"digital" darkroom -- ok to discuss?

Dana H. Myers wrote:
Scott W wrote:
Yeah, I noticed when Costco dropped Kodak 100 - which I like quite a
bit - in favor of Kodak 200. I really like the 100 and the 200
just never has made me happy.

You can still find the ISO 100 film in four-packs, but it does cost
a bit more than it did at Costco.

I believe that our Costco does not have anything lower then 400, which
I will not use and I have never gotten close to the same quality with
200 film as I can get with 100 film.

The last long vacation we took it was really hard to find ISO 100 film,
I should say we were in a motorhome and were not stopping at
photography stores as much as places like grocery stores. It seems
that even a few years ago I could buy both 100 and 64 film just about
anywhere, but in the last few years it has gotten a lot harder to find.
I blame Kodak for a lot of this since they pushed the high speed film
in the last 10 years or so.

The other problem with high speed film is that it is going to fog
faster then low speed in the xray machines, and we have to fly to get
anywhere more then 100 mile from home.

I don't shoot film now, but in the last few years it was getting harder
and harder to do. BTW we only have one place that sells film slower
then 200 and they charge an arm and a leg for it, one of the problems
with living on an island.

Scott

"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...

"Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Of course I understand the difference between digital
and photochemical imaging. I'm just strongly asserting
that the means by which an image is captured and printed
are distinct from and orthogonal to the image itself.

orthogonal? I'm afraid to ask (afraid that it might
entail another week long discussion...) IMO the only
thing "pointy" about it is your

Let's throw Tom Fill-Lips another bone and watch him go on forever. Poor
Tom, Orthogonal has a contemporary _digital_ meaning which refers to the
sameness of data storage so that it is somewhat free of typing. Dana's
application is, of course, from the digital paradigm.

"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...

"Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Of course I understand the difference between digital
and photochemical imaging. I'm just strongly asserting
that the means by which an image is captured and printed
are distinct from and orthogonal to the image itself.

orthogonal? I'm afraid to ask (afraid that it might
entail another week long discussion...) IMO the only
thing "pointy" about it is your

Let's throw Tom Fill-Lips another bone and watch him go on forever. Poor
Tom, Orthogonal has a contemporary _digital_ meaning which refers to the
sameness of data storage so that it is somewhat free of typing. Dana's
application is, of course, from the digital paradigm.

"John" wrote
"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:

The more it changes the more it stays the same.

One can only wish. Unfortunately the publics
ignorance exceeds its grasp.

So what's new?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

"John" wrote
"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:

The more it changes the more it stays the same.

One can only wish. Unfortunately the publics
ignorance exceeds its grasp.

So what's new?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:21:15 -0700, "Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Yeah, I noticed when Costco dropped Kodak 100 - which I like quite a
bit - in favor of Kodak 200. I really like the 100 and the 200
just never has made me happy.

Did you try rating it at EI 100 ? I had someone at Konica give me a trashbag full
of film (yes, a large trashbag!) which was all ASA200. I rated it at EI100 and it worked
quite well.

John - http://www.puresilver.org

"Are you planning on accepting the new definition of photography?" - Frank
"Just as soon as humanity accepts a new definition of the term humanity." - John

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:21:15 -0700, "Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Yeah, I noticed when Costco dropped Kodak 100 - which I like quite a
bit - in favor of Kodak 200. I really like the 100 and the 200
just never has made me happy.

Did you try rating it at EI 100 ? I had someone at Konica give me a trashbag full
of film (yes, a large trashbag!) which was all ASA200. I rated it at EI100 and it worked
quite well.

John - http://www.puresilver.org

"Are you planning on accepting the new definition of photography?" - Frank
"Just as soon as humanity accepts a new definition of the term humanity." - John

John wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:21:15 -0700, "Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Yeah, I noticed when Costco dropped Kodak 100 - which I like quite a
bit - in favor of Kodak 200. I really like the 100 and the 200
just never has made me happy.

Did you try rating it at EI 100 ? I had someone at Konica give me a trashbag full
of film (yes, a large trashbag!) which was all ASA200. I rated it at EI100 and it worked
quite well.

is that enough for one kid or do you need to
talk your wife into having another baby?

John wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:21:15 -0700, "Dana H. Myers" wrote:

Yeah, I noticed when Costco dropped Kodak 100 - which I like quite a
bit - in favor of Kodak 200. I really like the 100 and the 200
just never has made me happy.

Did you try rating it at EI 100 ? I had someone at Konica give me a trashbag full
of film (yes, a large trashbag!) which was all ASA200. I rated it at EI100 and it worked
quite well.

is that enough for one kid or do you need to
talk your wife into having another baby?

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 03:06:49 -0600, Tom Phillips wrote:

Did you try rating it at EI 100 ? I had someone at Konica give me a trashbag full
of film (yes, a large trashbag!) which was all ASA200. I rated it at EI100 and it worked
quite well.

is that enough for one kid or do you need to
talk your wife into having another baby?

At the time I was working in a lab in Atlantic City which was good as all of my
C-41 processing was free. I just had to pay for prints at my employee rate which I usually
sold as 5X7's to my many Irish acquaintances for them to send back to their families.

Note that both of these are on B-&-W though.

http://www.puresilver.org/about/sean.html

http://www.puresilver.org/about/erin.html

John