Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Provia Processing  
User currently offlineMidway DC9-10 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 265 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 10 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

All the local pro labs in my area mount my provia processed slides on plastic mounts as opposed to the carboard type. I have read that plastic slides may not hold their value as well as the plastic type? So this brings me to this question. If cardboard is the preferred type of mounting does it matter who processes it? It seems that almost everyone on this forum uses a local lab.

For example, when you process K64 you know you have kodachome slides. With other slides types, you have no real way to prove what type of slide film it is derived from unless you take it out of the mount. Even if there were other labs that could process K64, my guess is that most would still use Kodak because of the mounting? If this is true, why wouldn't Fuji users use Fuji processing?

I hope this isn't too confusing!

Thanks,

Dave

7 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 10 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1335 times:

Regarding K64:

(For the U.S. members)
You don't have to use Kodak Fairlawn. I believe A&I Photo does Kodachrome processing also and the mounts come back with both A&I logo and "Kodachrome".

No sure about Fuji...

Michael


User currently offlineFastGlass From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 0 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (13 years 10 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1333 times:

What is your definition of "they don't hold their value"? Do you plan on becoming a stereotypical K64 slide trader/broker? If so, stick with K64 and Kodalux processing (or whatever they call it now).

The big advantage of the cardboard slide mounts is that they are much easier to label, with a normal pen (don't use pencil). Plastic slide mounts require a pen with ink that is capable of adhereing to the plastic surface, like a SHARP Sharpie or a Pilot photo marker.

The disadvantage of cardboard slide mounts is that sometimes the remnants of the cardboard cutting process (fine cardboard shavings/dust) might invade your box of slides, thus requiring a blast of air to clean-off each slide.

I wouldn't worry about it...


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 10 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1327 times:

With my processor, I tell him what I want printed on the frame, and he does it.

Each of my slides has printed on it the Film type, the month/year of processing, and the roll number. The details of what I shoot indexed by roll number I keep on an Excel file on my handy dandy HP Jornada palmtop.

The developer, for anyone interested, is Schtutz, in Zurich. He's never spoiled a single slide of mine yet.

Charles


User currently offlineSkyliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 204 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (13 years 10 months 19 hours ago) and read 1319 times:

Fuji processing, in Phoenix, uses cardboard. There are are few other (non-Kodak) processors of Kodachrome, including A&I, which uses cardboard. As far as "holding value", a fair number of slides have been traded unmounted over the years, to hold down on postage costs, and mounted by the recipients. At least that way you were sure of the film type! Assuming that they have been properly cared for, a quick look with a loupe will indicate whether they are valuable or not. While old Kodachromes will continue to be prized for a long time to come, image quality is more important than brand name, unless you are into the value of slides as collectible objects more than the image itself. In the future, more and more images are going to move around the world electronically, including for publishing, whether they were originally made on film or not. Still, there is a lot of enjoyment at being able to look at a fine image in its original, positive form (slide), whether cardboard (my preference) or plastic, with no other other equipment required other than some sort of magnifying device, of modest technology.

User currently offlineMidway DC9-10 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 10 months 19 hours ago) and read 1315 times:

I hate to ask a stupid question, but how do all of you pull the quotes from the original forum topic? I searched for the "how to" to no avail.

Fastglass,

As far as "do they hold their value", I have heard somone say that they would not trade or sell for as much in the future as would a cardboard mount. And, yes I may trade and sell like the stereotypical slide trader in the future, except I am not 100% loyal to K64.

You also mentioned not to use pencil on the mounts..is this due to archival reasons? For plastic mounts have you ever used label stickers?

Charles,

Do you use Fuji slide films, and do you trade or sell these? I didn't realize the processor would put all that information on the mount for you, but I will tell them to do so next time I process Provia.

I thank all of you for your help.

Dave


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 1312 times:

Dave,

I do sell some slides, but mainly to other spotters in my area, with boxes of slides and mini-viewers out of the back of the car (sound familiar, anyone?  Smile/happy/getting dizzy). Doing it by mail is too much of a pain. Maybe one day I'll get my butt organized and do something there.

Don't expect many developers to have the capability to print information on the slide. I lucked out in finding a high quality development lab which did have the equipment for it. Of the 7 developers I tried around here, they had the best quality AND the printing possibilities. Pure luck.

I expect that it should increase the value of the slide a little bit. Personally, I think the only reasons that K64 has been a standard for so long is that with them, you always know what you're getting. It will always have (that I've seen, anyway) "Kodachrome" stamped on it, and its longevity is established, whereas other films will come in generic frames with no information on them. So a buyer will be wary of buying the slide because he doesn't know if it's a good quality film or if it was a generic supermarket special. Stickers can be added or replaced easily, so is less sure.

I think by now all the major manufacturers have pretty much sorted out the longevity thing. I expect my Provias to last as long as anything else, especially since I live in a pretty mild, non-humid climate.

Cheers,

Charles


User currently offlineFastGlass From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 0 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (13 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 1300 times:

Cfalk brings up a very good point. With a generic frame, the buyer/trader/viewer DOESN'T know about the film. It could be Fuji, Kodak, Agfa, or even the dreaded 3M, et al.

When I mentioned writing on the frame, I was referring to labeling the slide with specific info redarding the picture (airline, aircraft, location, reg.#, etc.). My pro lab will also imprint anything on the slide I request (within reason). They only charge $2 a batch, as long as the same text is to be printed on each slide.

Pen vs. pencil? When writing with pencil, you run the risk of tiny carbon particles/shavings coming off the lead with each stroke. They may not be visible to the naked eye, but they can look huge when scanning. Also, these particles are relatively hard as compared to film mylar and can scratch the surface of the slide.


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
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
Processing Of A Photo On Sharpness,how You Does? posted Mon Sep 18 2006 15:55:02 by Andrei