Re: [APML] what the heck is this?

["Chris & Jennifer Cook" <ccjd@ix.netcom.com>]

Wowzer!  Freaky man.......  Looks like you have a bad case of film
mites........ with big razor like teeth!....<g>

Seriously, I've never seen such sharply defined marks like that from poor
processing.
I don't think it is from Kodak.

Chris


==================
Chris Cook
Astronomical Photography
www.abmedia.com/astro


-----Original Message-----
From: Bobby Middleton <bobm@koyote.com>
To: astro-photo@seds.org <astro-photo@seds.org>
Date: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [APML] what the heck is this?


>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Lodriguss" <jml@astropix.com>
>
>
>> Did the film look like this on the unexposed portions also?
>
>Jerry it was only on the exposed frames.
>
>>
>> What does the film look like visually, not on a light box, but just
>looking
>> at the physical film?
>
>It looks normal as far as I can tell.
>
>>
>> I would say that it is almost certainly not Kodak, but more likely the
>> processing, but I've never seen anything like this.
>
>Thanks for looking. I have another 220 roll I'd like to use with my vacuum
>back, but I'd hate to fry another night's work tonight on the small chance
>the whole batch had some problem. I have several rolls of 120 but it won't
>work with vacuum like it needs to because of the paper backing. Would Kodak
>have any data on a bad batch?
>Bobby
>
>>
>> At 03:13 PM 11/6/2002 -0600, you wrote:
>> >http://www.koyote.com/users/bobm/e200_problem.htm
>> >
>> >Is this a processing problem or a manufacturing problem from Kodak? It
>> >ruined all my work from half a night last week. On parts of the slides
>you
>> >can see where no red recorded; almost like there was masking tape that
>kept
>> >the red nebulosity from recording but it still recorded matching
>background
>> >color and stars. On the rest you can see these big blue swaths where
>> >obviously only the blue layer was recording. Did my processor get me or
>did
>> >Kodak? Or is there any way my vacuum back camera did something? It was a
>> >pretty dry night with light+ but not moderate dew. This is 220 size E200
>and
>> >I have another roll probably from the same batch. The batch # is 0263
031
>> >expire 07/2004.  I guess I don't use the other roll?
>> >Bobby Middleton
>> >
>> >
>> >--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>> >              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>>
>>
>> Astronomical photography: http://www.astropix.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>
>
>--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>


--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>