|
Next: Konica 750 IR
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2003 12:45 pm
Post subject: Films
Archived from groups: rec>photo>film+labs, others (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Mar 28, 2004
Posts: 227
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2003 12:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Yes, but why would you want to. The developed film is stable and does not
need to be frozen.
If you mean can you put both exposed and unexposed film in the freezer, the
answer is again yes. Freezing will help stabilize the latent image a bit,
but you should process the film fairly promptly in any case. Be sure to
thaw it completely before processing or using.
"Alex" <alexanderandyyip DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bk9ha5$5gf$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> Can we put developed and undeveloped films into a freezers?
>
> Thx for infos.
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 17, 2004
Posts: 1674
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2003 12:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Alex" <alexanderandyyip.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<bk9ha5$5gf$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au>...
> Can we put developed and undeveloped films into a freezers?
>
> Thx for infos.
Yes. You open the freezer door, place the film inside, the close the door.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2003 9:01 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>film+labs (more info?)
|
|
|
OH yea, I mean exposed and unexposed.
Got it wrong there =P
"Norman Worth" <nworth.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:wC1ab.6566$UN4.575@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Yes, but why would you want to. The developed film is stable and does not
> need to be frozen.
>
> If you mean can you put both exposed and unexposed film in the freezer,
the
> answer is again yes. Freezing will help stabilize the latent image a bit,
> but you should process the film fairly promptly in any case. Be sure to
> thaw it completely before processing or using.
>
> "Alex" <alexanderandyyip.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bk9ha5$5gf$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> > Can we put developed and undeveloped films into a freezers?
> >
> > Thx for infos.
> >
> >
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 12
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:41 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>film+labs, others (more info?)
|
|
|
why the hell would you want to freeze it anyway..........in the fridge it
will last a few years.........if that is not long enough you should rethink
why you are buying the film in the first place......
anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
"Alex" <alexanderandyyip.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bk9ha5$5gf$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> Can we put developed and undeveloped films into a freezers?
>
> Thx for infos.
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 01, 2003
Posts: 14
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:41 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Peter Wallis" <newspete DeleteThis @tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f6c4af7@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
a real photographer could have done that easily. thanks to digital,
everybody thinks they're a photographer now.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 03, 2003
Posts: 36
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 5:12 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:41:23 +1000, "Peter Wallis"
<newspete RemoveThis @tpg.com.au> wrote:
>anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
>week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
>
What a crock of BS.
I made over $2500 in 1 day using a 1936 vintage Leica while a
freelance news shooter back in 1981..
I have also made several hundred from a single print on several
occasions...
Digital is no better or worse than film cameras..<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 07, 2003
Posts: 280
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 5:15 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <6WqdnRO3UbfImfCiXTWJig.TakeThisOut@comcast.com>,
"M77" <Matt@*giantdork.com> wrote:
> "Peter Wallis" <newspete.TakeThisOut@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3f6c4af7@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> > anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> > week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
>
> a real photographer could have done that easily. thanks to digital,
> everybody thinks they're a photographer now.
Are you reading my mind?...& on a second agreeing note I once made 3K in a single
week because of my film camera,,,,,what it boils down to is Who DF cares?
What really matters is not one week but every week, for many many years
after the thrill of shooting digital fades what it amounts to is do you have the juice
to do it for 40 years. Well I have 20 so far without a digital camera......some maybe
I should revise it 60 years 
--
website:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank" target="_blank">http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 21, 2003
Posts: 27
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 12:39 pm
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Gregory W. Blank wrote:
> In article <6WqdnRO3UbfImfCiXTWJig.RemoveThis@comcast.com>,
> "M77" <Matt@*giantdork.com> wrote:
>>"Peter Wallis" <newspete.RemoveThis@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
>>news:3f6c4af7@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
>>>week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
>>a real photographer could have done that easily. thanks to digital,
>>everybody thinks they're a photographer now.
>
>
> Are you reading my mind?...& on a second agreeing note I once made 3K in a single
> week because of my film camera,,,,,what it boils down to is Who DF cares?
What it boils down to, is that photography is way more than the
choice of capture medium. Digital or film, it doesn't matter now
that we're seeing mainstream digital cameras that capture at
resolution/sharpness competitive, if not indistinguishable, from
mainstream film in prints 8x12 and below.
It's just not worth getting worked up about.
I say this as someone that loves the unique qualities of
film capture, especially B&W capture. But, when it comes
to photography, snapshots and most professional, digital
is practically superior.
Art photography is another story, though.
Dana<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 21, 2003
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 6:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
There is application I read about where digital had it over film.
There is a wedding photographer shooting digital. He would sit in his van
with a laptop and portable inkjet printing out proofsheets with an album
program after the wedding and hand them out at the reception with order
forms.
Try THAT with c41 or E6 
"Colyn" <colyng DeleteThis @swbell.net> wrote in message
news:uv1qmv8q26nful5r11k2thch4hmc5eije6@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:41:23 +1000, "Peter Wallis"
> <newspete DeleteThis @tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> >anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> >week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
> >
> What a crock of BS.
>
> I made over $2500 in 1 day using a 1936 vintage Leica while a
> freelance news shooter back in 1981..
>
> I have also made several hundred from a single print on several
> occasions...
>
> Digital is no better or worse than film cameras..
>
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 21, 2003
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 10:30 pm
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
David in Perth wrote:
> There is application I read about where digital had it over film.
>
> There is a wedding photographer shooting digital. He would sit in his van
> with a laptop and portable inkjet printing out proofsheets with an album
> program after the wedding and hand them out at the reception with order
> forms.
>
> Try THAT with c41 or E6
>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.asf.com/products/digipix/inputstation.asp" target="_blank">http://www.asf.com/products/digipix/inputstation.asp</a>
should not say that as its available now shooting film to digital.
>
>
> "Colyn" <colyng.DeleteThis@swbell.net> wrote in message
> news:uv1qmv8q26nful5r11k2thch4hmc5eije6@4ax.com...
>
>>On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:41:23 +1000, "Peter Wallis"
>><newspete.DeleteThis@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
>>>week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
>>>
>>
>>What a crock of BS.
>>
>>I made over $2500 in 1 day using a 1936 vintage Leica while a
>>freelance news shooter back in 1981..
>>
>>I have also made several hundred from a single print on several
>>occasions...
>>
>>Digital is no better or worse than film cameras..
>>
>>
>>
>
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 21, 2003
Posts: 8
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2003 12:10 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
What if you want to produce a print 4x6 feet of high quality try that with
digital
"Wiz" <wiz RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f6d6fb1$0$95046$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
>
> David in Perth wrote:
>
> > There is application I read about where digital had it over film.
> >
> > There is a wedding photographer shooting digital. He would sit in his
van
> > with a laptop and portable inkjet printing out proofsheets with an album
> > program after the wedding and hand them out at the reception with order
> > forms.
> >
> > Try THAT with c41 or E6
> >
>
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.asf.com/products/digipix/inputstation.asp</font" target="_blank">http://www.asf.com/products/digipix/inputstation.asp</font</a>>
>
> should not say that as its available now shooting film to digital.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > "Colyn" <colyng RemoveThis @swbell.net> wrote in message
> > news:uv1qmv8q26nful5r11k2thch4hmc5eije6@4ax.com...
> >
> >>On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:41:23 +1000, "Peter Wallis"
> >><newspete RemoveThis @tpg.com.au> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> >>>week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
> >>>
> >>
> >>What a crock of BS.
> >>
> >>I made over $2500 in 1 day using a 1936 vintage Leica while a
> >>freelance news shooter back in 1981..
> >>
> >>I have also made several hundred from a single print on several
> >>occasions...
> >>
> >>Digital is no better or worse than film cameras..
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2003 4:11 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
David in Perth wrote:
> There is application I read about where digital had it over film.
>
> There is a wedding photographer shooting digital. He would sit in his van
> with a laptop and portable inkjet printing out proofsheets with an album
> program after the wedding and hand them out at the reception with order
> forms.
>
> Try THAT with c41 or E6
>
Just takes a little longer in which time the guests get even more pissed
and are ready to order anything waved in front of them<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 12
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:46 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
so are you saying that with film that you could have emailed images out half
an hour after you are taking them........you must be really good......tossa
"M77" <Matt@*giantdork.com> wrote in message
news:6WqdnRO3UbfImfCiXTWJig@comcast.com...
>
> "Peter Wallis" <newspete RemoveThis @tpg.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3f6c4af7@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> > anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> > week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
>
> a real photographer could have done that easily. thanks to digital,
> everybody thinks they're a photographer now.
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 12
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:48 am
Post subject: Re: Films [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Sull shit hey......keep using ya shit vintage leica......you can not email
images from ya vintage leica.......i was not worried about the money aspect
as the abbility to email images straight away and I would have not made that
money if not for digital......
ya fucking tossa
"Colyn" <colyng.TakeThisOut@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:uv1qmv8q26nful5r11k2thch4hmc5eije6@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:41:23 +1000, "Peter Wallis"
> <newspete.TakeThisOut@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> >anyway......digital is better so stuff film......made 2500 dollars this
> >week.......could not have done that with a film camera.....
> >
> What a crock of BS.
>
> I made over $2500 in 1 day using a 1936 vintage Leica while a
> freelance news shooter back in 1981..
>
> I have also made several hundred from a single print on several
> occasions...
>
> Digital is no better or worse than film cameras..
>
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Films |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
