Archiving film and old negatives.

by JamesNYCMarch 3. 2009 09:12
There have been a few discussions in other photo groups and forums concerning the archiving of film and the possible degradation over time.

Having worked in photo processing labs for more than 10 years back in the 80's   and 90's I came to find that there is/was a huge difference in the manor that a customer’s film was handled or processed.

Regardless of whether you took your film to a 1 hour mini lab, a professional photo lab using a dip and dunk system or one of the many bulk film developing companies around the country that would run miles of film through a continues film line; it all comes down to the quality control that each lab implemented

As some of you may recall back in 1989', Kodak tried to implement a Kodak Certified Processing certification associated with a number of labs.

This entailed mixing the chemistry to exacting standards and even checking the specific gravity of each batch for process such as Ciba-Chrome and E-6 or color reversal film. In addition each film processing machine would have film test strip run every 4 hours.

That lasted for all of 12 months before the photo labs decided that the extra expense of following such a stringent model was not cost effective.

What you could expect from the better photo labs that ran Colenta or Hostert dip and dunk machines was Kodak chemistry that was mixed to specs and added daily to the 50 gallon replenishment reservoir that fed each processors replenishment system, and were triggered as each new rack of film was loaded into the machine.

When these systems were properly monitored they ran flawlessly and the systems ran a steady line. Meaning that the test strips run 3 times a day never moved more than 5-7 points above or below the recommended base line, resulting in perfectly processed film that was theoretically completely archival and as Kodak claimed; would remain stable for more than 100 years.

However there was a not so pretty reality.

More...

Hasselblad - Warning concerning use of 32 GB CF Card

by JamesNYCFebruary 20. 2009 07:58
Hasselblad hereby advices you NOT to use 32 GB CF Cards in our products, until further notice.
At the present time we have verified that images shot on such cards with the H3DII-50 will be corrupted. We have not had this issue reported using any other type of Hasselblad camera, but as a precaution we temporarily recommend all our customers NOT to use 32 GB CF cards.
The issue is not related to certain makes of 32 GB CF cards, but is universal.
We will provide further information as soon as we know a time frame for the solution to this issue.
Please accept our apologies for any inconveniences caused.

Best regards
Hasselblad USA

Leaf Capture 11.2.0.2

by JamesNYCDecember 15. 2008 08:16
Leaf Capture v. 11.2.0.2 resolves the issue of occasional appearance of colored dots in some Leaf Capture v11.2 images taken with Leaf AFi and AFi-II camera systems, and Leaf Aptus-II camera backs.

Learn More

2009: Weakest Ad Market Since '01

by JamesNYCDecember 4. 2008 08:18
AdWeek
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Business is about to go from bad to worse for Madison Avenue and media companies, a 2009 sector outlook issued this week by Fitch Ratings indicates. Newspapers will disappear, advertisers will cut back on ad spending, but those that do still advertise can push for better rates thanks to the proliferation of digital media options.


FULL ARTICLE

8X10 with out a net.

by JamesNYCAugust 14. 2008 09:39
I got a call last week from a photographer friend of mine for an 8X10 shoot.
This was to be a fine art shoot that would take place in a burned out building with out air-conditioning.
While we had plenty of film for the shoot (FUJICOLOR PRO 160S PROFESSIONAL), but we came to find that Polaroid 8x10 could not be found anywhere in or around NYC.

The lack of Polaroid and use of hot-lights for the shoot presented an interesting scenario.
This would require what some would consider the “old school method” metering every part of the set to see exactly where the lights were falling off, and where the hot spots were, and balancing the ratios across the set.
Now let me interject and respond to those asking “Why not just shoot digital?”
1) It’s what the photographer wanted.
2) 8x10 was the right tool for the job.

While this may not sound like much fun to some people, I live for this stuff
Since we didn’t have Polaroid we at least had some latitude that shooting C-41 offered. After metering we shoot ? stop open from meter, plus the ½ stop compensation for a slight bellows extension. So because we were essentially shooting blind we did do a 2 sheet bracket, plus ½ stop open for the second sheet, for all of the shots that day.
Did I mention that we were shooting in Jersey?
This meant that we wouldn’t have the opportunity to see the film until later the next day; and since we were again on set first thing in the morning we still didn’t have the option to view the results of the first day until we brought in the film later that day.
SO what we did was to have the lab contact print the negs and scan 3 with a flatbed scanner and email the JPG’s to use. This worked pretty well for the photographer as he got to see that he was getting what he wanted. While looking at the JPG’s I noticed that the even though the images looked great, I could still see a hint of the film base on the contact sheet. This meant that even with over exposing by nearly 2 stops we had to over expose more. Having this new information made shooting the second day a little less stressful.

More...

"I don't hire women" and other sexist comments.

by JamesNYCAugust 13. 2008 09:21
As I have stated in some of my other writings, based on my observations there is an unspoken fact about the commercial photo industry; that being the degree of sexism and racism that exits.
This despite it’s perception of being all inclusive and populated by progressive thinking artists’.

This was again brought to my attention about two weeks ago when a female assistant emailed me from the west coast.

While she didn't go into graphic details, the content and structure of the email conveyed the level of stress and anxiety she was feeling. I answered her email as best I could but suggested she call me to speak of her experiences further.

She called 2 days later. During the conversation, she recalled her experiences of the past year. She had been told "I don't hire women." Despite having the same level of experience and skill sets, was paid less than other assistant for the same job. Among other choice comments, she has even been told "..well, I pay the men more because they work harder.."
It should also be pointed out that women photographers are often just as discriminatory towards female assistants.
More...

Aperture 2.1 launch issue when running Phocus 1.0

by JamesNYCJuly 7. 2008 09:44
If you encounter problems with Aperture 2.1 while running Phocus 1.0, the information provided in this mailing is relevant to you :

The issue:
When Phocus 1.0 is launched it will check whether the necessary ICC profiles are present and if not they will be installed. Unfortunately due to an OS bug related to 64 bit applications this leads to a partly corrupted ColorSync profile cache which will prevent Aperture 2.1 from launching.

The solution:
In most cases the issue can be fixed by following these steps:

1) Phocus installs 3 profiles:
Hasselblad RGB.icc
Hasselblad 330Skel 30K75.icc
Hasselblad 350Skel 30K90.icc

For users with administrator rights they will be located in /Library/ColorSync/Profiles - otherwise you can find them in /Library/ColorSync/Profiles.
Drag these 3 profiles to another location - for instance the desktop.

2) Aperture should now be able to launch without problems - verify that and quit Aperture.

3) Drag the 3 Hasselblad profiles back into the Profiles folder

4) Launch Aperture again - this should still be possible without any issues

After completing these steps you can now run Phocus without triggering the issue again.
Apple is working on fixing the OS bug, but it is still present in 10.5.4. For the upcoming Phocus 1.0.1 release we have been able to implement a workaround so that it will not trigger the issue during profile installation.
Best regards,

Hasselblad USA
Technical Support

How Getty Is Killing the Stock Photo Industry

by JamesNYCJuly 7. 2008 08:35
When we created the PhotoShelter Collection, we aimed to change the face of the stock photography industry by fundamentally altering the dynamics of how photographers were treated, and in turn, providing visual diversity to buyers that simply didn't exist. Tens of thousands of photographers from over 130 countries signed up and started uploading their images to PhotoShelter, and the buyers have followed. Each month we have stolen sales with major clients away from Getty and have become an increasingly large thorn in their side.

So it's a flattering to hear that Getty Images is validating our approach and recognizing our success by reaching into the flickr community.  No other competitor in their history has forced Getty to change their model. This is a great sign of encouragement for us. Getty's CEO Jonathan Klein describes this new endeavor as "the best imagery from a fresh collection of high-quality images chosen by us from Flickr's diverse and prolific community." If it sounds familiar, it should be, something very similar is printed on our homepage.

But rather than compare lexicon, let's clarify some of the key points and differences of this announcement.
Klein stated in a Seattle Times piece that the deal "for us is not significant, but it's strategically extremely important." Flickr GM Kakul Srivastava corroborated this by saying, "From our perspective, on the Flickr side, we're not expecting this will be a huge stream of monetization for our members...The relationship, in the licensing piece, is purely between the photographer - the Flickr member - and Getty Images itself."
So, if it's not really about making money, what is it about? Why would the market leader (which is now held by a private equity firm whose sole goal is to make money) strike a deal in such a public fashion if they didn't intend for it to make money? Why would flickr consent to not taking a transaction fee? What is of such "strategic importance" to Klein?
The answer is in Getty's historical moves. It's about locking out competition from the industry to ensure a continued, virtual monopoly. Getty pays flickr for an "exclusive" deal to be their preferred stock content distributor because they are threatened by an open platform like PhotoShelter. Consider that if PhotoShelter succeeds, not only does Getty lose market share, but they invariably will have to give back more of the profits to photographers because they will need to compete for content.

More...

We look at the Shoot Sac

by JamesNYCApril 6. 2008 09:33

Back in October we told you about a really cool new camera bag we had seen while attending the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC I came upon the booth of a new product called Shoot Sac.

This new company was doing a brisk business at the PhotoExpo and the idea of a photo gear bag that didn’t look like your grandfathers camera bag was very appealing. So I called them up to see about getting a sample to review for the site. Ok so I’m a little late in making this post, by about 3 months… but I think it’s still worth talking about again.
The Shoot sac is a light weight bag with an adjustable nylon strap similar in design to a bike messenger bag that is made out of 3mm neoprene and measures roughly 17” in length and 9” tall.

The bag was initially designed to be useful for wedding and event photographers as well as others who need quick access to their lenses. While it’s not a replacement for a regular camera bag it would be a great location bag for photographers, assistants and digital techs whom on location might need to quickly throw a bag together with lenses and other gear for that quick run down the beach, or the photographers sudden need to leave that location you’ve paid to use in order to shoot in a location that he knows he’ll get kicked out of; or that quick trip in a zodiac to shoot on the side of a volcanic island.

As you can see in this photo, the bag stays close to the body which makes it not even appear to be a camera bag. This is probably a great idea for paparazzi or other situation where some semblance of discretion is mandatory.

The Shoot Sac comes in basic black but replacement covers can be ordered in a variety of colors, designs and fabrics.
One of the esthetic advantages of the Shoot Sac is the ability to change the bags cover flap which is attached by a strip of Velcro. This is simple enough with a quick pull on the Velcro and you can replace the covers or remove it all together.



The Shoot Sac has three pockets in the front and three in the back.

 

The back pockets use snaps as a method of closure, and the front are protected by the detachable cover flap.

This bag is really well made and for those wanting or needing to have an alternative photo bag this light weight bag makes a great option.
On some levels the Shoot Sac’s purpose is one of form over function.
However having said that I filled it with some heavy items around the house and gave it some abuse. This included dropping it from 6 feet, banging against the walls while running up the stairs, swinging it into a wall as if by accident, and the result was that nothing was damaged, including the bag.
(NOTE: no actual photographic equipment was used during these tests.) The sales team I spoke with were primarily selling to the DSLR photographer demographic.
But I wanted to see what practical application this bag could have for the commercial photographer that doesn’t shoot weddings or events.
So during one of our Digital Tech workshops a few months ago I filled the bag up with some typical Medium format digital gear.



This included:

2 – external Firewire drives

2 – 15’ Firewire cables

1 – 30’ Firewire cable

1 – USB cable

1 – Hasse 120mm lens

1 – Hasse 150mm lens

1 – Mamiya 140mm lens

6 – CF cards

1 – CF card reader

 

So here’s my take on the Shoot Sac.

Pros:  It’s Lightweight, good looking, offers better than average protection to expensive equipment considering its thin appearance. The stitching looks pretty secure. Holds a good amount of equipment for short limited location situations

Cons: Currently the Shoot Sac comes in only 1 size, it could really use a shoulder pad because the shoulder strap falls off the shoulder every 30 seconds unless you walk leaning to one side. The current Velcro strip that holds the cover flap should be replaced with an industrial version. It’s just too easy to remove the flap or for it to accidentally get pulled off.

The addition of a Velcro strip or clasp on the front of the bag would be nice so that should the bag ever fall off your shoulder your lenses won’t fall out. The snaps on the back too need to be replaced with a more heavy duty version. The current snaps on the bag I received looked like they would pull off after a very short time. While it’s a great idea to have a replaceable cover flap it would be nice if this flap actually cover the entire width if the bag.  As seen in the photo there is a fair amount of space on both sides that should a photographer ever get caught in the rain (like that ever happens) everything in the Shoot Sac will get a fairly good soaking. Double stitching all around would be a nice option along with wider pocket separators. The hardware for connecting the shoulder strap looks pretty but also looks like it would have a short life expectancy; so stronger materials would be a priority.  For $179.00 all of the above issues should all be corrected.

Final thoughts: From my listing of ‘Cons’ you might think that I don’t care for the Shoot Sac.

Not So! I honestly think that this is a must have for the many situations over the years where I really could have used one of these. I only wish that I have invented it.

Price: $179

Further information: www.shootsac.com

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

ShootSac responds. Hi James! I just read the review you posted, thanks for that! It's nice to see people trying out the Shootsac in different ways than we even intended... we've had reports of people using it for all types of things (it even carries a six pack quite nicely). I did want to mention one thing to you, though. In the review you stated that the bag falls off the shoulder easily unless you walk with a tilt. The Shootsac is actually intended to be worn messenger bag style... with the strap going over your head and resting on the opposite shoulder. This would not allow for the bag to ever fall off or allow any of the contents to fall out. This also would take care of the issue of needing the flap (which is mostly for dust protection and aesthetics, as well as being a lens cloth is you have one of our designer covers) to secure down via velcro. We wanted the bag to be the fastest and easiest to get into and change your lenses out of... so securing the flap was against that. Anyhow, I just wanted to express my appreciation for you taking the time to examine and review our product, and to make you aware of the intended use of the Shootsac. I hope this clears up a little bit of what seemed to be negative aspects to you, and hopefully it will allow you to be more confident in using the bag yourself. I can certainly see why it would seem easy to fall if it was being worn straight off the shoulder! :)

Job_folders app V.3.2

by JamesNYCFebruary 7. 2008 09:19

Hi James,

I've just updated Job_folders app to create folders that have the structure more like C1. I've found this to be more convenient..... even for Leaf users. 

http://www.rap.net.au/?p=10 Please feel free to include it in your next news letter. Cheers Rick

      Copyright 1998-2013 1ProPhoto.Com All rights reserved.