But I understand why half-frame was an easy choice. Most of the mini labs should easily handle HF, square would be a nightmare.
That was a question I had. As someone who has never experienced half frame and lives where there's still a chain of drugstores who offer 1 hr* photo services, I was wondering how they might handle negs shot as half frame
*more like 4-24 hrs lately
Someone who has run a lab such as @foc might well have much deeper knowledge of this.
late 80s - early 90s I did not have my Darkroom going and so I used the minilab at the loacal walmart. I would bring in enogh rolls that the Manager of the depertment would greet me as "Hello Mr. MacDonald".My recollection is that most mini labs were made with the ability to recognise half frame? But they might well charge more, not for the processing but obviously if prints are involved it's double the number of prints...and possibly for scanning time a bit more might be charged. But I don't think half frame is a problem.
Do the two halves of half-frame fall completely within the normal spacing for one normal frame of 24x36mm? If so, Pentax might just expect labs to scan normally and each scan be a diptych. Pentax has already touted the practice of creating diptychs with this new half-frame camera.
Although, considering that Pentax suggested the inclusion of auto-exposure is because they don't expect new users to be able to make proper manual exposures, it seems a lot to expect users would always use the camera accurately planning the diptychs. Many users might not always want to make diptychs, either. I suppose that the scans of the diptychs could always be separated into individual images in computer editing, though.
Thank you for the mention. What I have to say only relates to my own lab and how we operated years ago.
Any Fuji Frontier I owned over 30 years didn't come with half frame capabilities. There was a 3rd party manual carrier but the important part was software adjustments but my local Fuji engineer wasn't too interested in helping with half frame and to be fair there was little or no customer interest in half frame until about 10 years ago.
The only way we could scan (Frontier or Pakon) half frame was to have the two images in the one full frame.
Like this (image from Analogue Wonderland)
View attachment 365871
To cut a long story short we made our own solution. I created an action in Photoshop that would separate, crop, and save each side of the half frame in the full frame scan. While it worked it was time consuming. The extra time involved could only be justified when prints were ordered. If it was develop and scan only, it wasn't worth it.
I did some simple research. I asked a few mail order customers would they prefer the above image or pay more for scans. All wanted the above image. I also Googled half frame developing and saw some other labs offering the same (as above) service. (this was 10-12 years ago)
My impression was that most of the half frame customers were new to film photography and liked the way the images were scanned. To them it was different and different was good. I never had a complaint from a half frame customer.
From the labs point of view, the half frame did require attention when scanning. The scanner software often had problems aligning the frames with in the scan area. The operator needed to pay extra attention with manual overrides now and again.
With modern 3D printing, I can't see a problem with automated negative scanning carriers being adapted and while the software is almost the same now as then, it is now easier to get help making changes to it.
The first film camera I ever shot was a Penti half frame that used the Rapid film cassette (the GDR/DDR version)
View attachment 365278
Noritsus do it out of the box with no additional hardware or software tweaks.
The video is pretty long, but I guess the most important part is at the end. They’re apparently aiming to bring 4 different cameras to the market in the near(?)-future.
The 4 cameras will be chronologically :
Of course, it is not a given that they will be able to bring these 4 cameras, it will depend on Ricoh management and sales of each camera type.
- The aforementioned half frame zone-focusing camera
- A high-end compact camera (Contax T2-like, maybe)
- A SLR (Guessing a 2000s camera equivalent chuck-full of electronics)
- A fully mechanical SLR
However, these kind of news make me hopeful for the future of (35mm) film. This looks like a comprehensive and great line-up of cameras.
Maybe they can make a small selection of manual mechanical lenses again to go with it. They could probably do well even with just 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Or perhaps to match their current selection of FA Limited lenses, the quirky focal length choices of 31mm, 43mm, and 77mm.
The SLR that's in demand right now is the Canon AE1. I'm unsure why as it's nothing truly special, other than it uses the unorthodox shutter priority mode by default. It's a nice camera, I have one and it will certainly get some use, but I don't see it as special.
Love this idea. I was thinking this and or bringing the Pentax 67 or 645 back into production.Personally I'd nix that idea, and replace it a simple 6x7 rangefinder, maybe fixed MF lens and electronic leaf shutter (with manual and AE controls) to keep costs down. Plenty of people out there would like a Mamiya 7, but also maintain ownership of both their kidneys.
I’d bet it’s more than you think. Most young photographers that I meet talk about moving up to medium format one day. Whether that’s financially feasible for them is another issue but the desire is there.We'd all appreciate a nice 6x7 camera....but how many of the young people want one? I've certainly seen a few young girls out there with Hasselblads, but they definitely had an air of money about them.
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?