Laurie Solomon wrote:
> Art,
>
> Interestingly, I have been finding that the length of the film leaders on
> both ends of the film have gotten shorter and shorter as time has gone on.
> There use to be enough leader to allow for three extra frames plus room to
> put clips on the ends of the fi
I pay and have paid for and expect 36 exposure for many, many years -
everything over and above that is a gift.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: filmscan
y were within the normal range of frames for that roll,
be it 12, 24, 36 exposures.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Maris V. Lidaka,
Sr.
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 11:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Film lengt
So the conclusion is - don't try to squeeze out an extra frame or two?
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Laurie Solomon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 11:07 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleani
That is the safest conclusion.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Maris V. Lidaka,
Sr.
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 12:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleaning slides (PEC
tips)
So the conclusion
Laurie Solomon wrote:
> That is the safest conclusion.
>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Maris V. Lidaka,
> Sr.
>
> So the conclusion is - don't try to squeeze out an extra frame or two?
>
> Maris
>
When mentally reviewing my own many thousands of rolls of film, I think
I can h
Laurie Solomon wrote:
>> I pay and have paid for and expect 36 exposure for many, many years -
>> everything over and above that is a gift.
>
>
> While that is not in question; what often is in question is the fact that
> given the shorter lengths of leader any attempts to squeeze that extra
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur Entlich wrote:
> What I see mainly is wasted
> leader due to too much of it being "used" during the autoload process.
> The autoload feature should actually allow for extra frames is anything.
> This, I believe, is an "agreement" with maybe both film manufacturer
TECTED]]On Behalf Of B.Rumary
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 7:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleaning slides (PEC
tips)
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur Entlich wrote:
> What I see mainly is wasted
> leader due to too much of it being "us
, May 01, 2001 8:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Film lengths was: Cleaning slides (PEC
tips)
Laurie Solomon wrote:
>> I pay and have paid for and expect 36 exposure for many, many years -
>> everything over and above that is a gift.
>
>
> Whil
10 matches
Mail list logo
