Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fuji Processing  
User currently offlinePsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 513 posts, RR: 18
Posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1217 times:

Hi everyone:

It's time to re-open the Great Film Debate. Specifically, I thought the Fuji partisans should read this:

------Original Message------
From: "Steve Barry"
To: ObservationCar@yahoogroups.com
Sent: April 25, 2001 10:46:26 AM GMT
Subject: [ObservationCar] Fuji processing

[snip]

Now, on to the main part of the post. Just got my slides back from the Washington/SP&S trip from Fuji, and boy am I disappointed. The shots themselves are generally well-composed and exposed (if I may so myself) but the procesing is downright abysmal. First, every box has the last slide numbered 1 and the first slide numbered 37 or 38 or whatever. This would be a minor annoyance if it happened to a box or two, but all 30 rolls are like this and my slide system is set up on a box/frame key code, so I have to renumber all (36x30= uhhhhhh) over 1000 mounts. Yuck.

That ain't the worst of it however. Recently I've been getting scratches on several boxes of slides, but since I use three cameras I thought that maybe one camera was the culprit. This trip I marked each roll of film as to which camera it went through. The results -- all three cameras generated perfect rolls and all three cameras generated seriously scratched rolls. The scratches are fairly deep on many slides. Some scratches are vertical. The scratches don't appear on consecutive rolls coming out of a camera (a camera might have a scratched roll, a good roll and another scratched roll on three consecutive rolls). A couple of rolls have a deep scratch along the entire roll about 5% down from the top. These rolls were generated by two different cameras. The last frame on many rolls looks like it was stomped by a combat boot. Fortunately, I shoot with a winder and there is a salvagable frame for about 95% of the locations I shot as far as projection goes, and about 99% of the scenes are easily salvagable in PhotoShop for prints and magazine work. Nonetheless, its frustrating to think that I have to shoot four or five frames of each scene to raise my chances of getting one good image out of the bunch.

On a quasi-related note, my last roll of film from my foray with George (Five Stops Down) Pitarys got into the wrong pocket in my pants and wound up in the washing machine (Note to GSP -- this was a quite valuable roll as it included the Salmon Bridge, Lac Baker and the potato barn on the B&A). I sent the roll to Fuji, and amazingly most of the roll was salvagable. The worst damage is some spotting in blue skies, but I think (once again thanks to a winder) that I have at least one salvagable image from each location. Most of the damage is easily repairable in PhotoShop, and I think I could project some of the slides without the crowd going "Eeeeeeuuuuuuwwww." Other damage includes a small pink stain next to the pocket that contained the film, showing some emulsion escaped the film cartridge.

On a quasi-quasi-related note, "Five Stops Down" needs a new nickname, since in the five days I went shooting with him, I only had to use Provia-F 400 for five scenes (and three of those were because we were still chasing after the sun went down).

Steve Barry
Railfan & Railroad

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 54
Reply 1, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1151 times:

Wow! Scratches on Fuji too. Guess we all better start shooting digital. But until then, I'll stick with Kodachrome. Happily, my last batch of 24 rolls came back perfect. No scratches and only a few mismounts, can't complain.

Michael


User currently offlinePsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 513 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1149 times:

Yeah, Mike, my recent Kodachromes came back from Fairlawn without scratches. The only problem was the back of your head.

BH


User currently offlineMikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1148 times:

That would be called the mikephotos-scratch. For those not familiar with the shot, here it is:


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Bill R. Hough



Michael


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1145 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

So a local photographer's lab scratched his film. What's to debate?


Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineRWL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1145 times:

Andy,

I believe if you read the post carefully, you will see it say's " got them back... from Fuji ". Not a local lab. I believe the reason this was posted is due to the number of posts lately about Kodachrome processing problems. Just illustrates another side.

Cheers,

Roger

Oh yeah , I use both Kodachrome 64/125 & Provia 100F , so I don't have a " side " to take.


User currently offlineNscaler From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 243 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1136 times:

Okay so Fuji's own labs aren't any good. But why would you send it away to them (if you are not in the middle of nowhere) as just about every photo lab can develop E6, not the case with Kodachrome.

If you have bad luck with one E6 lab, find another. And once you find a good local lab, you are all set.

Saul

BTW, Does a "mikephotos" scratch decrease the slide's value much more than a regular scratch?  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlinePsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 513 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1128 times:

Saul asks: BTW, Does a "mikephotos" scratch decrease the slide's value much more than a regular scratch?

Hough responds: Absolutely.


User currently offlineNscaler From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 243 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1121 times:

And I'm guessing if it was shot by Michael and had a "Hough" scratch, then the value goes up?

Saul


User currently offlineChrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2104 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1120 times:

While Fuji might not be good at processing, the independant labs that do E-6, (provided they are good) do an absolutely fantastic job processing. I've had 1 roll of Fuji scratched out of 300+ rolls. Hmm, a 0.3% of getting one scratched is nothing to scoff at. Numbering seems to be the same as what shows up on the camera frames. With that, I wonder if I should bring up my Kodak problems?

Plus the turn-around time is much better than Kodak (anywhere from 2-24 hours). Kodak was 2-5 days. This is probably lower in NY, where you guys are so close to the lab.




User currently offlinePsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 513 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1101 times:

Chrisair writes: Plus the turn-around time is much better than Kodak (anywhere from 2-24 hours). Kodak was 2-5 days. This is probably lower in NY, where you guys are so close to the lab. '

Hough responds: When I spent the summer in California with a broken leg, I learned that Kodak turn-around is about 2 weeks. It's a pity, too, because my parents [where I was staying] house is just a couple of miles from the site of the old Kodak Page Mill plant.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Good Software For Image Processing? posted Wed Dec 10 2008 10:37:26 by Phoenix9
Help Processing A Rare Image posted Fri Dec 5 2008 04:43:20 by JakTrax
Canon Raw Processing Using PS3 posted Sat Nov 22 2008 09:45:54 by Rtl
RAW Processing Help posted Mon Feb 18 2008 06:58:49 by Virgin7
Batch Processing Help (Gimp Or Other) posted Thu May 10 2007 01:57:24 by TedTAce
Post Processing To Improve Quality posted Fri Feb 16 2007 05:16:25 by Vnvlain
Fuji 9500 Pic posted Mon Feb 5 2007 21:08:37 by Ranger703
Photoshop And Processing RAW Formats posted Sun Jan 28 2007 08:16:31 by Monteycarlos
Color Settings For Post-processing Software. posted Mon Jan 1 2007 20:29:06 by Avsfan
Help Processing A Few Shots posted Tue Sep 26 2006 02:32:36 by Airplanenut