Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This is an ongoing discussion right now on the HUG. Seems like most Wedding Photogs on that list either sell their negs to the client, or shred them after some relatively short time span. They say that after a couple of years, reprint orders are non existent. So why keep them. Interesting sidebar... I was in Calypso Imaging on Wednesday, picking up some prints (another 48x60 and some smaller LightJet prints) and this fellow came in and asked if his film was ready. He spoke very poor English. It was and Amanda said to him "cross processing produces some very interesting and strange results" and the man didn't understand her. He looked at the film (which was 120 E6) and said "this is E6". Then he saw that he had filled out a cross processing request rather than an E6 processing request. He got, as he requested, his E6 run through the C41 process. What he had photographed was a wedding. About six rolls. The man then buried his face in his hands and uttered strange words. It was easy to tell that he was very distressed. Jim At 03:44 PM 8/27/99 -0700, you wrote: >Marc Rabiner wrote: > >>A different mind set on the HUG huh? (Hasselblad Users Group) >>A real insult to the camera and photographers in general. Wedding >>photographers >>in general really are the bottom of the cesspool and this kind of stuff makes >>them worthy of the general disdain they get. >> >>"using shredding machines for negs? >> >>Yes, I use a shredder for my negatives. It works fine. I have a Royal >>cross-cut shreadder..it was around $250 or less.....but it shred 12 sheets >>at a time, and it easily paid for itself because I have a LOT of >>negatives....">>>>>>> > >Hi Mark, > >If I've read the post correctly, that is the "wedding folks shred their >negs once they've milked them for all they're worth?" Then destroy them! >Is that correct? > >If so. What a shame if that is the case, simply because those negatives >could very well be worth a tidy amount of income from the National Archives >in 50 or 60 years! Imagine if the wedding / portrait photogs of the 1800's >smashed all their negs? Why, we wouldn't have any of those wonderful old >time images to appreciate today. > >Every image we put on film, regardless of whom you are, is a record of the >times we live in, whatever the subject. Sure throw away/shred whatever, >those negs that are completely out of focus, but to deliberately destroy >perfect negatives for lack of storage space is beyond comprehension. And if >that's what the wedding photogs do with their milked dry images, they truly >are the bottom feeders.. However, well paid bottom feeders! > >But truly stupid to shred their negatives! If that is the case. > >ted > >Ted Grant >This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler. >http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant > >