On Sun, Jan 14, 2007 at 10:38:55AM -0500, Mark Cassino wrote: > David J Brooks wrote: > > http://www.equiman.com/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum8/HTML/022168.html > > > > This is from an Equine BB i moderate. > > > > Sometime they ask about were to get processing done. > > > > I ~could~ be wrong, but check out the replies from Hi-Jinks > > > > I think there could be flaws here, no.If not, give me some ammo here.:-) > > Back when I shot film I had mis-exposed rolls several times - probably > less than 0.1% but still several times. Problems included just poor > development (negs dense beyond use or too thin), inconsistent > development (middle of the roll too thin), chemistry burns (clear spots > on transparency film in a liquid splash pattern) and lastly film > shredded into confetti by one drug store machine. (In that case there > was no arguing that the camera somehow did it!)
Then there's that perpetual favourite - the scratch all down the film. One time that happened to me the store absolutely insisted that the scratch had to be made by the camera, not by their equipment. They were unable to explain how the camera had managed to scratch the last third of the film, which was unexposed :-) That's why I used to take my film to dip-and-dunk labs whenever possible. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
