35mm film, how much longer?

rafe b wrote:
"jeremy" wrote in message
news:aY0Fg.13025$Z1.11371@trnddc03...

I'm going to try Dwayne's Photo for some Kodachrome work. They sell the
film and process it, too. Their web site listed a number of interesting
services, including hi-resolution scans of Kodachrome slides (15 MB) for
only $4.00 per roll.


That's a great price but 15 MB for a 35 mm film scan isn't exactly
high resolution. It's less than 2000 dpi, in fact.

A 4000 dpi scan using 24-bit color is just under 60 MBytes.

Yes but normally that extra 45 MB buys you very little in detail.
The bigger question is not how many pixel the scan has but how good of
a scan is it?
For $4/roll I would worry that the scans are not very good.

Prerhaps Jeremy could post a crop from one once he gets one done.

Scott

Scott

"rafe b" wrote in message
t...

"jeremy" wrote in message
news:aY0Fg.13025$Z1.11371@trnddc03...

I'm going to try Dwayne's Photo for some Kodachrome work. They sell the
film and process it, too. Their web site listed a number of interesting
services, including hi-resolution scans of Kodachrome slides (15 MB) for
only $4.00 per roll.


That's a great price but 15 MB for a 35 mm film scan isn't exactly
high resolution. It's less than 2000 dpi, in fact.

A 4000 dpi scan using 24-bit color is just under 60 MBytes.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com


I was surprised to see 15 MB scans at $4.00 per roll. That is less than it
costs to get a Photo CD from Kodak--and their scans are nowhere near 15 MB!

These scans may be fine for less-than-critical applications, such as for
making 4x6 prints from slides. Especially if one wants to get scans without
having to go the do-it-yourself route. For $4.00, it might be perfect. If
there is one or two excellent images, they can always be scanned at home
using more dpi.

I'm going to try it. It's been a long time since I shot Kodachrome. In
fact, I always used Kodachrome 25, never Kodachrome 64, so this will be a
new experience for me. And I'll be doing my part to keep Kodachrome off the
chopping block, too.

On 16 Aug 2006 19:04:25 -0700, "Cardamon Dave" wrote:

For me, the real question is: how long will there be quality film
photofinishing and printing? Film will be available indefinitely, but
more and more retailers are experiencing poor returns for the
square-footage they've dedicated to film processing. They can use the
floor space more profitably. And there will be fewer lab techs who know
what they're doing.

Stockpile all the film you want in your freezer. But be sure there's a
lab around that can process it.

A good argument for having your own darkroom.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography

Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"David Starr" wrote in message
...
On 16 Aug 2006 19:04:25 -0700, "Cardamon Dave" wrote:

For me, the real question is: how long will there be quality film
photofinishing and printing? Film will be available indefinitely, but
more and more retailers are experiencing poor returns for the
square-footage they've dedicated to film processing. They can use the
floor space more profitably. And there will be fewer lab techs who know
what they're doing.

Stockpile all the film you want in your freezer. But be sure there's a
lab around that can process it.

A good argument for having your own darkroom.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography

Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Does anyone really believe that all film will suddenly disappear?

I think Kodachrome is on borrowed time, but it seems doubtful that the
owners of those many millions of film cameras out there will all pack it in.
I wouldn't be surprised to see virtually all film being manufactured in the
Third World, rather than Rochester. That has already begun with some Kodak
consumer emulsions (Gold 200 is one that comes to mind). One day our Kodak
and Fuji-branded films may be manufactured under license, but I think that
film cameras will go completely out of production long before film itself is
withdrawn.

Consumers will probably abandon film entirely--at least in industrialized
nations.

On 16 Aug 2006 19:04:25 -0700, "Cardamon Dave" wrote:

For me, the real question is: how long will there be quality film
photofinishing and printing?

If history is any indication there will be film available as long as
there are people who use film.

Now is the time to be around if you want very high quality vacuum
tubes. They don't come from GE and RCA anymore and the prices
are high but no worse than the 10x increase in the price of a car
since early 60's.

Kodak spun off its fine biochemicals and industrial chemicals
business units. They let the chemical spin off call itself 'Eastman
Chemicals'. Who knows - we have two Ilfords.

"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote in message
nk.net...
On 16 Aug 2006 19:04:25 -0700, "Cardamon Dave" wrote:

For me, the real question is: how long will there be quality film
photofinishing and printing?

If history is any indication there will be film available as long as
there are people who use film.

Now is the time to be around if you want very high quality vacuum
tubes. They don't come from GE and RCA anymore and the prices
are high but no worse than the 10x increase in the price of a car
since early 60's.

Kodak spun off its fine biochemicals and industrial chemicals
business units. They let the chemical spin off call itself 'Eastman
Chemicals'. Who knows - we have two Ilfords.


This may be, but for sure, they must not hire today's teenagers to do their
work for them. I can't go to the local sandwich shop and order two
sandwiches without their employees screwing up the order. I order a pastrami
for myself and a roast beef for my wife, and we get two roast beefs with the
wrong condiments. Today's teenagers not only can't read and write, but they
can't listen and/or remember anything for more than 30 seconds. They have
achieved, "no child left behind", by leaving the whole school behind the
rest of the world........

jeremy wrote:

It has always been frustrating for me to have used excellent quality
equipment and fine lenses, only to see the final results look like they were
taken by an inexpensive camera--the kind that are sold in blister-packs. So
I've limited my print processing to only Kodak (Qualex), where there is
courier in-store pickup and delivery daily, and my mail order business has
always gone to Dale Labs (www.dalelabs.com) which still prints optical
prints (their Nikkor enlarging lenses cost over $10,000 apiece!) and has
always given me excellent results, albeit at a price substantially higher
than the one-hour labs. But one gets what one pays for.


Qualex is the choice of Costco in Minneapolis. A role of slide film costs
$4.19 [for E6 ... not sure if they do kodachrome]. The images are always
good, but they have a horrible tendency to damage the film or I often find
small hairs stuck in the emulsion. The only nice thing is the relatively fast
turnaround, which is about 10 days, or as little as 7 days. If I use Fuji
mailers, I can expect three weeks! A&I will turn around faster ... for a
price; as will Dale Labs.

With today's superior mail options, it isn't the big deal to send film out
for processing that it once was. More people should try it. After a few
rounds, it becomes second nature. If all those inferior drug-store labs
disappeared overnight, would it really have a negative impact on us? I
think that it might actually result in better quality images, as it would
require us to have our film processed by folks that really knew what they
were doing, not by some high school kid.


I use mail order for most of my film anyway. At times, I shoot Kodak Gold 200
for simple family functions [or I just shoot digital] I will use Target, they
seem to do alright, but the paper is cheap. In house Costco 35mm film is
absolutely horrendous!

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

rafe b wrote:

"jeremy" wrote in message
news:aY0Fg.13025$Z1.11371@trnddc03...

I'm going to try Dwayne's Photo for some Kodachrome work. They sell the
film and process it, too. Their web site listed a number of interesting
services, including hi-resolution scans of Kodachrome slides (15 MB) for
only $4.00 per roll.


That's a great price but 15 MB for a 35 mm film scan isn't exactly
high resolution. It's less than 2000 dpi, in fact.

A 4000 dpi scan using 24-bit color is just under 60 MBytes.


And if I am going to pay for a scan, I want more than 24-bit color. 48-bit is
much more appropriate.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

jeremy wrote:

These scans may be fine for less-than-critical applications, such as for
making 4x6 prints from slides. Especially if one wants to get scans without
having to go the do-it-yourself route. For $4.00, it might be perfect. If
there is one or two excellent images, they can always be scanned at home
using more dpi.


Costco by my house indicates they will do a scan for 29 cents per slide. I do
not know any details as to resolution or bit depth, but it is a place to start
on a quest for an economical solution.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

jeremy wrote:

Does anyone really believe that all film will suddenly disappear?

I think Kodachrome is on borrowed time, but it seems doubtful that the
owners of those many millions of film cameras out there will all pack it in.
I wouldn't be surprised to see virtually all film being manufactured in the
Third World, rather than Rochester. That has already begun with some Kodak
consumer emulsions (Gold 200 is one that comes to mind). One day our Kodak
and Fuji-branded films may be manufactured under license, but I think that
film cameras will go completely out of production long before film itself is
withdrawn.


It will be awhile before film disappears. I seep posts in the newsgroups all
the time indicating that somebody is shooting digital, but are no considering
film again for various reasons. A giant reason for me is resolution ... you
pay big dollars for big resolution currently ... and then you dollars get
coated by smoke residue and dust because of where you changed your lens (I do
not smoke!).

Consumers will probably abandon film entirely--at least in industrialized
nations.


Nope ... not me. I like to shoot both though.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1