When I first started at the lab, it was owned by a supermarket chain called
Kroger. I suppose, by putting the Kodak logo on the supermarket's
photofinishing bag, gave them some credibiltiy. Kodak provided tons of
promotional materials too. If I remmber right, about 1980, Konica and Fuji
started making inroads into the paper business. They had the option of
buying chemicals and paper from a few companies but never strayed far from
Kodak. The Yellow Father's prices were way higher, I want to say 30 0gher
than anyone else paper price. They were way scared so they formed a
partnership (510wned by Kodak )with some manufacturing firm and called it
Qualex.
When I was there, every single frame was printed on Kodak paper and souped
in Kodak chemistry. Customers could choose silk or glossy. Both were
resin-coated. Process control was powered by a single MacBeth densitometer.
That one densitometer kept the plant running the entire 10 years I was
there. Film processing was exactly the same for every roll except for
damaged film. If the sprocket holes were ripped out or the order was in
pieces, it was run on a dip-and-dunk. Not necessarily a good thing in a big
lab to have your stuff done in the dip-and-dunk.
If you turned in your pictures by US Mail to a discounter, you got the same
process as the guy who dropped his off in a camera store. (At the time,
"Kodak" processing was not done by Qualex. They still had the Kodak labs
running with nearly hand-built machinery I'm told.) Every retailer had a
different bag, yeah. The big resellers had their own inner envelope for
negs and prints but many specified generic ones with the Kodak emblem and
"The Good Look" on it. (Who thought up THAT slogan?)
We sorted by type of order, before splicing, so we'd end up with a 100 order
reel of 35mm C-41 that was all destined to become, say, 2-each 3x5 matte.
So when that reel of film came off the cine (continuous) processor, it was
inspected for staples and scratches, then printed from the same reel. The
only way a premium-priced dealer could differentiate his product was to
bundle neg sleeving. Later someone forced through the wierd idea of zipping
a strip of clear tape onto the prints and put them into a binder for a
premium price.
Note that I'm not saying that all EP-2 paper from Kodak is the same. I
don't know that. But the entire lab ran *ONE* emulsion in any one
size/surface. They always rotated stock religiously. I've read in pop
photo that the mass market guys get paper with lower contrast and higher
saturation than the wedding photographer's lab. That's one reason why you
get cartoonish burnt-sienna skin tones on Caucasion skin. (Mass market film
is aimed at producing that familiar super saturated skin tone that resembles
(to me) the way appliance stores over-adjust their color TVs. I suppose it
makes the average Joe stop in his tracks and say, "Wow, Mabel ! Will ya
look at that! How come Claudia Schiffer's cheeks aren't the color of a
basktball at *OUR* house?" <Lama shrugs>
Printing was all done on high speed machines that scanned for density and
color corrections, stored the setting, then when the correct frame came
along, it stopped for a split second and the exposure was made. At the time
of exposure, some printers punched holes in the paper (during exposure!),
driven by compressed air so the cutters could recognize the end of a frame.
There must have been a lot of vibration at the plane of the paper.
Lama
----- Original Message -----
From: "dreammoose" <dreammoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> I can take my C-41 film to a nearby drugstore and have it sent to Kodak
> or Fuji or I can take it farther away to a real Photography shop and
> have them send it to Kodak or Fuji. In the case of Kodak ( I don't
> remember for Fuji) the envelope looks different, more black and less
> gold, and says things about "Royal Gold Dealer" and "Kodak Royal Paper"
> My question is, what's the difference?
>
> Most important, is there any difference in the way the film/negatives
> are processed and handled. Are my chances of geetting properly developed
> negs without scratches better at one or the other? Does the film all go
> to the same lab?
>
> Second, is there a difference in the printing/paper?
>
> I know a good deal of the Photo shop's profit probably comes from
> processing and I try to support them, but there are times when
> convenience would make me opt for the drugstore. I'd like to be more
> knowledgeable about any quality differences.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|