough to print it myself.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

At his point, it is hard to keep opened most of business based on
photo-chemical processes so it is difficult to find suitable places to
develop our "old" films and prints. Affortunately, we still have films
and chemicals in order to work in our darkroom, the only place where I
have got best results for my shots.

andrew m. boardman wrote:
> David Nebenzahl <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>> So that makes two (in this thread) so far. Maybe someone should compile
>> a list of current extant color printers ...
>
> I'm amazed that it sounds like there's more than a very small handful, as
> I'd thought it was basically a dead business! Though for an established
> lab that's processing RA4 anyway, keeping an enlarger with a color head
> around for the oddballs who want it isn't much of an investment.
>
> It's basically just morbid curiousity on my part, though; if I care
> enough to want to do a direct enlarger print instead of scan+digiprint, I
> care enough to print it myself.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

"Alvaro" <burnetdosdoses.RemoveThis@terra.es> wrote in message
news:fkeqem$6qk$1@aioe.org...
> At his point, it is hard to keep opened most of business based on
> photo-chemical processes so it is difficult to find suitable places to
> develop our "old" films and prints.

Speaking as one who does custom B&W printing, I do not welcome more
business. I focus upon customers who are successful in their B&W work and
appreciate the prints, and can pay.

The field of custom printing has become narrow as the digital nutz go their
way and a highly select group of qualified clients continue to work in
conventional B&W film.

Fewer custom printers is a good thing. It simply reflects the field vs. the
digital mavens. It has come to the point that persons wanting quality B&W
printing have to show us that their work is worth the $$ or bedamned .I
don''t care how mucn money you have. There is no shortage of qualified
photographers looking for good printing. Amateurs should look to Walmart or
something.

Life is very good here in the film world.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

"jjs" <john> wrote

> Speaking as one who does custom B&W printing, I do not welcome more
> business. ... It has come to the point that persons wanting quality B&W
> printing have to show us that their work is worth the $$ or bedamned.
> ... There is no shortage of qualified photographers looking for good
> printing ...

I'll be glad to take your overflow ...

--
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
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

"Nicholas O. Lindan" <see.DeleteThis@sig.com> wrote in message
news:13mnik5cglbuf0@corp.supernews.com...
> "jjs" <john> wrote
>
>> Speaking as one who does custom B&W printing, I do not welcome more
>> business. ... It has come to the point that persons wanting quality B&W
>> printing have to show us that their work is worth the $$ or bedamned.
>> ... There is no shortage of qualified photographers looking for good
>> printing ...
>
> I'll be glad to take your overflow ...

Nicholas, there is plenty of room for another custom B&W printer. Given your
experience, I am certain you know some pros who would be happy to have you
as a printer. Warning - your spare time will vanish.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

On 12/20/2007 7:45 PM jjs spake thus:

> "Alvaro" <burnetdosdoses.TakeThisOut@terra.es> wrote in message
> news:fkeqem$6qk$1@aioe.org...
>
>> At his point, it is hard to keep opened most of business based on
>> photo-chemical processes so it is difficult to find suitable places to
>> develop our "old" films and prints.
>
> Speaking as one who does custom B&W printing, I do not welcome more
> business. I focus upon customers who are successful in their B&W work and
> appreciate the prints, and can pay.
>
> The field of custom printing has become narrow as the digital nutz go their
> way and a highly select group of qualified clients continue to work in
> conventional B&W film.
>
> Fewer custom printers is a good thing. It simply reflects the field vs. the
> digital mavens. It has come to the point that persons wanting quality B&W
> printing have to show us that their work is worth the $$ or bedamned .I
> don''t care how mucn money you have. There is no shortage of qualified
> photographers looking for good printing. Amateurs should look to Walmart or
> something.

Well, while fewer custom printers may or may not be a good thing, I can
definitely say that *no* custom printers (in this case, no custom
*color* printers in a very large part, if not all, of the San Francisco
Bay Area) is a very bad thing.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

"David Nebenzahl" <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
news:476c1dfc$0$29897$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com...
> Well, while fewer custom printers may or may not be a good thing, I can
> definitely say that *no* custom printers (in this case, no custom *color*
> printers in a very large part, if not all, of the San Francisco Bay Area)
> is a very bad thing.

Wasn't there a Gamma photo in the BA?
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

On 12/22/2007 8:53 AM jjs spake thus:

> "David Nebenzahl" <nobody DeleteThis @but.us.chickens> wrote in message
> news:476c1dfc$0$29897$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com...
>> Well, while fewer custom printers may or may not be a good thing, I can
>> definitely say that *no* custom printers (in this case, no custom *color*
>> printers in a very large part, if not all, of the San Francisco Bay Area)
>> is a very bad thing.
>
> Wasn't there a Gamma photo in the BA?

Apparently still is (http://www.gammasf.com), but they only do b&w.
(Wet, though.) There may also still be at least one in Oakland, judging
from the prints still hanging in his window.

I don't know for sure that there aren't *any* wet color labs hereabouts,
but I know of none.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

In article <476d6b62$0$29848$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com>,
David Nebenzahl <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens> wrote:

> On 12/22/2007 8:53 AM jjs spake thus:
>
> > "David Nebenzahl" <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
> > news:476c1dfc$0$29897$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com...
> >> Well, while fewer custom printers may or may not be a good thing, I can
> >> definitely say that *no* custom printers (in this case, no custom *color*
> >> printers in a very large part, if not all, of the San Francisco Bay Area)
> >> is a very bad thing.
> >
> > Wasn't there a Gamma photo in the BA?
>
> Apparently still is (http://www.gammasf.com), but they only do b&w.
> (Wet, though.) There may also still be at least one in Oakland, judging
> from the prints still hanging in his window.
>
> I don't know for sure that there aren't *any* wet color labs hereabouts,
> but I know of none.

Labs have always been a losing proposition. Coupled with things like
photographers with open accounts that don't pay its a bad business to be
in. Now with high end inkjets that graphics departments can do in house
imaging why spend the big bucks at the lab for just a single image when
yo can invest a few 1,000 and do you own trade show displays.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

On 12/30/2007 9:16 PM ____ spake thus:

> In article <476d6b62$0$29848$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com>,
> David Nebenzahl <nobody.DeleteThis@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> On 12/22/2007 8:53 AM jjs spake thus:
>>
>>> "David Nebenzahl" <nobody.DeleteThis@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
>>> news:476c1dfc$0$29897$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com...
>>>
>>>> Well, while fewer custom printers may or may not be a good thing, I can
>>>> definitely say that *no* custom printers (in this case, no custom *color*
>>>> printers in a very large part, if not all, of the San Francisco Bay Area)
>>>> is a very bad thing.
>>>
>>> Wasn't there a Gamma photo in the BA?
>>
>> Apparently still is (http://www.gammasf.com), but they only do b&w.
>> (Wet, though.) There may also still be at least one in Oakland, judging
>> from the prints still hanging in his window.
>>
>> I don't know for sure that there aren't *any* wet color labs hereabouts,
>> but I know of none.
>
> Labs have always been a losing proposition. Coupled with things like
> photographers with open accounts that don't pay its a bad business to be
> in. Now with high end inkjets that graphics departments can do in house
> imaging why spend the big bucks at the lab for just a single image when
> yo can invest a few 1,000 and do you own trade show displays.

Yeah, yeah, we all know too well why there aren't any wet color labs any
more. What would be much more interesting would be to hear about the one
or two still in business somewhere: people who aren't only interested in
the economic aspects of the trade.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

In article <rdlbl3ln54uf6jk1tquqhnu4aofj7svmj0.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>,
David Starr <davestarr.TakeThisOut@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:51:36 -0800, David Nebenzahl <nobody.TakeThisOut@but.us.chickens>
> wrote:
>
> >So I talked to the person today who I am pretty sure was the last to
> >operate a commercial wet color darkroom here in the San Francisco East
> >Bay, and sure enough, as I suspected since he just recently moved, his
> >darkroom didn't make the move. (His business was previously called
> >"Clone Art".) So as far as I know, that leaves nobody on this side of
> >the bay who makes "real" color prints. (Dunno about the South Bay or San
> >Francisco, but I don't hold out much hope there either.)
>
> Sounds like an opportunity for someone to start a niche business.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
> Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
> Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiricy
> Web Site: www.destarr.com
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Or lose a lot of money

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

In article <47788e1b$0$12715$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com>,
David Nebenzahl <nobody DeleteThis @but.us.chickens> wrote:


> >> but I know of none.
> >
> > Labs have always been a losing proposition. Coupled with things like
> > photographers with open accounts that don't pay its a bad business to be
> > in. Now with high end inkjets that graphics departments can do in house
> > imaging why spend the big bucks at the lab for just a single image when
> > yo can invest a few 1,000 and do you own trade show displays.
>
> Yeah, yeah, we all know too well why there aren't any wet color labs any
> more. What would be much more interesting would be to hear about the one
> or two still in business somewhere: people who aren't only interested in
> the economic aspects of the trade.

I personally would love a shot at it- that is; I would rather be
printing 40+ a week than doing what I am, promoting such a business as
any is a rather expensive proposition & requires advertising and such.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust 

"____" <internetphobic RemoveThis @deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-850C9E.18092631122007@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <47788e1b$0$12715$822641b3@news.adtechcomputers.com>,
> David Nebenzahl <nobody RemoveThis @but.us.chickens> wrote:
>> Yeah, yeah, we all know too well why there aren't any wet color labs any
>> more. What would be much more interesting would be to hear about the one
>> or two still in business somewhere: people who aren't only interested in
>> the economic aspects of the trade.
>
> I personally would love a shot at it- that is; I would rather be
> printing 40+ a week than doing what I am, promoting such a business as
> any is a rather expensive proposition & requires advertising and such.

So there ya are again with obvious the economy lesson.
 >> Stay informed about: Another one bites the dust