Re: filmscanners: OT:X-ray fogging

["Anthony Atkielski" <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr>]

Laurie writes:

> ... I would stay away from sellers who only stock
> a small supply of a few limited types of films ...

Most large cities have photo stores.  Many of these have refrigerators stocked
with fresh film.  All you have to do is buy from one that has film stored in
this way.  It's unlikely they'd pay for refrigeration just to keep ruined film
cold.

But frankly, I've bought slide film and other film even from photo shops that
don't have refrigerators, and I still get the same results.  The only places I
avoid are _non_-photo shops, as I have no idea of their storage conditions or
turnover (mostly the latter).  In the few emergencies when I have done so,
however, the results were still the same.

A good compromise is to look for a chain of photo-only shops, or better still, a
chain of lab-only shops.  If all they do is sell and develop film and prints,
they are typically pretty good at it, and reasonably conscientious.

> If the shoot is a professional commercial shoot
> or one in which the images have some serious value
> like one of a kind pictures of famous people that
> you may never see again or pictures of soon to be
> dead family, then I would say bring the film with
> you ...

If you are concerned enough about film to want it refrigerated, why would you
bring it unrefrigerated through multiple climates and extremes of temperature
and humidity to your destination?  And remember, it only has to be blasted with
x rays once to be ruined--you might be shooting with film that has already been
fogged.

> First I am not sure how convenient one would find
> traveling with boxes of slides, transparencies,
> or prints as contrasted to a brick of film canisters.

Have it developed and placed uncut into sleeves.  It will then occupy exactly
the same space as it did before it was developed.

> Secondly, as a traveler in a strange place, you would
> be trusting your film to processors whose reputations
> are unknown to you based on recommendations of people
> who you do not know; you would be trusting your film to
> processors who you may never see again ...

These wicked foreigners actually use the same machines as your favorite lab at
home.  Same chemistry, too.  And it's pretty hard to screw up development when
it is done automatically by a machine.

Prints are a different matter (although that is changing, too), but you don't
need prints--you just need the film developed so that it is insensitive to x
rays and relatively resistant to environmental changes.

I know it is popular among some pro photographers and especially many amateur
photographers to be a bit snooty about choosing a lab for development, but I've
seen photographers doing commercial work on deadlines standing in front of me in
ordinary, garden-variety chain photo labs to get their work developed, and they
didn't seem to be too worried about it.  In fact, I've really never seen much of
any reason at all not to use a one-hour lab for development; I used to try to
stick to "pro" labs, but they cost far more, they took longer, and yet they used
the exact same machines and produced identical results.

There seems to be a touch of xenophobia in your viewpoint.  Rest assured, in
many countries photography is just as important as it is in your hometown, and
so you'll find labs that are just as competent, and you don't necessarily have
to know any secret passwords to locate them, either, as just a glance at the
place may be sufficient.