Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[genphoto] Eastman Kodak Processing

Expand Messages
  • HJOLLYROGER@aol.com
    Yes, this is a new subject area. I just returned from a trip in southern Mexico and have in my hand a half dozen rolls of AGFA color prints that were
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 1, 2000
      Yes, this is a new subject area. I just returned from a trip in southern
      Mexico
      and have in my hand a half dozen rolls of AGFA color prints that were
      processed by a local Kodak firm and don't seem to have the color gradients or
      acuity that my local KING FROG processor had. I'm wondering if anybody else
      has found this problem recently? I haven't used Kodak processing or their
      film for some time and I wonder if Kodak has slipped in the market? Rod
    • WIPINTL@aol.com
      hi Rod, Funny you should mention this! I just got back from Kits Camera, who uses Kodak to handle their slide and prints-from-slide processing needs. I was
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 1, 2000
        hi Rod,
        Funny you should mention this! I just got back from Kits Camera, who uses
        Kodak to handle their slide and prints-from-slide processing needs. I was
        appalled at the poor quality prints that awaited me, not to mention the fact
        that out of 45 slides given to them, about ten of those original slides, were
        NOT returned in the protective 355 plastic sleeve, but rather were tossed
        into an unsealed paper envelope! One slide was even damaged seriously...and
        all I was told was: "Well, Kodak is moving their lab from Seattle to Kent
        right now..." So this is supposed to explain totally unprofessional
        behaviour and poor quality prints! I asked for the phone number at the lab
        and was asked to wait while the gal at the counter waited on another
        customer. Needless to say, I will have to get that number from another
        source! But I think it's important to let people know when Kodak slips up so
        badly...really a broken trust.
        Nancy Clendaniel
        Clendaniel Photography
      • WIPINTL@aol.com
        hi Rod, Funny you should mention this! I just got back from Kits Camera, who uses Kodak to handle their slide and prints-from-slide processing needs. I was
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 2, 2000
          hi Rod,
          Funny you should mention this! I just got back from Kits Camera, who uses
          Kodak to handle their slide and prints-from-slide processing needs. I was
          appalled at the poor quality prints that awaited me, not to mention the fact
          that out of 45 slides given to them, about ten of those original slides, were
          NOT returned in the protective 355 plastic sleeve, but rather were tossed
          into an unsealed paper envelope! One slide was even damaged seriously...and
          all I was told was: "Well, Kodak is moving their lab from Seattle to Kent
          right now..." So this is supposed to explain totally unprofessional
          behaviour and poor quality prints! I asked for the phone number at the lab
          and was asked to wait while the gal at the counter waited on another
          customer. Needless to say, I will have to get that number from another
          source! But I think it's important to let people know when Kodak slips up so
          badly...really a broken trust.
          Nancy Clendaniel
        • C. Allen
          Moving huh? I m in Seattle and back in 1991 my son took in a negative to Kit s to obtain an enlargement for a photo competition. As a junior in high school,
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 2, 2000
            Moving huh? I'm in Seattle and back in 1991 my son took in a negative to
            Kit's to obtain an enlargement for a photo competition. As a junior in
            high school, he had already entered and won first place in 3 competitions.
            This was an entry for the national competition (he had already won at the
            state level, and that photo along with two others had to be submitted for
            nationals.) The 11x14 enlargement came back with a huge scratch running
            down the left side (it was a vertical print), about 1 inch from the edge.
            The negative was also scratched. Kit's insisted the negative must have
            been scratched in the original processing (which they had not done),
            although the original 4 inch print was not damaged. Clearly, their
            equipment had scratched the negative. He managed to choose another photo
            and have it enlarged on an expedited basis for substantially extra money
            somewhere else and made the deadline, but needless to say we have never
            been back to Kit's for photo processing. Maybe it's been an 8 year moving
            process?

            By the way, he came in 3rd. I still think if he had been able to use his
            first choice photo he would have won (but then I'm his mom).


            At 12:30 PM 2/2/00 EST, you wrote:
            >hi Rod,
            >Funny you should mention this! I just got back from Kits Camera, who uses
            >Kodak to handle their slide and prints-from-slide processing needs. I was
            >appalled at the poor quality prints that awaited me, not to mention the fact
            >that out of 45 slides given to them, about ten of those original slides,
            were
            >NOT returned in the protective 355 plastic sleeve, but rather were tossed
            >into an unsealed paper envelope! One slide was even damaged seriously...and
            >all I was told was: "Well, Kodak is moving their lab from Seattle to Kent
            >right now..." So this is supposed to explain totally unprofessional
            >behaviour and poor quality prints! I asked for the phone number at the lab
            >and was asked to wait while the gal at the counter waited on another
            >customer. Needless to say, I will have to get that number from another
            >source! But I think it's important to let people know when Kodak slips up
            so
            >badly...really a broken trust.
            >Nancy Clendaniel
            >
            >
          • HJOLLYROGER@aol.com
            In a message dated 2/1/00 5:12:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, WIPINTL@aol.com writes: I got good advise from both you and other, thanks. You
            Message 5 of 6 , Feb 6, 2000
              In a message dated 2/1/00 5:12:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, WIPINTL@...
              writes:

              << WIPINTL >>
              I got good advise from both you and other, thanks.
              You mentioned KITS, do they have any connect with SEATTLE FILM WORKS?
              Its my impression that Seattle film works as some interesting ideas on
              finishing film, but putting a whole roll on one floppy, is not one of them, I
              can barely get one on a floppy. Rod
            • FranAnd@aol.com
              ... them, ... I ve never heard of a connection between Kits and SFW. I ve used both in the past, and found both to be overpriced (in my opinion). SFW seems
              Message 6 of 6 , Feb 6, 2000
                > I got good advise from both you and other, thanks.
                > You mentioned KITS, do they have any connect with SEATTLE FILM WORKS?
                > Its my impression that Seattle film works as some interesting ideas on
                > finishing film, but putting a whole roll on one floppy, is not one of
                them,
                > I can barely get one on a floppy. Rod

                I've never heard of a connection between Kits and SFW. I've used both in the
                past, and found both to be overpriced (in my opinion). SFW seems to do good
                work, and I got a couple of rolls on floppies about four years ago, but
                decided it wasn't worth the extra cost. (Now they offer your photos over the
                internet, I believe.) The last time I used Kits was ten or more years ago
                when they gave me the quickest estimate of processing time for a roll I
                wanted in a hurry. Then they didn't make it by their estimated time, and
                charged more than my usual processor! I haven't patronized them since then.
                (That must have been back before the 1 hour processing we have available now
                days.)

                Fran Anderson
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.