[photo-3d] Re: Subject: Printing Realist Pairs

["Howard Wade" <HWADE@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Thom: I don't know if you've posted further information about this 
or not, but I'd be very interested in sending film to this lab. Do 
you know if they'll work with a request for specific prints from a 
developed roll, or do I need to pay a buck a frame for everything on 
an unprocessed roll?

Any information would be appreciated. Thanks,

Howard Wade
hwade@xxxxxxxx

--- In photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Thom Gillam" <ThomGillam@xxxx> wrote:
> --- In photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx, Edward Comer <ecomer@xxxx> wrote:
> > Regarding "Mark Dottle's" markaren@xxxx"
> > comments, while you are technically correct in saying
> > that any lab could print the uncut negatives, that
> > isn't the problem. (1) most labs don't want to do
> > anything out of the norm; (2) many labs are operated
> > by kids who only know how to do the basics and can't
> > be expected to deviate from their rote and ill trained
> > role; (3) most labs are now only able to print 4X6
> > inch - we want 3X5 for viewcards; (4) the operators
> > will only use the machines in full-auto mode and the
> > overlap creates printing exposure problems with some
> > of EVERY roll that I have tried as you describe. So,
> > don't laugh - the problem is real. 
> 
> 
> Ed, you are absolutely correct.  Any one-hour lab can print 35mm 
film 
> which is, after all, what comes out of a Realist.  The problem Ed 
> mentions in (4) is the mcguffin.
> 
> A 5 perf negative can be centered in the normal 8 perf mask (36mm X 
> 24mm) but parts of the adjacent images are included as well.  Even 
if 
> you can get a print machine operator who is willing to manually 
> override the automation, the new machines do not start at zero: the 
> operator can only override the machine AFTER the exposure has been 
> read.  The adjacent fragments visible to the machine will skew the 
> reading; since the adjacent fragments are different from left chip 
to 
> right, the starting point presented to our intrepid operator is of 
> necessity different.  I had an EXCELLENT technician do the best he 
> could in that mode and still come up short (after many, many tries).
> 
> The only solution that works is when the 5 perf frame is masked 
> completely, and left and right chips are thus equal. EVEN THEN a 
> perfectly matched pair is not a given.  The operator may still have
> to tweak the exposures to get them right.  If the image needs to be 
> adjusted for over or under exposure or if you are after something
> more than a basic print, for example, a sunset or silhouette, the 
> problem is compounded.
> 
> I have found a photofinisher who will do the job right.  The 
service 
> is not cheap but it is GOOD!  They make the prints on a medium-
format 
> print machine, mask to the 23mm x 24mm size of the negative, then 
> enlarge to 3-1/2" wide x 3-3/4" high on Kodak paper.  Each exposure
> is set manually, and matched with the corresponding negative to 
> produce MATCHED pairs.
> 
> I have had four rolls done, with only one redo: they printed one 
> negative twice instead of a left and right pair.  They cheerfully 
> reprinted (for no additional charge) and even mailed the prints 
along 
> with my UNCUT, ROLLED film, to save me from having to make the 60
> mile round trip drive to pick them up. As soon as I get a chance to 
> mount one I'll post an example in the eGroup Files.
> 
> Each print is $1.00.  That's right...$2.00 per pair (Ouch! But hey, 
> you get what you pay for).  I know, I know, I know, this is 
expensive 
> but service this good is hard to find, and so far I haven't seen 
> anyone else step up to the plate and deliver the goods like this.  
> This is custom work at a very attractive price, and I am making 
> arrangements to make this service available to all.
> 
> Sorry for the sales pitch.  I will shortly post full details to 
> Sell-3D but meanwhile, any interested parties may contact me at 
> thomgillam@xxxx