Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1227

[harold lee tichenor <hticheno@xxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Goldstein wrote:

> My experience similar to your. Have seen far more fading from E-2 and E-4 ektachrome than from eastman motion picture reversal films 

Actually, I have found that E-2 and E-4 slides I hand processed as early as 
1967 still seem to have had no fading.  Commercially processed ones have not 
stood up as well.  But my commercially processed Ektachrome motion picture 
films from the same period have lasted well.  I think it must be the 
technical standards of the labs.  Professional motion picture labs are very 
conscious of maintaining standards because of the extreme cost of the 
original production.  Their clientele would be lost if their quality weren't 
first rate.  Most labs handling slides are for the consumer market and are 
not as rigourous in maintaining chemical standards.  Hand processing with 
fresh chemistry, while it is wasteful and probably environmentally unsound, 
is unsurpassed in quality and potential lifespan of the image.

Someone also asked about photcds.  I have been using the system for a couple 
of years with Photoshop.  It is an economic approach to scanning at high 
resolution; but I have had some problems with commercial services.  I was 
getting significent cropping of the original images as well as the occasional 
flipped shot (e.d. exposed through the emulsion side as opposed to the base.) 
Like commercial processing, the standards set by the labs and transfer 
services are often aimed at the snapshot market.  Last week I spent a couple 
of hours at my lab working with the operators of the scanning machine setting 
the standards I need for my 3d shots.  The test scans were excellent. Next 
week I should get my revised disc and I am hopeful it will all be correct. 

In Photoshop I find it comparatively easy to prepare a screen viewable stereo 
pair.

regards
Harold


------------------------------