horace_t

Hey Paul, David, can you make public which screw is the vertical adjustment?

<p>One more: </p> <blockquote> <p>Kodak will sell 10 million rolls of film this year, a far cry from its heyday of a billion rolls and the dawn of digital. Yet its once-core business has turned a key corner.<br> "Our film volumes have stabilized over the last two months," said Wayne Martin who is the Vice President of Film and Chemicals. "We have actually hired 50 to 60 people."</p> </blockquote> <p><a href="http://13wham.com/news/top-stories/kodak-ektachrome-relaunch-is-job-security-for-rochester-employees">http://13wham.com/news/top-stories/kodak-ektachrome-relaunch-is-job-security-for-rochester-employees</a></p>

<p>and another:</p> Mod: Verbatim posting of content from another site is not allowed. Please use the link. <p>http://www.apug.org/forum/index.php?threads/photokina-2016-analog-thriving.140666/</p>

<blockquote> <p>That "high" point isn't very meaningful. Show me data indicating this recovery? Fuji stopped making pack film due to absent demand. IP's product isn't a patch, quality-wise, on the old stuff. Instax? Please...<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>Well, most recently: <br> "Kodak never stopped producing film stock and we have actually sold more film stock this year, so far, than last year. I cannot give you the exact number but in Europe, for instance, we sold twice as much 35mm camera negative film in the first quarter of this year compared to the year before. So, we have doubled our sales and there is global growth"<br /><br> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Kodak-to-revive-infrastructure-for-film-in-India/articleshow/53349242.cms</p>

<p>Maybe you're in the no images forum</p>

<blockquote> <p>Tiny niche in a fading residual market? I'm guessing this isn't happening, especially with the surviving stock of cheap medium format gear collecting dust. Big problem remains sinking demand for film and the narrowing selection of film materials that reflect it.</p> </blockquote> <p>Valid points except, I think, for film. My understanding is that the demand for film has started to level at one of its highest points of the past decade. Also the kickstarter camera can take fuji and (according to the emulsive article) impossible instant offerings, a growing film sector for which there are few camera options.</p>

<p>There's a new kickstarter for an open source medium format/large format/instax wide/polaroid camera, intended to take a large variety of different backs and different lenses. With the state of film camera production today I think an open source camera intended for users is exactly what is needed. <br /> Here's a link to an interview that honestly has a lot more information on the product than the kickstarter:<br /> <a href="http://emulsive.org/articles/the-mercury-project-the-answers-yes-now-whats-your-question">http://emulsive.org/articles/the-mercury-project-the-answers-yes-now-whats-your-question</a><br /> And the kickstarter:<br /><a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/294564710/mercury-the-worlds-first-universal-camera">https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/294564710/mercury-the-worlds-first-universal-camera</a></p> <p>*I have no association with the company or founder</p>

<p>I can answer your last question - yes, but it depends on the camera. I believe that a film camera would need, inter alia, an electronic shutter for ttl flash.</p>

<p>http://www.soverf2repair.webs.com/</p>

<p>second on Jon Goodman. really good price and shipping was included.</p>

<p>Okay, thank you. <br> I'm thinking now (since I'm not doing any lifting or heavy angling with it) I might start with two or three large sheets of foamcore tied together and then just stand them up at an angle from the window light.</p>

<p>Thanks Paul, that's very helpful! I toyed with a small reflector once and I couldn't make it look what I felt was natural, probably because I was positioning it exactly opposite and getting the second light source effect you are talking about.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks guys. The light is coming from large factory windows on one side.<br> Basically what I'm reading is that a reflector only makes sense opposite (or close to opposite) the main light source. Is that about right?<br> And a simple clamp and support should work since I'm not doing any crazy lifting or downward angling with it.</p> <p>Thanks</p>

<p>I'm planning on getting a big reflector (looking at this 5x7 one <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/836791-REG/Digital_Juice_dj_sup_ref_scrn_gww_5x7_REFLECTOR_GOLD_SILVER.html">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/836791-REG/Digital_Juice_dj_sup_ref_scrn_gww_5x7_REFLECTOR_GOLD_SILVER.html)</a> to balance some big one-sided factory windows and a full body photo.</p> <p>This will be my first reflector and I don't know exactly how I will be using it. The bits and pieces that I've gathered are that it is generally best to point light down at a 45 degree angle so my first question is 1. Is this mostly true for reflecting light as well? (I understand that in certain situations you'll want to be opposite the light, is that all situations or in some situations will you be hoisting a reflector up on a stand and angling it downwards?)</p> <p>My second question depends on the answer to the first one, if one does mount reflectors on booms and angle them downwards for natural light, what does one use to do that? I've seen light booms with special attachments for reflectors but they all seem fairly short with the reflector attachment. What could I use to hoist a 5x7' reflector high enough to get 45 degrees downward?</p>

<blockquote> <p>- avoid the Rocky Mtn oysters</p> </blockquote> <p>unless they're deep fried, then get a plate</p>

<p>Okay, thanks Lex. This is a cheap 35mm reel I think, says Japan on it. Do you think an inch or two overhang would cause problems? I'm imagining it pulling even more of the film loose when I invert.</p>

<p>Okay, sorry for reviving an oldish thread but I'm trying to figure out these steel reels. I've been practicing and don't have much trouble loading it but I'm always left with a couple inches extra hanging off the end. Is that normal? Am I doing something wrong? Should I just let it hang?</p>

<p>There are companies still making good film scanners that aren't crazy expensive, look up Reflecta's new film scanner or Epson's new multi-format scanners.</p>

<p>Larry,<br> Thanks for the advice. That sounds like a great idea had I needed it. I ended up having D-76 in my darkroom...and had been using it for prints... which explains why my prints were taking 5-6 minutes to develop. <br> I got advice on APUG to use Dektol to get the negatives developed, went to mix up my Dektol and realized that what I was mixing was different than the last Dektol I mixed up. Well, as I already said, the last Dektol I mixed up wasn't Dektol at all. So I just went and used the D-76 I realized I had and all was right.</p>

<p>I loaded Arista.edu 400 (35mm) onto a Paterson Reel, put it in the tank, poured in some 68 degree water, went to mix up some developer - and there isn't any left! <br /><br />Do I, <br /><br />A. Leave it in the water until Monday when I can pick up some new developer...<br /><br />B. Dump the water out and let the film dry inside the Paterson tank until Monday...<br /><br />C. It has been suggested to me that I use Dektol (paper developer I have on hand) on the film. If there's no harm in the film sitting inside the tank I'd rather wait to get the developer I'm used to (D-76).<br /><br />D. ?</p>

<p>I use http://www.freestylephoto.biz/ and http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ to get film. Lots more places.</p>