It was in between the paper magazine climbing up the previously mentioned "elevator" thingy and leading towards the laser exposure unit. I'm still not sure how it ended up being that long, or how there was space for it as the mechanics of the machine are obviously designed to keep the paper flat. We hung on to it for several weeks just because it was such a neat thing to look at!
Priceless lab tech moments.
-
A
- Thread starter bob100684
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Canon 50mm 1.8 ltm (later black & chrome version)
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Want to Buy Mamiya Sekor 145mm Soft Focus 645 Lens
- Started by GDI
-
For Sale Nikon 400mm 5.6 ED Ai
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Two Durst L184 colorhead enlargers with motorized focus and negative carriers
- Started by Early Riser
Forum statistics
It was in between the paper magazine climbing up the previously mentioned "elevator" thingy and leading towards the laser exposure unit. I'm still not sure how it ended up being that long, or how there was space for it as the mechanics of the machine are obviously designed to keep the paper flat. We hung on to it for several weeks just because it was such a neat thing to look at!
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 510
- Format
- 35mm
Weird. My favorite WTF is that moment with regards to paper wasn't a jam, but apparently when fuji tears a roll, the cut off the damaged areas and splice it back together with a large oval hole in the middle. This apparently lets the print processor know to not expose that piece of paper. So we had just adjusted several thousand digital files, and were letting it print, listening to the rhythm our 340 makes wirrclunkclickwirr, and all of a sudden WIIIRR WIIIR WIIIR and then a noise that sounded like the biggest paper jam ever in the exposure section. waited for whatever was in the processor to come out, but a like 3' long piece with a whole in the center was all that happened. Prints kept comming out just like normal.
We had a student who kept fogging film when he processed it. Couldn't figure it out until we decided to accompany him into the darkroom. He got his film ready, reached for the pull-cord light switch and screwed his eyes closed....The switch didn't work perfectly so, with eyes tight shut, he took his film out to process it with the light on. Maybe he was scared of the dark?!
What's the N-word?
Classic case of lights on, nobody home!
Gotta love them!Sometimes watching their whole process is the only way to figure out what is being done wrong. I have watched students toss around single-weight fiber paper, then accuse others of messing with their prints while it was on the drying screens because the prints were all wrinkled and dimpled when dry.
Vaughn
Apo -- "n-word" -- unacceptable slang word used to describe someone with (non-Arab) African ancestry
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 461
- Format
- Medium Format
..oh-man the stories i could tell you from my collage 1hr days[when it all just started]....we all had to start somewhere..
like the time a lady brought in her 110 camera, i loaded the film, took the negs to the printer machine.. I noted some big clear looking spots on the negs.. the prints come out and there is big shadowed roaches crawling over Jr's face... baby roaches walking on the film while mom was taking her 110 photo's... my recommendations on the envelope... fumigate camera.
@ another 1hr high volume shop, night shift while in collage in NYC, we were right next to the county morgue. the head coroner would shoot all his autopsies. you cant imagine how people die and what we do to each other....
..or how about; ....woops! I dropped my roll of film.. will it be out of focus??
..the mid 80's was it for me and 1hr photo... full circle however, now i'm back in the lab, going on 11 years.
dw
like the time a lady brought in her 110 camera, i loaded the film, took the negs to the printer machine.. I noted some big clear looking spots on the negs.. the prints come out and there is big shadowed roaches crawling over Jr's face... baby roaches walking on the film while mom was taking her 110 photo's... my recommendations on the envelope... fumigate camera.
@ another 1hr high volume shop, night shift while in collage in NYC, we were right next to the county morgue. the head coroner would shoot all his autopsies. you cant imagine how people die and what we do to each other....
..or how about; ....woops! I dropped my roll of film.. will it be out of focus??
..the mid 80's was it for me and 1hr photo... full circle however, now i'm back in the lab, going on 11 years.
dw
"Blazing Saddles", 1974, right?
Vaughn
Disco.
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 510
- Format
- 35mm
never got autopsies, got some crime scene photos, one of a guy who's head was now a puddle of jello, plastic surgeons, eye surgeons...that stuff was nasty.
Our units in the USAF were charged with taking forensic photos of every accident or death on our base or involving AF people. As such, I have seen some photos that still haunt me. These things should be forgotten! At least that is my feeling. Many more accidents take place on military bases than you might expect. Almost all of them had to go across my desk for approval for release to the Military Police.
I can relate to "Ducky" somewhat.
(call or write about this one if it is obscure to you 
)
PE
I can relate to "Ducky" somewhat.
(call or write about this one if it is obscure to you )PE
Been there, done them all and then some. My favorite, or one of them..
APS film where the guy hit the panoramic button on his camera. All his pictures came out as 4x8 or 4x12, whatever. He was surprised at the price of his prints. Very surprised. He then asked me to 'print them right'. So I ask him "You want them cropped or you want a border?" He said neither. After nearly arguing with him and giving him a lesson on proportions and basic math, he decided to crop. Then we felt we f*&*&ed up again as the prints were 'grainy'. Asshole.
Also the lady with the 1970s photo portrait that had been painted over.. Wanted a reproduction and 'digital touch up'. I fixed it. I fixed all the black sharpie marks on the knife stabs. Then she accused me of marking her original up with a sharpie. She fought with me, saying I touched up her original and did a sloppy job (I scanned the f&*^*&ng ugly thing in photoshop and printed a new one, never touched the original).
Or the lady who had ugly art on slide film.. had it shot by a 'professional'. After I ran her slide film she flipped out because the guy didn't crop it tight enough and you could see boom arms and light boxes, etc.
She blamed me, said I introduced these errors while processing.
After at least 5 phone calls and screaming with the guy who shot them.. the poor guy calls me and apologizes to be and says that she is a picky youknowwhat and has no idea what she is doing.
I find it funny that people thing we can magically add things to negatives and slide film, both pre and post exposure aside from dust, scratches and gross erroneous exposure.
I loved the job. And I absolutely hated the job and the people.
But the guy with the Wisner and the guy with the collection of MF folders who eagerly showed them to me made it worth it. Also the free minty Crown Graphic. Oooh.
APS film where the guy hit the panoramic button on his camera. All his pictures came out as 4x8 or 4x12, whatever. He was surprised at the price of his prints. Very surprised. He then asked me to 'print them right'. So I ask him "You want them cropped or you want a border?" He said neither. After nearly arguing with him and giving him a lesson on proportions and basic math, he decided to crop. Then we felt we f*&*&ed up again as the prints were 'grainy'. Asshole.
Also the lady with the 1970s photo portrait that had been painted over.. Wanted a reproduction and 'digital touch up'. I fixed it. I fixed all the black sharpie marks on the knife stabs. Then she accused me of marking her original up with a sharpie. She fought with me, saying I touched up her original and did a sloppy job (I scanned the f&*^*&ng ugly thing in photoshop and printed a new one, never touched the original).
Or the lady who had ugly art on slide film.. had it shot by a 'professional'. After I ran her slide film she flipped out because the guy didn't crop it tight enough and you could see boom arms and light boxes, etc.
She blamed me, said I introduced these errors while processing.
After at least 5 phone calls and screaming with the guy who shot them.. the poor guy calls me and apologizes to be and says that she is a picky youknowwhat and has no idea what she is doing.
I find it funny that people thing we can magically add things to negatives and slide film, both pre and post exposure aside from dust, scratches and gross erroneous exposure.
I loved the job. And I absolutely hated the job and the people.
But the guy with the Wisner and the guy with the collection of MF folders who eagerly showed them to me made it worth it. Also the free minty Crown Graphic. Oooh.
Seattle Film/PhotoWorks is the scourge of my existence. "Why can't you develop my film?" and then the inevitable "Well just try.." and 75% of the time it comes out looking like I rubbed the film on asphalt.
I was a photoshop master. Swapping heads, adding things, taking them out. Adding people to pictures, etc. The most gratifying ones were the ones that went on tombstones. Those will be there forever. I liked doing the dead people ones.
I also sold 150-200mm canon ef lenses or whatever, the cheap ones.. The ticket to selling them is that "You can take pictures of deer from far away with this". I sold so many of those using that line.
I was doing work that cost $50-75 an hour and got paid $8 an hour. I think the place is going under anyhow. Sad, the camera repairman who has been associated with the place for like 40 years knew the whole story. Ran the black and white side, had/has the last working kodak print processor from the 60s or 70s (the folks at kodak told him this).I believe it as he had the thing jerry-rigged with parts from noritsu and chrysler I swear.. Finally kodak discontinued the developer-incorporated paper and he couldn't get Ilford to work, which is when he decided to retire.
Went from 50+ rolls a week to 2 a week of black and white. Ah well. Sorry to blab on..
I was a photoshop master. Swapping heads, adding things, taking them out. Adding people to pictures, etc. The most gratifying ones were the ones that went on tombstones. Those will be there forever. I liked doing the dead people ones.
I also sold 150-200mm canon ef lenses or whatever, the cheap ones.. The ticket to selling them is that "You can take pictures of deer from far away with this". I sold so many of those using that line.
I was doing work that cost $50-75 an hour and got paid $8 an hour. I think the place is going under anyhow. Sad, the camera repairman who has been associated with the place for like 40 years knew the whole story. Ran the black and white side, had/has the last working kodak print processor from the 60s or 70s (the folks at kodak told him this).I believe it as he had the thing jerry-rigged with parts from noritsu and chrysler I swear.. Finally kodak discontinued the developer-incorporated paper and he couldn't get Ilford to work, which is when he decided to retire.
Went from 50+ rolls a week to 2 a week of black and white. Ah well. Sorry to blab on..
NCISOur units in the USAF were charged with taking forensic photos of every accident or death on our base or involving AF people. As such, I have seen some photos that still haunt me. These things should be forgotten! At least that is my feeling. Many more accidents take place on military bases than you might expect. Almost all of them had to go across my desk for approval for release to the Military Police.
I can relate to "Ducky" somewhat.
PE
all I can say is that photos don't smell.....
While I never worked in a photo lab, while dropping by I saw plenty. I've heard people ask about dropping their film and making it fuzzy. I also watched one woman complain about an odd pattern on her photo. The tech asked her which one and she showed him the print while grabbing the negative with her bare fingers and (holding both sides with her fingers) showed him which frame. Yup, the "odd pattern" was an enlarged fingerprint.
Our photographers sometimes came back sick and explained why. In particular, the odor affected them.
BTW. Someone said that I looked like Ilya Kuryakin when I was young.
JK.
PE
BTW. Someone said that I looked like Ilya Kuryakin when I was young.
JK.PE
My wife has witessed autopsies in the past. The smell gets everyone, as it connects directly to your brain, and you can't filter it. At least the ones she saw were fresh.
Rub Vaseline under your nose! I'm told it helps.
PE
PE
I can relate to "Ducky" somewhat.
PE
You had a hyperactive hottie roaming around?
Nope.
But I need a Caf-Pow!
PE
But I need a Caf-Pow!
PE
I farted in the darkroom just as I put a sheet of 11x14 fibre base paper into the developing tray....I thought I was going to die....
Priceless moments
Here's one from my Dye Transfer Days:
When I was a student at Ryerson Polytechnic Institute in the 1970's (now known as Ryerson Polytechnic University), I was required to make dye transfer prints. The first one was made from three negatives which were produced in-camera, using three sharp-cutting separation filters; said negatives were made using Kodak Super-XX Pan film. The problem with that film was getting enough contrast for the blue-filter negative, with the HC-110 developer we were using.
The development times got a bit long, to say the least; I recall that the time for that negative was something like 20 minutes in HC-110, dilution A. I was merrily "tray shuffling" several sheets of film, and just as the 20-minute mark came up on the timer, one of my friends, who had been leaning against the wall, stood up. In doing do, he brushed against a light switch, and the lights came on.
I will never forget the shocked look on his face! His punishment for messing up our film was to take the next 20-minute turn developing the film!
BTW, we were the last group to use Super-XX/HC-110 combo; the next bunch of students got to use Separation Negative Film, Type 2 and DK-50, which gave more contrast and much shorter times!
Here's one from my Dye Transfer Days:
When I was a student at Ryerson Polytechnic Institute in the 1970's (now known as Ryerson Polytechnic University), I was required to make dye transfer prints. The first one was made from three negatives which were produced in-camera, using three sharp-cutting separation filters; said negatives were made using Kodak Super-XX Pan film. The problem with that film was getting enough contrast for the blue-filter negative, with the HC-110 developer we were using.
The development times got a bit long, to say the least; I recall that the time for that negative was something like 20 minutes in HC-110, dilution A. I was merrily "tray shuffling" several sheets of film, and just as the 20-minute mark came up on the timer, one of my friends, who had been leaning against the wall, stood up. In doing do, he brushed against a light switch, and the lights came on.
I will never forget the shocked look on his face! His punishment for messing up our film was to take the next 20-minute turn developing the film!
BTW, we were the last group to use Super-XX/HC-110 combo; the next bunch of students got to use Separation Negative Film, Type 2 and DK-50, which gave more contrast and much shorter times!
Terrence;
I'm surprised at that. AFAIK, HC110 was never recommended for use with DT separations.
PE
I'm surprised at that. AFAIK, HC110 was never recommended for use with DT separations.
PE
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |