me bad...
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Couch [mailto:JamesBCouch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 1:29 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Seattle Film Works (was films)
SFW has had variable quality, but the film is fine. It is C-41 and has been
so
for many years! It is standard C-41 film and can be processed anywhere. I
have
gotten good results with it myself. I don't use it (or any print filem) for
critical stuff, but for snapshots, family stuff, ect it is fine. I like it
better than most of the consumer grade print films I have tried. Greenspun
has a
lot of good information, but much of it is very outdated. Film stocks in
particular have improved dramatically over the past few years.
Jim Couch
"Daniel J. Mitchell" wrote:
> Philip Greenspun doesn't like them either, for whatever that's worth.
> http://www.photo.net/photo/film a fair way down says:
>
> "Films to avoid: [...] Anything derived from movie stock, e.g., Seattle
Film
> Works. Movie film is lower quality than photographic film and it is also
> non-archival. Your memories will fade very quickly if you don't keep your
> processed negatives in the freezer (which is what movie studios do).
[Note:
> normal color neg film will say "Process C41" on the canister. If it says
> "Process ***something else****" then you've got movie film. This is why
the
> junk that Seattle Filmworks respools cannot be processed at your local
> minilab.] "
>
> -- dan
< 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 >
< 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 >
|