126 film has frame numbers and an index hole, though no sprocket holes... Paul Stenquist wrote: > Are you sure it's not 126 film? > Paul > On Sep 20, 2007, at 10:07 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: > > >> On 21/09/2007, John Sessoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> I run a photo mini-lab. I've mentioned that before. >>> >>> I had a customer come in yesterday, wanting re-prints from some >>> negatives. They'd been processed by another store in our chain, >>> and she >>> had the index print. I wrote down the frame numbers from the index >>> print >>> and how many of each she wanted on the inside flap of one of our 4x6 >>> print wallets and left it for my relief to print. >>> >>> Got to work today, and there's a note that there's no numbers so >>> the lab >>> operator didn't know what to print. >>> >>> Before I started making a fuss, I looked at the negatives, and lo & >>> behold, there's no edge print whatsoever; no frame numbers, no film >>> identifiers ... NADA! >>> >>> Had to have been C-41 film, 'cause that's all our labs do. Looked >>> like >>> regular 35 mm, but there's nothing on the negative except the >>> customer's >>> images. >>> >>> Anyone have thoughts on this? >>> >> May it have been a cheap film containing 35mm movie film stock? >> >> -- >> Rob Studdert >> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA >> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO >> http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ >> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > >
-- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
