Old film developing.

[Celraysoda 7]

I have some very old film that has already been exposed and is ready for developing. There were all in cameras I picked up anywhere from the 40's to the 80's.

 

Does anyone know who still develops this old film?

 

Would really like to know what's on them.

 

So far, I have Ektachrome E160, C-22 Kodacolor, 8mm and K-12 Kodak film can.

 

-Thanks!

[djg0770 481]

Probably mail order will be your best bet but after a quick google search I bet you could find 5 places in Manhattan that still do it.

 

these two are a few minutes from you...

http://www.ritzpix.com/photo-processing/film-developing

http://www.florhamvillagecamera.com/products-services/film-developing/

[RobertJames 14]

Try this place. Unique Photo in Fairfield.

[Celraysoda 7]

Great info. I will try the place in Fairfield as it is by my job. If not, Florham Park is not far from my house.

 

I'm hoping to find some Beatles home movies or something interesting. Porn wouldn't be bad, either.

[RobertJames 14]

Film does have a shelf life, so don't be too surprised if the results aren't great.

[Silent Service 7]

Some guy bought some Ansel Adams stuff at a yard sale and it was worth big $$. Good luck. Post some of them here when you get em back.

[woodentoe 14]

PAC lab and a1 film & video in manhattan.

 

Google em

[tt-33 8]

I have a friend that does video , home movies and all types of films to dvd Ive seen some of it and it looks good to me.if this is what you are looking for pm me for phone number most of her work can be through mail or ups

[BobZ 0]

You are out of luck with the kodacrome.

 

The last place developing kodacrome ran out of chemicals last year.

[GRIZ 3,369]

http://www.rockymoun...ilm.com/c22.htm

 

I've used Rocky Mountain in CO for C22 and they have been around a long time.

 

http://www.dwaynesph...slide-film.html

 

These guys in KS can do your Kodachrome and Ektachrome.

 

You don't say which process is listed for your Ektachrome. If its E6 thats what they use today.

 

If you take it to a local photo store they are only going to send it out to some place else and add a few bucks. Cheaper if you send it yourself.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

The place in CO has a turn-around of 6-12 months on their web site, so I hope you're not in a hurry for C-22 processing! Sounds like BS to me, and I'm a PRO PHOTOG that remembers using C-22 emulsions!

 

Kodachrome chemicals aren't made anymore and this lab's web site states that their last batch was processed in December of 2010, more than a year ago, so I'd call 1st to see IF they can handle it at all.

 

As to antique Ektachrome, it's probably Process E-4, which requires (believe it or not) exposure to a high intensity light source about half-way during the processing. There you have both a chemical and handling scenario (re-exposing the film) that prevents automation at this point. So IF you can find old, out of date chemicals or test strips, and do it yourself you MIGHT be able to see what's on it.

 

Now we get to the heart of the matter. You've been collecting cameras for decades. Did you or a family member take these photos or are these images taken by others and therefore really don't belong to you? Posting images of recognizable people without their permission is morally & ethically wrong and could be construed by a Judge to be an invasion of privacy. So in effect, you've just announced on the internet your intention of loading-up some 30 round mags for a NJ range session! Short of finding images from JFK's last ride in Dallas, how many hundreds of dollars is it worth to you to do this at this point?

[djg0770 481]

He never said he was posting the photos.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

He never said he was posting the photos.

You are correct. I just wanted to prevent a problem before it happened. Displaying them in a public venue such as a Historical Library display MIGHT be O-K, so long as no funds change hands. Posting is a no-no and so is publishing the old fashioned way. Depends upon whats in the images. Old cars without people--no problem! Nudes, people with guns, under-age scantilly-clad kids, NO WAY would I display them! A close-up of wing tip shoes on a shag carpet won't hurt anyone though!

[GRIZ 3,369]

The place in CO has a turn-around of 6-12 months on their web site, so I hope you're not in a hurry for C-22 processing! Sounds like BS to me, and I'm a PRO PHOTOG that remembers using C-22 emulsions!

 

Kodachrome chemicals aren't made anymore and this lab's web site states that their last batch was processed in December of 2010, more than a year ago, so I'd call 1st to see IF they can handle it at all.

 

As to antique Ektachrome, it's probably Process E-4, which requires (believe it or not) exposure to a high intensity light source about half-way during the processing. There you have both a chemical and handling scenario (re-exposing the film) that prevents automation at this point. So IF you can find old, out of date chemicals or test strips, and do it yourself you MIGHT be able to see what's on it.

 

Now we get to the heart of the matter. You've been collecting cameras for decades. Did you or a family member take these photos or are these images taken by others and therefore really don't belong to you? Posting images of recognizable people without their permission is morally & ethically wrong and could be construed by a Judge to be an invasion of privacy. So in effect, you've just announced on the internet your intention of loading-up some 30 round mags for a NJ range session! Short of finding images from JFK's last ride in Dallas, how many hundreds of dollars is it worth to you to do this at this point?

 

I'd qualify myself as a amateur professional photographer (been paid for my work but not enough to live on) but have been paid to teach photography (enough to live on for what thats worth).

 

I've used (not recently) and have had friends that have used Rocky Mountain and the longest turnaround I've seen is a month. Maybe they put that 6-12 months in there so you don't think they are like regular mail order photo labs.

 

You're taking a very cautious approach on the copyright and model release issue. If people take a photo, leave the film in the camera and sell it, they pretty much have relinguished their copyright. Invasion of privacy denotes there is a expectation of privacy. That would also apply if someone was shooting a professional model in a public place and you decided you'd take a few photos too. However, with any photo you take in a public place where the presence of any individual person is just coincidental there is no expectation of privacy (people walking by the Unisphere at the 63 NY World's fair for example). Easy rule is if its in public its okay as long as you were legally in the place you were.

 

If you're a public figure (politician or celebrity) in a public place your expectation of privacy is virtually non-existent. That's how all the paparazzi make their money.

 

How that photo is used is the second part. If used as news reportage or as a fine art or historical display there is usually no problem if you don't misrepresent or use the photo commercially to promote something else.

 

Your comparison to the 30 rd magazines isn't really valid as there is no violation of conspiracy to violate civil law.

 

There's a lot more to this as we know but taking your approach would be the safest, although I think overcautious.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

Griz,

 

Yes, you're right. I was a little bit over the top with the magazine comment, so let's just forget that was said.

 

The posting comment was somewhat valid since it was asked & answered on an internet forum and therefore I can make an (somewhat on the side of extreme caution) assumption that the OP has access to a computer or scanner. Public figures in public places or private citizens in public places are of course "fair game". Your useage comment is spot-on! I agree with you and apologize for not posting the same earlier. My point is this: A naked 5 year old girl in a bath tub from 30 years ago could be considered child pornography today. Probably NOTHING in those films like that, but who knows? Exercising care & caution is the order of the day, we both agree on that.

 

At $30.00-$40.00 a roll including shipping, it could get a little expensive to see if anything is printable. There may be a historic gem in there or just lots of blurry camera shake....

 

Sorry I came off a little crazed--I was short on time and didn't want to PO the Mrs. as the dinner bell was ringing.....So everyone have a nice day today!

 

Dave