Ektar 100 - interesting quote on Kodak website

StorminMatt · Mar 24, 2009

Q.G. said:
Not to pour gasoline on the flames, sincerely wondering: are there really so many of us who only use their images for projection in a darkened room?

This is apug.org. And let's face it. Viewing slides with a projector is analog viewing in its truest and highest form. So I am sure there are ALOT of folks here (myself included) who frequently drag out the old slide projector.

Alexander Ghaffari said:
Ha, how lucky they are! I can only afford looking at them against the sun. I am open for donations of a 5500K or so light table, 35mm projector, and 6x6/6x7/6x9 projectors. Let me know. ; )

Have yougone to craigslist lately? Seriously, used 35mm slide projectors are DIRT CHEAP these days. I, for instance, picked up a VERY new looking Kodak 4600 projector with 10 carousels for a measly $50. And I have since seen MANY projectors for less. I even found a medium format projector for $100. So I guess a least SOME positive will result from a decline in the popularity of slides.

keithwms said:
QG let me flip this statement: what is the worth of a method (digital file+ computer projector) that everyone is using? How much impact is lost when a person shows his/her colour work exactly same way that everyone else does?

I have never actually tried this. But I can see one SERIOUS problem: low resolution. Even if a drum scanner can scan a slide to an outlandishly high resolution (and, of course, the best DSLRS out there can shoot files well over 20MP), projectors are a SERIOUSLY weak link. Because even the best 'hi-def' projectors can only display 1080 lines. With the 3:2 aspect ratio typical of 35mm (and both full-frame and APS-C DSLRs), this translates into a 1620x1080 image - about 1.75MP. And the fact that you are only displaying 1.75MP is going to stick out like a sore thumb at the image sizes typical of projection. As everyone here knows, you need MORE resolution with greater enlargements (whether film or digital), not less.

perkeleellinen · Mar 24, 2009

Amongst my friends the biggest 'wow' factor came from projecting slides, it might be that they hadn't seen something like that in years and it was a novelty, though. Passing around prints is how I usually show my photos, in the past I've tried the scanning - computer screen method but people I know seem to have a really short attention span when looking at a computer and they just drift away.

tim_walls · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
I left that one blank so that you could add something nice and comforting by editing your original.

See, there is always a way around errors.

But, I could have done (e) I am not being petulant, I'm being tongue-in-cheek!

.

I woke up this morning and thought "oh dear, I hope PE realises I'm kidding him" - glad to see we are indeed both being tongue in cheek .

Q.G. · Mar 24, 2009

So nobody (of who responded anyway) has found an added value in being able to see large images without having to sit in a darkened back room?

Don't get mad at me, but i find that rather amazing, and strangely disturbing at the same time.
(But seriously!)

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

Q.G. said:
So nobody (of who responded anyway) has found an added value in being able to see large images without having to sit in a darkened back room?

Don't get mad at me, but i find that rather amazing, and strangely disturbing at the same time.
(But seriously!)

I see large images in a lit room. I have hanging up here and there 16x20 prints and 11x14 prints as well as framed 8x10 prints on table tops that were mostly made from color negatives.

So, I don't have to drag the projector out of the closet along with that huge screen, and wrestle to set it up, then convince everyone to go dark and at the same time keep the youngest grandchildren from crying in the dark and being unable to play.

I have lessened the number of spilled snacks and drinks in the dark, and have increased the feeling of sharing.

Oh well, this is what market analysis showed at EK in the 80s.

PE

Q.G. · Mar 24, 2009

Pfew! That's reassuring, PE.
Thanks!

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

tim_walls said:
.

I woke up this morning and thought "oh dear, I hope PE realises I'm kidding him" - glad to see we are indeed both being tongue in cheek .

Actually, I was reminded by a comment by Graham Norton recently who said "well, he is from Leeds, what do you expect!"

I thought that was rather strong and wrong coming from me, but Graham Norton got a good laugh from the audience over it.

Most of us in the US know nothing about Leeds anyhow.

PE

Alexander Ghaffari · Mar 24, 2009

StorminMatt said:
Have yougone to craigslist lately? Seriously, used 35mm slide projectors are DIRT CHEAP these days. I, for instance, picked up a VERY new looking Kodak 4600 projector with 10 carousels for a measly $50. And I have since seen MANY projectors for less. I even found a medium format projector for $100. So I guess a least SOME positive will result from a decline in the popularity of slides.

I have been looking there for over two years. I live in a greater city area of several million people. I have also scoured schools and hospitals.

How many years do you want me to wait? This is unnecessary torture. ; )

tim_walls · Mar 24, 2009

Q.G. said:
So nobody (of who responded anyway) has found an added value in being able to see large images without having to sit in a darkened back room?

Don't get mad at me, but i find that rather amazing, and strangely disturbing at the same time.

What I find strangely disturbing is your obsession with why other people enjoy protecting slides. Honestly, what is it to you?

OK, you prefer prints. Brilliant, well done, I couldn't be happier for you. No, really, I know it's as much a thrill for me as I'm sure it is for everyone here. But what is it to you if other people prefer projecting slides? Does it make you feel somehow inadequate to imagine other people might enjoy something you don't? Do you have some crushing spiritual need to evangelise prints and demonise slides because the voices in your head tell you to?

Because I'm completely failing to understand your motivation here.

I mean, some people like eating aubergines (eggplants for you stateside folk I believe.) Me, I can't stand them, but I don't lay awake at night feverishly trying to understand what motivates such deviants as would eat them, nor do I feel the need to repeatedly hit the miscreants over the head* until they explain their strange fetish to me.

* possibly the only good use for an aubergine.

tim_walls · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Actually, I was reminded by a comment by Graham Norton recently who said "well, he is from Leeds, what do you expect!"

I thought that was rather strong and wrong coming from me, but Graham Norton got a good laugh from the audience over it.

It's alright, I wouldn't have minded - I'm a southerner born & bred, merely interloping in the People's Republic of Yorkshire.

Most of us in the US know nothing about Leeds anyhow.

I think the phrase is 'be grateful for small mercies' .

StorminMatt · Mar 24, 2009

Alexander Ghaffari said:
I have been looking there for over two years. I live in a greater city area of several million people. I have also scoured schools and hospitals.

How many years do you want me to wait? This is unnecessary torture. ; )

You live in Cincinnati? How about these?

Kodak Carousel 5200 projector - $50
http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/pho/1084766550.html

Kodak Ektagraphic IIIE projector - $45
http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/pho/1085145744.html

Q.G. · Mar 24, 2009

tim_walls said:
What I find strangely disturbing is your obsession with why other people enjoy protecting slides. Honestly, what is it to you? [...]

I see it's f) and g) again.

Alexander Ghaffari · Mar 24, 2009

StorminMatt said:
You live in Cincinnati? How about these?

Kodak Carousel 5200 projector - $50
http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/pho/1084766550.html

Kodak Ektagraphic IIIE projector - $45
http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/pho/1085145744.html

What am I, a billionaire? If I had that kind of money, I would get my dang ear unclogged at an ENT office so that I could hear out of the right ear once more (and stop that incessant ringing). Schools are throwing these things away...I just need to snatch one before the garbage collectors arrive. I done spent all my money on school...ehh, I still do not regret not having a business major (not my passion) : (

Ektagraphic · Mar 24, 2009

Check the local Salvation Army weekly. You are bound to luck out. I have never seen one (I don't go there that often) there. I have found a great array of other photo stuff. Plenty of trays. I always wonder if I missed the projector whenever I see trays there. I have 3 projectors. One just died (not a Kodak...that says it all!). I have been cutting down on the amount of use they get to try to save their life span...Braun is still making them and sells them at B&H and they arn't that expensive. Certainly much much cheaper (and better image quality!) than any digital projector. I really don't care for those. Talk about poor color....I think it amazing that our movies are still shot one film and usually still projected streight off of film!

nworth · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Digital actually can pretty much do anything E6 can do, but cannot easily replicate C41 materials due to the tone scale and aliasing problems.

PE

It can't give you a physical transparency that will not disappear in two years due to deterioration of the media or changes in computer interface standards.

tim_walls · Mar 25, 2009

Q.G. said:
I see it's f) and g) again.

So that's "I haven't got an answer, I'm just here to troll" then, correct?

Q.G. · Mar 25, 2009

Tim,

It is clear that you do not like to read opinions contrary to your own.
You're just a troll, then. Correct? Correct!

Here (again) is my opinion): E6 does not provide better quality than C41, and the use of it is very limited.
So the guy at Kodak is correct.

But i bet you think he too is just a troll.
I bet too, seeing your contributions to this thread, that something like that is the only answer you can come up with anyway.
So you're just a troll, then. [Etcetera]

StorminMatt · Mar 25, 2009

Alexander Ghaffari said:
What am I, a billionaire? If I had that kind of money, I would get my dang ear unclogged at an ENT office so that I could hear out of the right ear once more (and stop that incessant ringing). Schools are throwing these things away...I just need to snatch one before the garbage collectors arrive. I done spent all my money on school...ehh, I still do not regret not having a business major (not my passion) : (

Look at it ths way about the price. These projectors originally costed a few hundred dollars. So getting one for ~$50 is not too bad of a deal. After all, it's only about the same cost as buying and processing maybe 2-3 rolls of film. That certainly makes it look ALOT cheaper. Besides, if you are looking for a slide projector for $5, you will probably be looking for a REALLY long time.

Ektagraphic · Mar 25, 2009

You can certainly find them for $5! I found a brand new Kodak Carousel 4400 for $5. Best find yet!!

StorminMatt · Mar 25, 2009

Ektagraphic said:
You can certainly find them for $5! I found a brand new Kodak Carousel 4400 for $5. Best find yet!!

I'm sure you can find a slide projector for $5 somewhere. After all, I got an EOS 3 a couple of weeks ago for $25. But you REALLY have to be in the right place at the right time to find such a deal. And if you are COUTING on finding such a deal, I hope you are in no hurry to get a slide projector.

StorminMatt · Mar 25, 2009

Anyway, as far as Ektar and the availability of C41 and E6 processing goes, I just had a thought. Specifically, quality C41 processing is really not THAT much easier (if ANY easier) to find than E6 processing. Sure, you can get C41 processed at any local Walgreens, Walmart, Rite-Aid, etc. But what kind of job are they going to do? Are they REALLY going to produce the kinds of results that someone of at least the prosumer level of photography expects? Probably not. So where would someone go who wants better? That's right. The same local lab that does E6. In other words, the same kinds of labs that are shutting down film operations left and right in favor of digital printing.

tim_walls · Mar 25, 2009

Q.G. said:
It is clear that you do not like to read opinions contrary to your own.
You're just a troll, then.

I can assure you that your opinions on matters photographic rank somewhere below whether or not you like aubergines on the list of things which concern me, and you'll no doubt be surprised to learn that's really very low indeed. So far in this thread though you've made, for example, entirely subjective remarks about whether or not people who shoot slide film have 'good taste', which moves out of opinion and into trolling.

If you want to sit and compare lp/mm figures all day be my guest, but that doesn't give you a right to pass judgment on other people's motivations or preferences. There are some people for whom numbers in a spreadsheet are not the defining quality of their art, thank God; if you're incapable of understanding that perhaps you have more in common with the digital shooters than you think.

So the guy at Kodak is correct.

But i bet you think he too is just a troll.

Assuming you mean PE, I have nothing but respect for his opinions; you could say you were polar opposites in that regard. Your attempts to hang onto his coattails really are rather demeaning though...

keithwms · Mar 25, 2009

Ganbatte Fuji-san!

Q.G. · Mar 26, 2009

Dear Troll Tim,

[snipped]

dfoo · Mar 26, 2009

Please guys, give it a rest.

Ektar 100 - interesting quote on Kodak website

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency