Hi, Barry:
On 24 Jan 2001, at 8:52, bhinderks@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Snow must be getting to you up in Edmonton. Your prior rant led
> directly to this one.
There isn't much snow in Edmonton. Maybe that's it???
Sorry if my message came across as a rant... it wasn't intended that
way!
> NO ONE said the discount labs produce crap - just that there are better
> ways (just as in the rest of photography) to really see what your
> camera/lens/film combo produces.
Both are true. Perhaps my use of the "C" word was because some
folks have reported *very* poor results from discount labs. I just didn't
want anyone to get the impression that *all* discount labs are the
same.
> Discount labs have their place in the chain and as I stated I still use
> them for some stuff. Good printers (the human kind) have an art to how
> they work. Finding one who understands what you want is a process. When
> you do you will be truly amazed at the results - and you will learn
> even more about photography.
Again, very true. It would be nice to be able to "get into the back" at
McBain's, meet their techs, and maybe with some luck see them at
work. But, at least in my experience, that's not possible.
> The comment about rotating staff was from me and refers to the fact you
> are dealing with 4 or more different peoples interpretation of what is
> printed - yes they do have some controls in the machine printing - ask
> to sit in some time and see for yourself. If all four printed the same
> neg I guarantee you will get four slightly different prints.
Hmmm... I thought it was "Biker Lex" who made the original comment!
Oh, well... no matter! :-)
True, again! But, correct me if I'm off-base here, if the *same* person
printed it 4 times, say on 4 different days, wouldn't you *still* get 4
slightly different results? I haven't the foggiest idea 'bout the "magic" of
developing and printing of film, but I've always thought that how it turns
out depends on the the tech, how the machine is operating, whether (or
not) the chemicals are "fresh," and a whole host of other variables? So,
and again correct me if I'm wrong, isn't it pretty much impossible to get
two *identical* prints?
> Do you care -- that's your call. Do you want consistentcy in your
> prints -- that's your call.
I may be WAY off base here, and so I'm prepping myself for an
onslaught from those who know better, but I've always thought 'bout the
only way to *really* get *exactly* what you want is either set-up your
own darkroom and do it yourself, or stand over the shoulder of the tech
and say "no, that's not quite right" as they "spin the dials" or do
whatever it is they do? But, as I said, I'm not in a position to do either
of those.
> I've already learned lots of photographic lessons the hard way - just
> thought you might want to save some time.
I'm learning too, and have had my "rough knocks" as I've gone down the
path. Again, I'm sorry if my previous message (or this one!) sounds like
I'm ranting. I'm NOT ranting, DAMN IT!!! :-)))
Seriously, though, I was merely making some comments based on my
limited and still-learning knowledge and experience. Others, including
yourself, have provided LOTS of food for thought, much of it that I'll
(hopefully) give a try in the future.
Regards,
Chris
---
I'm *not* a Zuikoholic.... I'm a Zuikohobbiest!
Chris O'Neill (coneill@xxxxxxxxxxx)
http://www.nucleus.com/~coneill
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|