Ask me about 1 hour photo processing!

[DeeBye]

I work in a largish retail store that has a 1 hour photo processing booth. I've always been a "jack-of-all-trades" in my store, but lately I've been doing a lot of photo finishing. I even went through the 2 day course on how to operate the crazy Japanese 1 hour photolab machine with bells and bright lights and OMG dangerous chemicals.

I can't answer your questions about digital photo processing (as in, I can't do photo prints from a digicam memory card), because my machine is too ancient. Anything film related (35mm or APS) I can probably answer.

I'll start you off with two fun facts.

- it only takes about 15 minutes to process a roll of 35mm, 24 exposure film -- assuming my photolab machine isn't otherwise occupied. At full speed, I can develop and print about 10 rolls of film in an hour. Newer machines go considerably faster.
- people take way too many pictures of their sexual organs

[Occhidiangela]

- people take way too many pictures of their sexual organs
[right][snapback]62090[/snapback][/right]

It may be that their friends found their camera. Some years ago, when I was at sea quite a bit, we all learned the sordid thruth that one simply did not leave one's camera about unattended, unless one wanted to build a urologist's scrap book.

Fast forward 18 years later. I lend my newly won in a raffle digital camera to a friend. We are at a pub. She asks another friend to take a few photos of her, me, etc. She then wanders off to order a drink when I am in "the gents" and in less than three minutes, the fella with the camera, in a reasonably full bar, gets three shots of what I assume to be his scrotum hanging from open fly, and a few shots looking down his throat. Fast work, I'd say, which was not discovered until the gal who had initially borrowed the camera down loaded the pics onto a disc, which she then turned over to me with an extremely red face. When I opened the disc, it took a minute or two to figure out a) the red face and b ) just what the heck I was looking at -- oh no, as it dawns on me, it happened! And I know better. She, sadly for her sense of embarassment, did not, though the laughs after the fact on all sides were still "with" and not "at." There is a little rube in all of us, and a bit of rascal . . .

Occhi

[Count Duckula]

- people take way too many pictures of their sexual organs
[right][snapback]62090[/snapback][/right]

I've heard rumors that places like Wal-Mart look through the one-hour processing film for images of child pornography. How safe are "risque" photos (that's a nice catchall phrase, methinks) sent off to processing? Are people better of with do-it-yourself digital cameras? Not that I'm planning on shooting or posing, of course :unsure: just curious.

[ShadowHM]

- people take way too many pictures of their sexual organs
[right][snapback]62090[/snapback][/right]

:wacko: Poor DeeBye !

I am grateful to be spared anyone sharing those photographs. The last time someone had the temerity to show me one, it wasn't of theirs.... *groan*.

Somebody else had insisted on proudly displaying his new tatoo - of a skull on the tip of his penis. :o Are you glad now that North Bay doesn't host international Tatoo shows?

[DeeBye]

It may be that their friends found their camera.
[right][snapback]62092[/snapback][/right]

Haha, yes. I've indeed developed film that has shots of mystery scrotums.

[DeeBye]

I've heard rumors that places like Wal-Mart look through the one-hour processing film for images of child pornography. How safe are "risque" photos (that's a nice catchall phrase, methinks) sent off to processing? Are people better of with do-it-yourself digital cameras? Not that I'm planning on shooting or posing, of course :unsure: just curious.
[right][snapback]62101[/snapback][/right]

It depends purely on who's developing the film. I'll let pretty much anything go, but I'll definitely draw the line at anything remotely close to child porn.

You're definitely better off using a digicam for your amateur porn. I don't mind the odd boobie shot, but some places get very angry about them.

[DeeBye]

:wacko:    Poor DeeBye !
[right][snapback]62115[/snapback][/right]

The worst one I saw was an entire roll of film featuring a fat couple and a beer bottle. It was horrible! :(

(I made sure to show the prints to as many coworkers as possible because it was hilarious and I'm a meanie. I couldn't look the customers in the face when they came to pick up their prints)

[Occhidiangela]

The worst one I saw was an entire roll of film featuring a fat couple and a beer bottle.  It was horrible!  :(

(I made sure to show the prints to as many coworkers as possible because it was hilarious and I'm a meanie.  I couldn't look the customers in the face when they came to pick up their prints)
[right][snapback]62119[/snapback][/right]

Brother Dee: ethics.

They trusted you with their film. OK, you got an eyeful, occupational hazard. Consider who is paying the bill for the film development.

Just a thought.

(FWIW: I agree with your suggestion that amateur Dark Brothers wannabes take advantage of the new equipmtner available in the Digital Age.)

Occhi

[DeeBye]

Brother Dee: ethics. 

They trusted you with their film.  OK, you  got an eyeful, occupational hazard.  Consider who is paying the bill for the film development.
[right][snapback]62121[/snapback][/right]

I am a very bad man and I'll never do it again :blush:

[Count Duckula]

The worst one I saw was an entire roll of film featuring a fat couple and a beer bottle.  It was horrible!  :(
[right][snapback]62119[/snapback][/right]

Well, I was thinking about having lunch this morning. Glad you cured me of that. :P

Why anybody would want that by one-hour processing is beyond me.

[Occhidiangela]

Well, I was thinking about having lunch this morning. Glad you cured me of that. :P

Why anybody would want that by one-hour processing is beyond me.
[right][snapback]62137[/snapback][/right]

As George Carlin observed regarding 1 hour photo shops:

Are people now waxing nostalgic about "this morning?" :D

Occhi

[Bob]

Why anybody would want that by one-hour processing is beyond me.

So they can look at the photos while it still seems like a vaguely good idea.


To save making an extra post:
Dee, I have a question. Why is 1-hour processing worth the extra cost and (presumably) lack of a free film?
When I was into film photography (which was only a year ago) I really saw no point in the 'fast' services. I got my photos developed by post & they took anywhere from a week to a fortnight (and the films would be sat around for weeks before being sent off). Whenever my grandmother got my photos developed for me (which was nice of her) she payed twice as much (although she went for the 12 hour, not the 1 hour), didn't get a free (which isn't really free I supose, you end up paying for it somehow) film (resulting in the 'film stock' going down by 1) and came back with poorer quality photos.

So, why is it worth it (unless your photos are urgent, in which case the answer is obvious)? or is short processing actually a whole lot better than my experience of it?

Oh, another question, do you just sit there and press buttons with no other interaction other than putting a film canister in and taking finished prints out at the end?

-Bob

Oh, what's up with your shirt?

[DeeBye]

Dee, I have a question. Why is 1-hour processing worth the extra cost and (presumably) lack of a free film?

Convenience. People can get their film developed while they shop.

Oh, another question, do you just sit there and press buttons with no other interaction other than putting a film canister in and taking finished prints out at the end?

I sit there and press buttons :shuriken:

Oh, what's up with your shirt?

It's a very nice shirt :wub:

[Rinnhart]

So they can look at the photos while it still seems like a vaguely good idea.
To save making an extra post:
Dee, I have a question. Why is 1-hour processing worth the extra cost and (presumably) lack of a free film?
When I was into film photography (which was only a year ago) I really saw no point in the 'fast' services. I got my photos developed by post & they took anywhere from a week to a fortnight (and the films would be sat around for weeks before being sent off). Whenever my grandmother got my photos developed for me (which was nice of her) she payed twice as much (although she went for the 12 hour, not the 1 hour), didn't get a free (which isn't really free I supose, you end up paying for it somehow)  film (resulting in the 'film stock' going down by 1) and came back with poorer quality photos.

So, why is it worth it (unless your photos are urgent, in which case the answer is obvious)? or is short processing actually a whole lot better than my experience of it?

Oh, another question, do you just sit there and press buttons with no other interaction other than putting a film canister in and taking finished prints out at the end?

-Bob

Oh, what's up with your shirt?
[right][snapback]62148[/snapback][/right]

Who'd you use, Bob?