Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

QWERKey-UK t1_j12sipj wrote

Lots of minilabs did both... film and RA4. You literally put the film in one end, and prints came out of the other.

2

FixedFront t1_j145zkq wrote

I know a lot of the big mail-in labs used unified machines, but all the minilab units I saw were separated. It makes more sense for the 1-hour workflow and, for one indie lab I saw, it allowed them to have a separate processor for E-6, which they got a lot of from a local photography group.

1

QWERKey-UK t1_j14aays wrote

E6 would be a separate machine, yes, it would have to be.

1

FixedFront t1_j14bo64 wrote

Well, as opposed to what many minilab operators do with slide film intended for prints instead of slides, which is to just run it through the C-41 processor and damn the chemical consequences. The indie lab I referenced ran through so much Kodachrome that it was worth it for them to buy a dedicated unit. Meant they could also take on mail-in orders from other regional indie labs with quicker turnaround than the big processing houses.

1

QWERKey-UK t1_j14cdd2 wrote

If you run C41 film through E6, you're cross processing, and that would look awful unless you shot specifically for it, and then printed accordingly. I doubt many minilabs would have done this, as it also ruins your chemistry pretty quickly.

Kodachrome was not E6... it was K14, a totally different process.

1

FixedFront t1_j14eddv wrote

Yes, my bad. Forgot Ektachrome was the E-6 name. It's been nearly 15 years, cut a girl some slack. :) Generally, anyone using slide film of any chemistry knows that if they bring it to a 1-hour lab they're getting C-41. Whether they shoot for it is their business. I never ran slide film through my machines because I was a testing nut (and got one district photo supervisor pissed at me for that refusal), but a lot of the old heads would do it for customers on the expectation that doing it a few times a year wouldn't hurt things too badly at the rate they changed chemicals.

1