Best B&W reversal film to convert photos into 35mm slides?

[ttok]

I have to present two talks, with photos, to an historical society in October. The basis for each presentation is a set of old 616-size B&W photos that I would like to present as 35mm slides to the audience. What is the best 35mm film to use to copy these photos? There are about 650 photos in one presentation and a couple hundred in the other!

I also cannot develop the film timely, so can you recommend a lab that would process the film as reversal (and mount the slides?) I have a dedicated darkroom with three enlargers, stainless Leedal sink, etc., but the wash water here is way too HOT to develop film until wintertime. The darkroom is air conditioned, but I do not have a water chiller. I see from some of the reversal posts here that reversal-processed film needs to be developed (washed) at about 68*F -70*F.

Have been lurking here for a number of years and LOVE THIS GROUP! I have learned a lot from you all - thank you!!

A.T.

 

[wy2l]

www.dr5.com

 

[destroya]

you can do it yourself. it will take a long time but be much cheaper than dr5. search for b&w reversal and you will find many threads on how to do it.

i find that traditional grained films work the best. I would use FP4 or rollei retro 80s.

just put 2 or 3 gallon jugs of water in the fridge to mix with your warmer tap water to get the temps down

 

[Sirius Glass]

www.dr5.com

Wot he done did sed, bye gum!

 

[MartinP]

If the originals are black-and-white prints, then why not use standard E6 transparency-film to shoot the material? You will then also be able to comment on the differences in colour (if any) of the aged prints.

To maintain a constant colour-temperature for shooting the material, I suggest either flash or photo-CFL lamps, making a lighting test before you shoot the bulk of the material, of course. Shoot the differently shaped prints on a black background, to avoid dazzle and distraction.

 

[McFortner]

Kodak Direct Duplicating Microfilm 2468, when developed in standard b/w chemicals, will yield positive images. It's ISO 0.8, but that's no problem for what you are doing. You can find it at the FPP store Dead Link Removed. You can find it elsewhere in bulk rolls, but be careful. Some of it is non-perforated. I got a 400' roll that way and have to use my Canon EOS 10S to shoot it. FPP is your best bet if you only need one roll..

 

[jeffreyg]

If you have or have access to a copy stand your task will be easy although time consuming depending on how many you have to copy. If it is equipped with daylight flash then use daylight color slide film. Have the bulbs on the right and left of the print and at 45 degree angles to the base board. Have a piece of glass handy if the prints don't lay flat. If it has tungsten flood bulbs as many do use Fujichrome T64 film or daylight color slide film and an 80A or 80B filter depending on the bulbs. You will need a lab that does E6 processing. I mail my slide film to Denver Digital Imaging Center (they provide mailers). They do a nice job and are reliable.

Note that the film has 36 exposures/roll so for the number of photos you mentioned you would need 24 rolls of film plus the processing. $$$-ouch! Have you considered a digital presentation? Editing down the number of slides? Going through 650 slides in one lecture presentation could easily run three or more hours. Does the society want to sit that long?

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[nwilkins]

yes I was also going to suggest going digital unless you really need to have slides for some reason. photos can be scanned and made into a powerpoint presentation much more quickly and much more cheaply.

 

[MartinP]

yes I was also going to suggest going digital unless you really need to have slides for some reason. photos can be scanned and made into a powerpoint presentation much more quickly and much more cheaply.

Digital projection with a standard commercial 'beamer' is very low quality. Everyone who I have shown 35mm slides to has been surprised (except for photographically 'old' people who have seen them before, of course).

Simplest solution is for the OP to use standard E6 film and have it commercially processed, then mount it himself in AN-glass mounts.

 

[nwilkins]

I'm not here arguing over quality (though I do take some issue with that given the quality of LED projectors today). Just suggesting a route that would be simplest and cheapest and perfectly adequate for a historical society audience. I love slides as much as the next guy but that doesn't mean they're always worth the extra time and expense in every situation. I just wanted to let the OP know that there is a way to do it with a lot less leg work. I also realize that for many people here the "leg work" is the thing they enjoy most about photography.

 

[jeffreyg]

+1 (nwilkins). During the past couple of years I attended presentations by Sally Mann and Elliott Ewirtt. They used digital projection that did not detract from their program. I think the audience is more interested in the substance of the lecture then the equipment and resolution of the images. Also after the presentations he would have approximately 800 slides to store perhaps never again to be viewed. It would be easy to digitally catalog them as well as reproduce various ones as needed.

I prefer film for my personal use but sometimes a more practical approach is better.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com//

 

[MartinP]

Well I was just trying to answer the question put by the OP. On the other hand, the audience may well be asleep after the first hundred shots, however they are presented !!

 

[Devlog]

Maybe Adox Silvermax? Accepts reverse development as well.

http://www.adox.de/Photo/adox-films-2/adox-silvermax/

 

[ttok]

Thank you guys very much!!

I contacted dr5.com yesterday - they look like the best bet for reversal processing. However, they are moving and last processed reversal film back in May! They hope to have a new location by mid-September, but that is cutting it CLOSE to my October date! Their building in Colorado was sold and they are moving out of state. They continue to process all other types of film - just not reversal! They will resume processing reversal film after they have moved - just my luck!!

I also looked at the FPP store, and it looks very promising to use Kodak microfilm 2468! I have a Nikon FM-2 with a Nikon 55mm macro copy lens and a good copy stand. I have used the setup to copy more than 6,000 photos and document pages (many at the National Archives in Suitalnd, Md.) on Panatomic-X and TechPan films. This microfilm seems close to what I have used for copy negatives in the past. If I use this approach, I will have to experiment with exposure times, but can develop with D-76, etc.

The guys in attendance at the historical society presentations want to see good photos. Most of my photos to be copied are in an old (1917) scrapbook, glued on BOTH SIDES of pages made of thick black construction paper. The paper is very brittle and breaks apart when handled. There are four photos per page, all in good condition and fully identified. I think it would be very hard to digitize them without destroying the pages in the book. I did find 125 slides presented at a previous meeting that really look great - hope to add to those with images of approximately equal quality.

A.T.

 

[MartinP]

If you can photograph the pages with a film camera then you can also photograph them with a digital one -- there is no reason to try to scan them. Nevertheless, I find the requirement for black-and-white transparencies instead of standard, easy-to-use, colour E6 film incomprehensible.

Edit: I make the assumption that E6 film is still available, and can still be processed, in USA and this may not be the case of course.

 

[Oxleyroad]

ttok, where are you. might be able to help if you are close to MI