Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Moose's Review Site

Subject: [OM] Re: Moose's Review Site
From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:14:20 +0100
It's a 4000-ED.

Since the images I showed you were mid- to late-1950s, it has to be plain
Kodachrome, not even Kodachrome-II (ASA25) which came along in the early
1960s (with Kodachrome-X at ASA64).  What speed was plain Kodachrome?  I
don't know, but K-II was supposed to be faster! 

--
Piers 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Chuck Norcutt
Sent: 21 August 2006 23:24
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Moose's Review Site

Any comment about the efficacy of FARE on Kodachrome?  K64 in particular
since almost all of my old slides are K64 and a fair number have been
infected with mold from improper storage many years ago.  Piers showed that
his Nikon film scanner (model ?) did a pretty good job on both dust and mold
on Kodachrome (25?)

Chuck Norcutt


Moose wrote:
> 
> - Canon's FARE dust removal seems to be just as good as ICE, but much 
> faster. Over 12 slides or up to 30 neg frames at once and what's left 
> of my lifetime, that's adds up to quite a few days difference. I don't 
> have to be there paying attention, but still...



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz