Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleaning slides (PEC tips)



>Well, I thought I was done with this thread...

I thought you were too; so we will chalk it up to a senior moment in which
you forgot you were done with the thread. :-)

>My experiments show that the loss of film is not at the rear end, but at
>the leader.

MY personal experience both in terms of processing my own Black and White as
well as examining the front and rear tails of the film which my local custom
professional lab returns for both E-41 and E-6 films suggest the loss of
film due to wasted unused film is at both ends and about the same amount.

>There has been some shortening of the rolls since years ago (I'd guess
>at most one frame)

Actually, I believe it is more than one frame.  If one measures the overall
length of the film strip against the length of the older film strips, I
believe you will find that rather than allowing for 6-7 frames total of
leader the new strips are allowing for only 4-5 frames.  It is this
shortening total length of the film that results in processors often being
forced as a practicality to damage the last extra frame on the roll that
people attempt to squeeze out of the roll, which as you note  is typically
the only spare exposure that the newer automatic cameras will allow given
the bar coded canisters.

>What I see mainly is wasted leader due to too much of it being "used"
during the autoload process.

As I said in another post, when this takes place it is at the beginning of
the roll; and with automatic cameras, it does not usually effect the amount
of leader at the end of the roll - especially 36 exposure rolls - since the
automatic cameras stop winding and allowing the shutter to be operated at 36
exposures.  However, it could effect the amount of end leader  (or I guess
the proper term is "tail") in less than 36 exposure rolls where the camera
may allow one to use the shutter pas the official number of exposures until
the camera can no longer wind off any leader/tail.    However, in all cases
the use of too much leader in loading will result in the camera not being
able to allow for the designated number of actual frames that are exposed.
In other words, the excess leader will cut into the actual film that was
suppose to be used for making exposures.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 8:40 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleaning slides (PEC
tips)




Laurie Solomon wrote:

>> I pay and have paid for and expect 36 exposure for many, many years -
>> everything over and above that is a gift.
>
>
> While that is not in question; what often is in question is the fact that
> given the shorter lengths of leader any attempts to squeeze that extra
frame
> out of the film often leaves no room for the processor to attach things
like
> processing clips for dip and dunk, leader tape for roller processing, or
> drying clips if the film is hung up to dry as in the case of black and
white
> films  done in custom labs.  As a result those extra frames frequently are
> damaged in one way or another due tot he mechanics of processing and the
> need for a frame or two of open space at either end.  Many people think
that
> because they can squeeze an extra frame or two on the roll - gift or not -
> they should be able to expect to get the image on those extra frames back
> undamaged as if they were within the normal range of frames for that roll,
> be it 12, 24, 36 exposures.

Well, I thought I was done with this thread...

My experiments show that the loss of film is not at the rear end, but at
the leader.  I know this may sound like it makes no sense, but it does.

There has been some shortening of the rolls since years ago (I'd guess
at most one frame), but not as much as is showing up in loss of frames
in newer cameras (back to 36 or max 37).  What I see mainly is wasted
leader due to too much of it being "used" during the autoload process.
The autoload feature should actually allow for extra frames is anything.
This, I believe, is an "agreement" with maybe both film manufacturers
and labs.

The most slide boxes used by labs can no longer even fit 39 mounted
frames anymore.

Art




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.