Staple negs to proofs?

I use a theoretically similar system:

I keep proof sheets in hanging folders with printing records
paperclipped to their backs;
I keep sleeved negatives on hanging bars in another filing box. These
are separated from the proofs to limit negative shuffling and make
reviewing proofs easier.

Proofs and negative sleeves are labeled using sequentially
numbered, computer-printed labels. The return address-sized labels fit
perfectly in the margin of Printfile sleeves where the sleeve hanger
fits.
I've been thinking of shifting my older negatives into notebooks,
but worry about dust and don't really want to pay for notebooks with
slipcovers.
BTW, I've used Printfile proofing sleeves that theoretically hold
proof sheets, but find them inconvenient.


Pieter Litchfield wrote:
I use 3 notebooks -

1 - has hole punched plastic negative pages, 7 strips of 5 35mm frames each
2 - has proof sheets in 8.5 x 11 hole punched "page protector" plastic
pouches
3 - has 8.5 x 11 ruled notbook paper with "production notes" - dates, times,
camera, film type, description of frames printed, etc.

All plastic carriers I use are "archival" and pre-punched. I use primarily
35mm, although I also use 4x5 and 2 1/4 square - there are also punched
plastic negative carriers for those sizes as well.

Each roll of film is assigned a unique sequential number (primary key to you
system freaks). The 3 sheets for each film all acrry the same number, so
that contact sheet holder # 121 is related to negative holder # 121 and
production notes #121.

I file 100 of each per set of notebooks ( 1 1/2 in. thcikess books), 3
notebooks per set.

There is no reason you could not use this system in a "1 notebook" system by
filing the negative sheet, the contact print, and the production notes all
as a group on one notebook. I use 3 books because I believe that shuffling
the neagtive sheets to look at contacts could be physically harmful to them,
so putting the contact sheets in a seperate notebooks allows me to rummage
through them without concern for the negatives.

When I find a frame I wish to print in the contact sheet book, I go to the
negative book, open to the sequentially numbered page, and pick out the film
strip with the frame to print. Takes only seconds, and if you are somewhat
studious (aka anal) about promptly filing your work, you will have a
more-or-less chronological history of your work.

I have not yet gone so bonkers as to suggest a computerized database by
frame so I can retrieve all frames with, for example, dogs in them. But it
would be simple. The 23rd frame of 35mm roll #121 could be assigned a number
like "121035" tha would uniquely ID it and allow easy cross reference to the
negative books. So my numbering system would work fine for that purpose.

If I require more than one page per film, all those pages have the same
number. For example, since a page of 35mm negatives contains room for 35
shots (and my Nikon will squeeze 37 out of a roll), I may have to use two
pages for a roll. Each would be labelled as (#121, page 1) and (#121, page
2). Of course, each frame can still have a unique ID regardless of which
page it is on. (#121014 is on page one, #121037 is on page 2) The same
reasoning applies to other sizes.

Even though 4 x 5 shots don't come "in rolls", I use at least a single page
per shooting session (4 negatives per page), even if there is only 1 shot on
the page, and treat exactly as above. That way, the production notes will
correctly reflect the data about the camera, film, and other data.



"Mike King" wrote in message
...
I am generally against putting sharp pointy things like staples in close
proximity to my precious (to me anyway) negatives. I put contact sheets,
back to back, in album pages next to the printfile negative pages in
binders
that organize my stuff by year and/or subject.

Mike

"Stephen" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:53:04 -0400, "lew" had a
flock of green cheek conures squawk out:

I have half an idea that it should be obvious to me why I should *not*
staple my printfile pages to their proofsheets, that other half is
saying
that this is an idea whose time has come. Why should I spend hours
trying
to
reassemble these pairs or reproof when I can't match them up? Any
opinions
out there?
-Lew


Use the printfile pages that can hold the negatives and proof sheet.

Double sided tape to tape the proofs to the pages.

Use a 3-ring notebook to keep them together.

Staples will scratch your negatives, no matter how careful you are in
storing the pages.

Stephen

--

"lew" wrote in message
...
I have half an idea that it should be obvious to me why I should *not*
staple my printfile pages to their proofsheets, that other half is saying
that this is an idea whose time has come. Why should I spend hours trying
to reassemble these pairs or reproof when I can't match them up? Any
opinions out there?
-Lew

If you're trying to come up with a filing system that makes no sense. Why do
you need to reassemble them? You make one contact and file it away. Then you
fle the negs.

I just serial number (year/roll #, ie 0142) the contact & the sleeve and
file them seperately. The contacts are in a folder; the negs are in hanging
file cabinets. The less you handle negs the less chance of damage. When I'm
looking for a particular neg the contacts get all the abuse. When I find the
frame in question I go to the neg file and pull it.

Natural Light Black and White Photography
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze76ane/
-George-

I guess our needs differ.
-Lew

George -

I gave the same response as yours in more elaborate form some time ago in
this thread. I use unique and sequential numbering of rolls with (of
course) identical numbers on the contact sheets. I absolutely agree with
you that the less you handle your negative, the less chance there is for
damage.

I don't understand how Lew "cant match them up." I file the negatives and
contact sheets sequentially in two seperate notebooks. You could use one
notebook for both, but I don't like to handle the negatives while browsing
the contact sheets. In either case, its not hard to find negative holder
sheet # 121 after you have found an image on contact print #121 for example.

Pieter



"seog" wrote in message news:Ky6bf.274$Y97.271@trndny05...
"lew" wrote in message
...
I have half an idea that it should be obvious to me why I should *not*
staple my printfile pages to their proofsheets, that other half is saying
that this is an idea whose time has come. Why should I spend hours trying
to reassemble these pairs or reproof when I can't match them up? Any
opinions out there?
-Lew

If you're trying to come up with a filing system that makes no sense. Why
do you need to reassemble them? You make one contact and file it away.
Then you fle the negs.

I just serial number (year/roll #, ie 0142) the contact & the sleeve and
file them seperately. The contacts are in a folder; the negs are in
hanging file cabinets. The less you handle negs the less chance of damage.
When I'm looking for a particular neg the contacts get all the abuse. When
I find the frame in question I go to the neg file and pull it.

Natural Light Black and White Photography
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze76ane/
-George-

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 18:08:42 GMT, "seog"
wrote:

I just serial number (year/roll #, ie 0142) the contact & the sleeve and
file them seperately. The contacts are in a folder; the negs are in hanging
file cabinets. The less you handle negs the less chance of damage. When I'm
looking for a particular neg the contacts get all the abuse. When I find the
frame in question I go to the neg file and pull it.


January 17, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

If the negs are roll films, one more number
at the end of the sequence identifies the
frame. And after that, when it comes time to
make a print, each print gets its couple of
digits at the end. The print logbook (where
details of how each print was made) gets
serialized the same way, and the number gets
written on the print at the extreme edge. So
no lengthy writing has to go on a print, just
a number. A given serial number identifies a
negative frame, a contact print, a darkroom
log entry, and a print. And a computer
database record, too, which turns out to be
really handy. A side benefit I didn't expect
is that the digital files of a given portrait
session can easily be found and played on the
monitor as a slide show. This is invaluable
in the editing process.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--