Getting back into medium format

"jeremy" wrote in message
news:Kgq7h.29$d42.0@trndny07...
"MASL" wrote in message

I read, about a year ago, that Kodak was THE #1 polluter in the entire
world. I was stunned to see that.


Got a cite for that? Just curious how you'd even measure that.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

"rafe b" wrote in message
...

"jeremy" wrote in message
news:Kgq7h.29$d42.0@trndny07...
"MASL" wrote in message

I read, about a year ago, that Kodak was THE #1 polluter in the entire
world. I was stunned to see that.


Got a cite for that? Just curious how you'd even measure that.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com



No, I failed to bookmark the source page. I had never even considered that
Kodak was a major polluter prior to reading that article.

The article was discussing Kodak's transition from film to digital, and the
pollution issue was mentioned as one reason why Kodak would be better off
not having to deal with increasingly restrictive anti-pollution regulations
around the world.

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Noons wrote:
Look, the whiole argument of pollution against film is dumab
as can be. the silicon wafer industry that is needed for the
alternative, digital, is much, much worse than film ever was.
By a very long margin. And no one gives a hoot about it!

Dumb does not stop it. For example, there is more mercury in one 40 watt
flourescent light than all the mercury batteries most camera stores
sold in a year.

My number show this not to be the case, a 40 watt bulb has about 12mg
of mercury
a button battery can have up to 11 mg, I think most camera stores
likely sold more then
one battery.

Scott

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 01:35:51 -0500, Noons wrote:

Steve wrote:

If I buy MF 120 film gear is there realistic expectation of having
film available for that much longer?

Define "much longer" first?

sheesh I just thoought the same thing

A lot was said a while ago about Fuji giving up on velvia 50.
Well, it's back: fuji has decided to make it available for a while
longer. That's good news in anyone's language.

Will it last forever? Of course not!
Will it last long enough for you to take a lot of
enjoyment out of your MF gear? My guess is:
heck, yeah!


Digital seems to be sweeping in
at a pace, yet I'd like to spend some more time with film and maybe
get few Cibachromes printed if that's going to be possible.

Of course it is possible. And will be for quite
a while yet. Enjoy it. And with the ls9000 you
can do a lot in terms of prep for digital printing, so
give that a go as well.


around UKP 1K. I'm thinking that if film disappears in the future,
and MF digital backs get cheaper, then maybe this camera would let me
stay with what I've bought rather than use it as a paperweight.

My logic too in selecting the rb67. Would have
gone for a rz if it had been affordable at the time.
That's the whole idea ebhind these "system" cameras:
you buy the basics then upgrade as needed and when available.
Don't expect Mamiya to keep supporting it now that they got
the ZD out in force. But there will be 2nd-hand gear available
for a long time yet.

that logic seems OK I'd welcome pointers to the best likely UK sources
of used Mamiya kit, found a few already but recommendations welcome.

Dunno about the UK. I get my gear from ebay, then
send it over to a mechanic to get a CLA. Every once in a while
I get some gear from a dealer depending on availability,
prices, etc. So far, it's working fine.

In article . com,
"Scott W" wrote:

My number show this not to be the case, a 40 watt bulb has about 12mg
of mercury
a button battery can have up to 11 mg, I think most camera stores
likely sold more then
one battery.

Scott

Regardless of who is right obviously disposal of the bulbs should carry
the same sort of restrictions, far less batteries are sold than bulbs.
--
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely,
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
- H. L. Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.


Reality-Is finding that perfect picture
and never looking back.

www.gregblankphoto.com

"Greg "_"" wrote:
"Scott W" wrote:

My number show this not to be the case, a 40 watt bulb has about 12mg
of mercury
a button battery can have up to 11 mg, I think most camera stores
likely sold more then
one battery.

Scott

Regardless of who is right obviously disposal of the bulbs should carry
the same sort of restrictions, far less batteries are sold than bulbs.

It may be that the energy savings of running fluorescent bulbs vs.
incandescent makes up for the added pollution cost of the bulbs themselves.
Here's a reference that claims that the electricity saved results in less
mercury release than the mercury in the bulb.

http://www.achd.net/airqual/pubs/pdf/mercury04.pdf

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

MASL writes:

Toni Nikkanen wrote:-
On the other hand, us younger people have no recollection of any
pollution-related problems in photography...-
That's because you don't visit the fabrication plants for digital
cameras and media. If you are ever in Thailand or China, go visit one
and see.

That's right; we don't. However I was talking about the 70's or
whenever when attention was suddenly focused on the environment
problems of traditional film photography. I've heard about the changes
that followed due to that from older photography hobbyists, but
without them, I'd never know why we now have lower silver-content
films and whatever.

In article ,
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
The film consists of three layers each sensative to a primary color
(red,green, blue) coupled with the appropriate dyes. Negative film
has magenta, cyan, and yellow dye, Ektachrome film has red, green, and
blue. Some Fuji slide film has a second (but different) red layer.

I do hope Ektachrome has cyan, magenta, and yellow instead of red, green
and blue otherwise it is not going to work.

The difference between C-41 and E-6 is that in C-41 the silver that got
exposed to lights gets replaced by dyes and in E-6 it is the unexposed
silver.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 05:35:08 -0500, Philip Homburg
wrote:

In article ,
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
The film consists of three layers each sensative to a primary color
(red,green, blue) coupled with the appropriate dyes. Negative film
has magenta, cyan, and yellow dye, Ektachrome film has red, green, and
blue. Some Fuji slide film has a second (but different) red layer.

I do hope Ektachrome has cyan, magenta, and yellow instead of red, green
and blue otherwise it is not going to work.

I was reading this newsgroup and came upon this article
which somehow just purely accidentally and so ever so coincidentally
resembles my recent discussions with others and somehow ever so
coincidentally my explanation


The difference between C-41 and E-6 is that in C-41 the silver that got
exposed to lights gets replaced by dyes and in E-6 it is the unexposed
silver.

jeremy wrote:

I read, about a year ago, that Kodak was THE #1 polluter in the entire
world. I was stunned to see that.

Do you have the citation, a source of authority for that?

(Your last name isn't Rifkin, is it? )