Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Ruined slides -- I've had it now
From: "SonC (Sonny Carter)" <sonc@sonc.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 13:29:37 -0500
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011009095856.033b7790@pop.alink.net>

Jim, this is excellent advice, all of it, and I'd like to add this;
Part of that chain of confidence is absolute familiarity with your
camera, the film type, and your lenses.  Those moments are NOT the
time to be experimenting with a camera or film stock you have never
shot.

Regards,
Sonny


From: "Jim Brick" <jim@brick.org>

> I realize that this is not possible for everyone, but I have said,
on the
> LUG many times...
>
> When serious about photography, when spending money traveling, when
> encountering fleeting moments, when photographing these moments and
other
> non-reproducible events... One has to be extremely careful not to
break the
> chain of confidence.
>
> This is why I do not use Kodachrome. It's not the film, it is the
fact that
> the film must be sent, by someone, to someone else, of whom, I know
nothing
> and know not where. All a recipe for possible disaster without any
> culpability by the perpetrators.
>
> When I use a lab, I only use a lab that I can walk into and talk to
the
> actual person the will be processing my film. When they know me by
sight,
> there is more chance that they will be careful with my film. Even
then, I
> have had the occasional glitch. Mostly dirt which was easily
re-washed off.
> For awhile, Fuji Velvia curled more than other films during drying
and if
> they weren't left to cool before mounting, the mounter would put a
fine
> scratch on the base just inside the sprocket holes. They solved that
with
> my help.
>
> All of my life, except for a few years between 1992 and 1997, I have
> processed everything myself. And yes, I have goofed on my own film.
But
> never on film that was expensive and impossible to re-du.
Photographs of
> fleeting moments in far away places.
>
> I personally process everything that goes through my cameras. I take
my
> time and double check everything. If there is any possibility that
the
> chemistry might be too old, I walk outside my house and quickly
shoot a
> roll of the same film type (E6, C41, or B&W), I include a MacBeth
color
> chart when appropriate, and process it as a single roll in the
questionable
> chemistry, wash and dry it, and inspect it. Then proceed from there.
>
> The labor of travel, finding the proper light, being somewhere
special,
> having that flash of insight, being at the right place at the right
time,
> and I could drone on forever here... is too much to waste on letting
some
> unknown person, in some unknown place, who doesn't know me from
Adam,
> process my film. There's just too much at stake.
>
> And I understand that it is not a choice for some people. But if you
do
> have a choice, you should make the right choice.
>
> Are you going to continue using that lab Pascal?
>
> Jim
>
>
> At 08:33 AM 10/9/2001 +0200, Pascal wrote:
> >Friends,
> >
> >got back from the lab the slides I had taken while in Switzerland
two weeks
> >ago.
> >
> >First, one film was missing from the batch I received. But no
worry, they
> >said, it will turn op. Indeed, a phone call to the lab (Littocolor,
this is
> >the offical Kodak lab in Belgium) confirmed that the last roll
would be sent
> >the next day.
> >
> >Second, when I received the last roll the next day, I immediately
noticed
> >something weird when opening the package: the supplied box was not
the usual
> >one, plus the slides had been put in slightly different frames, and
there
> >were no numbers and dates printen on the frames.
> >
> >Third, while a normal roll gives me about 37 slides, in this last
film I
> >only counted 34 slides.
> >
> >Fourth, nothing would be wrong if image quality was, at least,
untouched.
> >But when projecting the slides with the Pradovit P2002 I noticed
that the
> >slides of that second roll had a somewhat different " temperature
color"
> >(e.g. yellowish gras had become almost brown). Plus, and this is by
far the
> >worst part, I had taken on a particular morning when all conditions
were
> >perfect (one of those seldom days) a series of shots of the
upcoming sun
> >against the snowwhite peaks of mountains and blue skies etc. Now,
while the
> >slides are technically perfect, they have somehow managed to ruin
*all* of
> >these with their machinery. Big brownish stripes (thicker than the
usual
> >scratches) show up on the slide, it is almost as if the rolls of
their
> >machines made a handling mistake. Plus, one of these slides is cut
off to
> >the right, leaving white space in the frame (and this is not the
last frame
> >in that film).
> >To cut a long story short: they have ruined at least part of my
images. As
> >for the other rolls, some of the slides exhibited (the all too
often usual)
> >scratches which are, of course, quite visible especially on even
parts like
> >a sky.
> >
> >My question: what are my rights in this matter ? What should I be
advised to
> >do ? Can I reclaim part of my travel expenses because they ruined
some,
> >unique to me, shots ? Note that I am not a pro photographer, but
that
> >shouldn't devalue my work IMHO.
> >Thanks for informed suggestions.
> >
> >Pascal
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Jim Brick <jim@brick.org> ([Leica] Re: Ruined slides -- I've had it now)