If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How to make prints from 40 year old 'Kodak Safety Film'?
Hello,
I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. Do you have any recommendations as to how I can create prints from these negatives? I am in the NY area. This website seems to think that the film is "Ektachrome MS 7256" http://www.film-center.com/stock.html Can anyone help me figure out what this is and where I can get them printed? Thanks for your help, in advance, Aaron |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Aaron wrote: Hello, I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. Sounds like you probably went to a minilab. Try a custom lab. Do you have any recommendations as to how I can create prints from these negatives? I am in the NY area. This website seems to think that the film is "Ektachrome MS 7256" http://www.film-center.com/stock.html Can anyone help me figure out what this is and where I can get them printed? Well you're not clear as to what type of film this is. Color or b&w, negative or transparency. The web site you cite appears to be about motion picture films. Ektachrome is a transparency film, not negative. Any good custom lab should be able to make custom prints from any negatives regardless of format. They can also scan the film and output as prints. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Aaron wrote: Hello, I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. Sounds like you probably went to a minilab. Try a custom lab. Do you have any recommendations as to how I can create prints from these negatives? I am in the NY area. This website seems to think that the film is "Ektachrome MS 7256" http://www.film-center.com/stock.html Can anyone help me figure out what this is and where I can get them printed? Well you're not clear as to what type of film this is. Color or b&w, negative or transparency. The web site you cite appears to be about motion picture films. Ektachrome is a transparency film, not negative. Any good custom lab should be able to make custom prints from any negatives regardless of format. They can also scan the film and output as prints. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Let me guess. They lack the orange coloration that most color negatives
have, and instead, the unexposed areas are clear? This is slide film that has been cross-processed in color negative chemistry. (Some people still do that.) It can be printed with heavy orange filtration or by using a digital scanner. Normally, 40-year-old color negatives are about like modern ones, and printable with the same equipment. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
... Aaron wrote: Hello, I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. That sounds like instamatic film which was 35mm wide and perforated only on one edge. The image size was different than traditional 35mm which is 24mm x 36mm. I believe that the instamatic was 26mm x 26mm so it could not be printed with a regular 35mm negative holder and at best it would have 2mm cut off if used in a regular 35mm negative holder. This was a problem even at the height of this films popularity. Most people did not notice that something had been cut off unless it was a head and they examined the negative and saw the head was there. Even now lots of places do not print the whole 35mm negative. Michael Creem |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Aaron wrote:
Hello, I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. Do you have any recommendations as to how I can create prints from these negatives? I am in the NY area. This website seems to think that the film is "Ektachrome MS 7256" http://www.film-center.com/stock.html There were two almost identical formats that sound like what you have. Since you don't specify the size, I'm guessing. If they are about 1.5 inches (35mm) high, then they probably are either 828 or 126 (Instamatic). If the negatives are 1 inch by 1 1/2 inch (24mmx36mm) then they are 828, if they are an inch (24mm) square they are 126. If they are smaller than that they probably are 110, but I thought that that format came later. If they are really small they may be from a Minox camera. Judging by the age of the film, if they are color they are Kodacolor II. Ektachrome is a positive film, they would be slides. The biggest problem with printing them is that the modern color printing machines would have to be adjusted to produce the correct colors. This beyond the capability of the operator of the average one hour lab. Any professional lab that prints to order would be able to print them. The most cost effective way of dealing with them would be to have them scanned into a computer. Just about any film scanner can do them if the are 828 or 126. If they are bigger or smaller, then you would need to find someone with a scanner that can scan them. Look for a professional lab in your area, they probably can do it for you. You could also post a note on one of the digital groups with the dimensions of the negatives and how many are in one strip of film. You probably can find someone who would scan them for you. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, C.T.O. GW&T Ltd., Jerusalem Israel IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In the message quoted below, I may be on a completely false trail. You
mentioned perforations along only one side of the film. If you have: - normal orange-colored color negatives - square pictures on the film - one perforation per picture (I think) along just one side and the film is the same width as 35 mm film, then these are Instamatic (126) negatives, which were extremely popular around 1970. As others have mentioned, basically you're looking for a lab that has a film holder of the right size and shape. If run through an ordinary 35mm film holder, the pictures won't match the frame -- they'll be partly cut off, and on the ends the frame will extend into the previous and next pictures. "Michael A. Covington" wrote in message ... Let me guess. They lack the orange coloration that most color negatives have, and instead, the unexposed areas are clear? This is slide film that has been cross-processed in color negative chemistry. (Some people still do that.) It can be printed with heavy orange filtration or by using a digital scanner. Normally, 40-year-old color negatives are about like modern ones, and printable with the same equipment. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I have some old negatives,
the holes are only along one side one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. It sounds like 126 Instamatic. The film is still made (?), I think I saw some at the grocery store ... In any case, here is a list of a few of the labs that handle 126: http://www.frugalphotographer.com/pr...structions.htm Any reasonably good lab or any good photography store should be able to print it. Don't bother with Ritz or any place in a shopping mall. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
In article , Aaron wrote: Hello, I have some old negatives, from about 1970 that I have found in my grandparents home. I would like to create prints from these negatives. The film does not look like other negatives that I am familiar with, the holes are only along one side and it says 'Kodak Safety Film' on the edges. I brought these to one photo shop and they said that their machines could not print these. Do you have any recommendations as to how I can create prints from these negatives? I am in the NY area. This website seems to think that the film is "Ektachrome MS 7256" http://www.film-center.com/stock.html There were two almost identical formats that sound like what you have. Since you don't specify the size, I'm guessing. If they are about 1.5 inches (35mm) high, then they probably are either 828 or 126 (Instamatic). If the negatives are 1 inch by 1 1/2 inch (24mmx36mm) then they are 828, if they are an inch (24mm) square they are 126. I partly agree with this; if the film is the same width as 35 mm, it's either 126 (square images, but they're 28x28 mm IIRC) or 828 Bantam (but those were 28x40 mm, not 24x36). Both are decentered toward one side of the strip by a few mm to accomodate the frame size, and have a single perforation per frame, which was used in many/most cameras in those formats by a film advance feeler -- and neither can be full frame printed in conventional mini-lab equipment. If you find a pro lab, however, or a photo supply shop that does their printing in house, you should be able to get "custom" prints (at significantly higher price per frame) that will be correctly framed from either format. There are also a number of mail order firms that still process 126 (you can still buy 126 film, if you have one of those cameras), and should be able to reprint square negatives without difficulty. If they are smaller than that they probably are 110, but I thought that that format came later. If they are really small they may be from a Minox camera. Clarification: Minox film (9.5 mm wide, frame size 8x11 mm) is unperforated. The 110 format is 13x17 mm, decentered on a 16 mm strip, with a single perforation per frame. There were also a number of other 16 mm formats predating 110 that mostly used single-perf 16 mm movie film (Rollei 16, Minolta 16, Mamiya 16, etc.); these would have continuous perforations (like one side of a 35 mm strip, but finer pitch) and the frames of various sizes from 10x14 mm up to 13x17 or 12x18 possibly decentered to clear the sprocket holes. It's still possible to find mail order service for Minox and 110, but most of the other 16 mm formats would require custom handling and will be costly -- again, seek a pro lab if your film is single-perf 16 mm movie stock. Minolta, at least, continued support of their format through the 1980s with respooled 110 film, but the frame format was different from that of 110, and the frames won't match up with the perforations on the 110 respooled film; Minolta and Mamiya films were also often unperforated (the cameras neither needed nor used the perforations), but that doesn't apply to your description. Judging by the age of the film, if they are color they are Kodacolor II. Ektachrome is a positive film, they would be slides. Assuming they're negatives, Kodacolor negatives of any age should print fine in terms of color and filtration -- it's the film and frame format that's causing your problem, and you just need to find a better lab and be willing to pay for custom printing. The most cost effective way of dealing with them would be to have them scanned into a computer. Just about any film scanner can do them if the are 828 or 126. Unfortunately, also incorrect -- many film scanners are preset, either in software or due to the film carrier design, to handle only 24x36 mm centered frames, the standard 35 mm format, and will be unable to fully scan the frames for 126 or 828; mine, for example, can't scan into the sprocket hole region of the 35 mm strip, which would mean cutting 2-3 mm from one edge of 828 or 126. If all else fails, a flatbed scanner with transparency lid should be able to scan those negatives on the glass, though dust problems and Newton rings will almost certainly mar the results (been there, done that). -- I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
We should add that 126 (Instamatic) format was very, very popular in 1970,
whereas 828 was already quite rare by then. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kodak Gold 100 vs Kodak Bright Sun vs Kodak High Definition Colour Film | Graham Fountain | 35mm Photo Equipment | 9 | October 5th 04 12:57 AM |
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems) | Richard Knoppow | In The Darkroom | 192 | September 14th 04 01:59 AM |
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 94 | June 23rd 04 05:17 AM |
a question of B/W film | AArDvarK | Large Format Photography Equipment | 9 | March 21st 04 11:47 AM |