Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

LeRoy Neiman 1921-2012 Playboy VIP magazine Whenever the Olympics come up, I think of him. He was always featured at the old Olympics doing his paintings. Here he is at one of the Playboy Clubs in 1971 working on a mural.

Thanks Phil. So how would this work? https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/01/11/british-museum-banks-on-turner-nfts-after-hokusai-initiative Everybody buys shares in an artwork, but the museum still owns it? Do you get a serial numbered hi-res digital image with your share?

https://www.redsharknews.com/the-dslr-is-now-dead? I used to like DSLR's for sports. But I don't shoot sports anymore, so won't miss it. What about you? I know this is a topic like film vs digital. Each camp got their own likes. What I always wanted was a M43 digital rangefinder that was a Leica clone, was all manual and the size of the old Olympus half-frame cameras. If it did 2K that would be great!

I don't think they will ever run out of silver. I think the pollution police would be more of a worry with the processing chemicals. Or it may be the machines to process films, spare parts, etc that is the nail in the coffin for film. Do they even make still or cine' film processors anymore? Annie Leibovitz as a toddler! DDTJRAC

I got a somewhat diverse collection of underground newspapers from the 1960's & 1970's. It is interesting going back in time to that era. I was a teenager back then. Groovy was a word that was used a lot in the classified ads as well as 'aware.' People weren't 'woke' yet...they were AWARE! Classified ad L.A. Star 1972 DDTJRAC Classified ad L.A. Star 1972 DDTJRAC I think 'hip' was used before aware, but I'm not sure. I was not too hip or aware back then. All these newspapers are oversize and have to be flatbed scanned with the large format scanner, so it takes time. Even if you got a large format sheet fed scanner you can't run newsprint through it or it crinkles the paper, and the scanner rollers get fouled with black ink. If it is a big center spread, it has to be done on the vacuum easel and copy stand. Click to view DDTJRAC Back then we just threw away the papers. Some were .10, some were .25 and some were free. Now some of them go for $45 to $100 each on eBay. The San Francisco Oracle is one of the most prized papers as well as anything with Robert Crumb cartoons in them. Classified ad L.A. Star 1972 DDTJRAC Very entertaining the things you find in the papers. This guy advertises for someone to play with his wife's long hair. Classified ad L.A. Star 1972 DDTJRAC Another ad shows a pretty gal straddling her big dog 'Wolfie' and selling 2 bestiality sex photos for $2 a pop. These ads here are just some of the tame ones. I'll leave the bestiality stuff in the 8mm archive for now. For some reason most of the bestiality porn was on 8mm and not 16mm. I'm still trying to figure out if that stuff is fit for legal consumption or not or if some statute of limitations applies due to their age. Trying to find out the law in that area is not easy. For me as an archivist, I have no censorship hangups. (Another favorite word of that day) But that does not go too far if you run into legal issues. Back then, things were legal that are illegal now and vice versa.

Carbro print of Contance Towers eBay photo - Fair Use Before dye transfer, carbro was it for outstanding color and permanence. Been looking for a carbro for 4 years+ . Finally found one last week. It is gorgeous color, printed in 1959. I plan to color test it for fade resistance later in 2022 when sun comes out after the winter. I hate to cut it, but it has to be done for the greater good. Trouble with it is...it is a huge 20x24 photo. I've got a large format flatbed scanner, but it only goes to 11 x 17. They got bigger flatbed scanners, if you got $5k to spend. Anyway, the copy stand and vacuum easel will handle it. I wish I had the dough to buy a Phase One or other top end large format digital camera for my copy stand. I believe the print is from newspaper's archive. They would get a big carbro print for color reproduction with the process camera for halftone screening. But that is just speculation. It was wrapped and labelled as such, but the old wrapper did not fit it 100%. The wrapper may have been for something else. It is always detective work, but the longer time goes by, no witnesses are to be found to ask. I've been around photography since the late 60's. I've never seen a carbro print in person until now. They have a certain look to them that are unique to carbro when you view them from various angles. Also see the corners for the color registration overlaps on the bottom left and right corners. If you are interested in the 3 color printing process, see: Bob Pace 'The Dye Transfer Process' Parts 1-5 VHS D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Bob Pace 'The Dye Transfer Process' Parts 6-11 VHS D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive They are for dye transfer. But it is similar to carbro as far as color separations.

Yes, well put. But sooner or later, you will have to decide whether you want to put your pride in 'shooting film' or doing justice to a project. (aka going digital.) They have some film fanatics that say they will give up on it if they can't shoot film. I'd tell you not to be one of them. Put your project first and not your ego. If you can't swing film, accept it and use what you can comfortably use.

...Beautiful!

I like underground films!

OP...don't know. But I subscribe to the policy of...if they could of...they would of. The Golden Age of Film is long gone. People are investing in digital innovations and not film innovations. Film is $ and I think it will continue its one way trajectory of higher and higher prices in the future. Ink for my inkjet printer has gone from $54 to $72 per cartridge. And I need 9 of them. Most everything has gone up OP. Gotta suck it up and move on. And if it gets too much pain for you...go digital OP.

35mm? That is for the big boys! (I'd add girls to it, but lady film collectors are pretty rare.) You need space and $$ for 35mm. And those projectors! I got started with 8mm. But soon graduated to 16mm. Some film collectors still go for carbon arc projectors

Hopefully this is not too political for this forum. But someday you may be forced to do film work you don't want to do. At least that is what I gather from this article. (But I'm not very legal minded, so if I am wrong, then please correct.) Christian wedding photographer who refused to photograph same-sex weddings loses court case - DIY Photography <><><><> RPPC Selection from Flappers collection DDTJRAC

Although some would say I'm a film collector, the film archivist is something of a different mindset than an actual film collector. OK, I will agree I am a film collector of sorts. But a true film collector would rather watch a projected faded red and scratched up film rather than a restored Blu-ray disc of the film. For me, I would rather watch a restored digital copy than a subpar projected film copy. Here is a recent ad from a film collector's forum: The Goodbye Girl (1977). Pretty good print, theatrical. Eastman turning. A few lines, splices at reel joins. Got this a while ago, watched it, enjoyed it, but not something I'll watch over and over again. Would much rather get another print to enjoy. $275 shipped (C USA only), but would much rather trade for that value. 'Eastman turning' means the film is red and lost most of the original color. With filters on the projector lens or chemical treatment they can get something a little better to project... Internet Photos: My World in 8mm - Fair Use While film is mesmerizing to project, I'm not stuck into that 'projection only' mentality like a true film collector is. Actually, I don't do much projection at all any longer. Every time you project a film it causes wear and tear. Click to view Damaged section of 16mm film from The Radio Man Photo: D.D.Teoli Jr. As a film archivist I like to bestow as little wear and tear on a film as possible. And some of these projectors and editors are a pain to get bulbs for. You may need to buy used projector bulbs on eBay from Ukraine...with no guarantee of them even working. (But that is just one extreme example.) Photo: eBay - Fair Use Another difference is film collectors usually would never buy a film like this one below. Most film collectors like feature films and in somewhat pristine shape. I prefer short subject films and not feature films. But that is not the point here. The point is they would not buy a warped-up film suffering from vinegar syndrome to this extent...unless they had a dose of film archivist in them. Photo: D.D.Teoli Jr. With a film archivist it is a challenge to save some part of film history, no matter what condition it is in. I mentioned above that I like restored digital copies of a film. Well, I'm no snob with films. Most of my archival work deals with scratched up, faded and warped and ripped films with various stages of vinegar syndrome and sometimes bug infestation. I'm just saying if the choice is watching a faded and scratched up projected film or a restored digital copy...I will go for the restored digital copy. Recently a picker acquired a huge goldmine of films from a collector and amateur filmmaker. This is just a miniscule fraction of films he acquired from the estate...for peanuts. He sold one box of slides for $5,000+. So, here was a case where a picker had some pristine films from a film collector that was dispersed in short order before they sat too long and started to decompose. I just wish I was rich and could have bought the entire collection...to archive. The late Dennis R. Atkinson But whether film collector or archivist. We all got one thing in common. We got lots of film!

Stil or moving images...they are all related and much of the things are interchangeable. After all, the 35mm still camera, invented by Oscar Barnak, was made to use 35mm motion picture stock. Back on the early 70's if you wanted cheap 35mm film for still use, you bought expired and repackaged oddball movie film stock from Freestyle. It was about $1.50 - $2.50 for a 100 foot roll. In date Plus-X was about $7.50 per 100 feet. Oscar Barnak In 2022 I hope to recreate my lost website on camera comparisons. You can see how digital vs film looks and how different size sensors perform from P&S to medium format and everything in between. It is not cine' comparisons, but it will give you an idea.

Wanted 16mm films of: Synched dialogue vintage sound stag films Early French / German vintage stag films 1920's - 1940s Exceptional burlesque or nudie cutie films Narrated sound nudie cutie films 'Art Student' films Farm films Construction films Films with nuns in them / Catholic / Jewish or other religious ceremonies Ocean Liners / Ship films Vintage wedding films Interesting short subject films by Coronet, Encyclopedia Britannica, Castle, Blackhawk, Pyramid or Sterling films Graphic medical procedure films Childbirth films Aunt Jemima commercials Time capsule films Out of the Inkwell cartoons Racist cartoons / films Segregation films Popeye 1930's / early 40's Interesting home movies Car road trip films Interesting short subject educational films Train films (prefer steam, but open to diesel) 1920's Flappers Interesting faded red films...if they are cheap! No feature films...except 'Jones Family' and 'Nanook of the North' ...also VHS / Betamax home movies found footage (personal - not commercial movies) Write direct: w1000w@aol.com Dan Weegee tells how:https://archive.org/details/WeegeeTellsHow

Gotta take into account the loss of generational dupe sharpness when you do film dupes, from working negs from the OCN, etc. I never compared cine' sharpness in the digital vs film arena. But I can say flatbed scanned 35mm still negative film, is only = about 3 or 4 mp with a P&S camera. It is relatively low res stuff. A 6mp digital camera with crop sensor beats out the 35mm film for sharpness. What we need to see are real life cine' comparisons. I had the 35mm up to back up my claim, but Tumblr shut down my camera comparison website in 2019 and lost it all. Of course, tests have to be done by someone that has no iron in the fire. Or the 'film only' or 'digital only' devotees may skew results to match their own prejudices. I work in film and digital, so I don't care. I just go with what is.

Dunno why depth of field would be a deal breaker. If IQ is better, just juggle things.

OP, sure. Why not keep increasing the image quality...unless there are some sort of drawbacks. I just wish the same inventiveness went into making affordable film scanners. And beside IQ, digital can make better film like emulations with dynamic grain characteristics and deeper blacks. Weegee

Free Tutorials | Larry Jordan 2500 listings It is all over my head pretty much, but I like to be exposed to new ideas. You never know when something will click. For my own cine' post work I'm pretty basic. With archival material you can't get too fancy. Contrast grading, color correction, sound (if any) and titles. If you got good source material and money, then you go further with dust and defect removal. But maybe someday I want to be artsy and do something that does not respect the archival material's truthfulness, so I 'expose' myself to new ideas. And I would like better color correction and contrast grading abilities than my basic software offers. Since I have tons of films to process, I have even simplified workflow a great deal. I make templates with my various production companies, and I can plug in the film and change the main title and boom...export! I love having some fun with the films whenever possible...I am an underground archivist! So, I can mix in some of my archival or art material for more exposure for the in name only "production companies." <><><><> In the Holy Water Bowl St. Patrick's Cathedral, NYC 2016 (Candid) Selection from The Americans...60 years after Frank

I never knew that until yesterday. I just figured he crossed in the daytime according to the famous painting. Well, it could have been golden hour. And had no idea it was Christmas!

On one photo forum, they were trying to recreate the autochrome. Not much luck. Amazing they did it way back when. Give it some time and Technicaolor will be a lost art...maybe already is?

Via L.O.C. Post Processing: D.D.Teoli Jr.

A hand-tinted albumen print from Japan, late 1800's. DDTJRAC In the black and white era, one day someone decided to tint a black and white image with splashes of color. In 1907 the Lumiere' Bros developed the autochrome process. It was the first full color photo process. But photographers were hand coloring daguerreotypes way back in the 1860s or so.

Here is some JPEG output from the Retroscan 2K. I'm looking to do somewhat better in sharpness and better in dynamic range. Beside no sound, the thing I don't like about the Retroscan sensor is the dynamic range. The highlights seem to be blown easily. Retroscan JPEG from The Segregated Swimming Hole. Screenshots of the Segregated Swimming Hole D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Lots of the films I get are multi gen dupes or poorly exposed home movies. Good dynamic range is very important to me. But even the most $$ scanner 'can't polish a turd' as they say. Below is an example of some of the best quality film I would have to scan. (The color was off, so I color corrected some in Lightroom.) But it was decent exposure and focus and not a warped mess. 16mm medical film on breast reduction surgery...graphic photos. Breast Reduction Surgery Wayne State D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Retroscan JPEG from medical film Sometimes when I scan films, I put up a short sampling of images from the film in case people need screenshots. So, any scanner I get has to have individual images output as well as video. Now, there is nothing in the price range of the Retroscan, so for what it is, I think it is an excellent value...I just need more for my work. Hearing feedback, the Cintel is poor for archival 16mm, the Lasergraphics Archivist seemed like a possibility.

Yes, that is true. That is why I gave up on projection. It can be really hard on films.