Re: Seattle Film Works

[P3D Derek Gee <73157.2172@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Greg wrote regarding SFW film:
>Easy, the same way you get prints & slides from Kodachrome, Ektachrome
>or any other chrome film: print the slide onto a paper designed for
>the purpose, like Ilfochrome or the Fuji paper.  Only difference here
>is you don't get a negative, just slides and prints, unless of course
>you make an interneg, in which case you get the same results (except
>that the slides are first-generation and the prints are third).

>So if your information is correct, which are the originals, the slides
>or the negatives?

I don't think that's quite right.  When you ask for slides & prints,
you get back strips of negatives (the originals), a set of prints,
and a set of slides.  I believe the slides were made by printing
the negatives onto Agfa motion picture positive stock
(just like a motion picture release print).  I think that's an easier
way to get slides and prints from a single roll.  The problems I
see in using SFW are:

a) The motion picture stock they are using is grainer than the standard
   print or slide film.  

b) The cost for doing this is not that cost effective.

c) Motion picture stocks are not as archivally stable as the new
   standard films. 

>I still don't see the logic of using motion picture stock, unless it's
>grossly cheaper than other color negative film.

It's probably easier for them to process, but I'm not sure if the slides
you get back are better than if you have prints made into slides the 
conventional way, or if you had slides made into prints the conventional
way.  I've never had the need to do it the conventional way.  I only
tried SFW's system out of curiosity. (and I never inhaled  ;)  )  Most
publications I've read suggest if you need both prints and slides,
you should shoot slide film and have prints made from the slides.

                              Derek Gee


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