For someone who doesn't like vivid color film, you sure make a lot of beautiful colorful images.
Ferrania claims to be making E-6 soon, perhaps there's will be more muted
Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
After reading this E6 "bashing", looking at my E6 pics now I think I've made a most horrifing mistake in my life, I should've switched to humble digital long time ago or de-saturate and de-contrast all of my pics ASAP! Why I even shot the E6 in the first place? It's just beyond me! Especially now when they're considered very poor, horrible, excessive and oversaturated films by so many well regarded pro photographers. Will I ever grow up?
Cheers,
Margus
.....
Just shoot whatever fits your bill and keep the E6 film alive, or at least that little we have left
Margus
FYI I just got a big box of 35mm 400x from Unique Photo.
They had the best price I could find and the expiration date is Jan 2015.
They also sell Fuji Slide film Mailers that are processed by Dwayne's Photo.
I use a lot of them, I ordered 50 in early 2012 and they had an expiration date of 12-31-2013.
That was about a 2 year life span.
They were out of stock but Fuji just printed another batch with dates of 3-31-2014.
So it looks like Fuji will keep the contract with Dwayne's at least a little longer.
http://www.uniquephoto.com/product/...xposures-e-6-fujichrome-ektachrome-600006359/
Question (2 actually)
1. With those mailers can you send more than one roll of film in each mailer?
And two, how much are they?
Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
I remember way back in the old days... that's the mid to late '70's... Fujichrome and Agfachrome came with the mailer included. The Agfachrome mailer was a white cloth pouch, not a paper envelope. Very classy looking.
For most of its life, all Kodachrome sold in Canada included processing in its price. Kodak included a convenience envelope in the package, but it was the film cassette itself that confirmed that the processing was pre-paid.
In the US, Kodak was prohibited from selling the film including processing as a result of a consent decree issued in an anti-trust case initiated by the US government.
Yea, the US government is dumb... at least with that...
Do a little research on the Kodak anti-trust case before you call it dumb.
Would you pay $100 for a roll of C41 film and developing? That is what it used to cost in today's dollars.
And Kodak was in a habit of buying it's competition then shutting them down or raising he price of the product after they owned the it all.
We only got some price adjustments when Fuji came on strong in the USA.
Yes you could. The point of the order was Kodak owned the majority of the film making and developing in the US. Preventing them from selling process paid mailers was an attempt to get some competition in the market.
From:
Dead Link Removed
"The markets for color film and color photofinishing in 1954 were indisputably controlled by Kodak" (J.A. 75). Kodak had over 90% of the amateur color negative film market in 1954 (J.A. 214). Kodak did the photofinishing on all of its own color film (J.A. 220-21), because it controlled the technology, and because its photofinishing was included in the cost of the film (J.A. 234).(9)
9. The customer or retail dealer mailed the exposed film to Kodak for processing, and the prints were returned by mail in two to three weeks (J.A. 219-20). Kodak did the photofinishing of color film in large laboratories, supervised by engineers, due to the sensitivity of the process (J.A. 217-19). It refused, however, to process film produced by any other company, because its equipment could be contaminated by different chemicals they used (J.A. 220-21).
Yes you could. The point of the order was Kodak owned the majority of the film making and developing in the US. Preventing them from selling process paid mailers was an attempt to get some competition in the market.
From:
Dead Link Removed
"The markets for color film and color photofinishing in 1954 were indisputably controlled by Kodak" (J.A. 75). Kodak had over 90% of the amateur color negative film market in 1954 (J.A. 214). Kodak did the photofinishing on all of its own color film (J.A. 220-21), because it controlled the technology, and because its photofinishing was included in the cost of the film (J.A. 234).(9)
9. The customer or retail dealer mailed the exposed film to Kodak for processing, and the prints were returned by mail in two to three weeks (J.A. 219-20). Kodak did the photofinishing of color film in large laboratories, supervised by engineers, due to the sensitivity of the process (J.A. 217-19). It refused, however, to process film produced by any other company, because its equipment could be contaminated by different chemicals they used (J.A. 220-21).
Dwayne's didn't shut down Kodachrome - Kodak did, by shutting down supply of the processing chemistry. They coordinated the shut-down together.
When Dwaynes stopped processing Kodachrome, they were the last ones left, because the other labs, both Kodak and independent, had shut down theirs, due to the economics. Many of those labs could have been re-started (prior to 2010) because the equipment was available, but the economics stopped it.
And as part of the anti-trust decree, Kodak was forced to put a lot of resources into assisting their competitors in setting up and maintaining their Kodachrome lines.
However if they were doing things like "you can only sell Kodak film at your store or we wont sell to you" then that's NOT ok, but having free market choice on who to buy and have film developed with, that's the companies business.
Is this the beginning of the end for tranny film altogether? When you think about it, the media generally doesn't want it, (they demand digital) slide projectors are disappearing, as it becomes ever easier to view your efforts on the TV screen. There is probably a higher demand for colour neg., people still like prints to handle, and black & white is probably the primary area where film based results are preferred by many.
Another factor in the demise of tranny could be less and less labs around to process the film.
I see black & white as the main future for film based photography.
Why do I keep reading that 3 bath E-6 kits are poor quality? What evidence do you have to support this claim that all 3 bath E-6 kits are bad? The Tetenal Colortec E-6 Kit is available from Freestyle for amyone in the USA to buy and use at home. APUG members with huge amounts of experience and knowledge have said how good this kits is.
Show me one well done test that shows it is inferior to a 6 bath kit.
Btw it appears Ferrania will be making a 100 speed E-6 film soon... Good news....
~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?