Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

Baltimore Museum of Art Loses $50 Million Planned Gift Over Deaccession - Artforum International I've been looking for some wealthy art patrons to see if they want to chip in to buy me a film scanner. Especially the ones that get 'cancelled' and thrown off the museums Board. I will tell you from past experience. It is hard getting those type of people interested in underground film preservation. They don't want their name associated with underground work.

OP...that is what separates digital from film. Film does not try as hard to make sense of deep shadows. Digital tries to make sense of it with noise sometimes. If it is a still print you can fix the poor blacks with contrast grading. (dodging and burning) But I don't think it is practical with movies. Maybe they have AI software that can / will be able to do it? Another issue with digital BW is it has too many shades of gray and it sometimes looks kinda plasticy or artificial.

No, all in your head OP. A doc photog's job is to bring home the goods. Their job is not a game to see how hard they can make things for themselves.

Watched the 2 DVD set of 'The Exiles.' Impressive night photography for back in 1961. As a bonus the set comes with the 1956 film 'Bunker Hill.' 'The Exiles' was also centered around Bunker Hill. The movie is about a group of young Indians living in L.A.. Characters reminds me of some of the characters in Kerouac's On the Road. The DVD was a UCLA and USC joint project. They did a nice job cleaning it up. Commentary was doable. It was not tech oriented. They had an Indian doing half of the commentary. Although a filmmaker, he was more kibitzing about Indians and their life than sticking to the film commentary. Amazon.com: The Exiles: Mary Donahue, Homer Nish, Yvonne Williams, Tommy Reynolds, Kent Mackenzie: Movies & TV

While traveling across the USA I try to pick up a gallon of tap water wherever I go. Sometimes the schedule is too hectic to stop and can't do it. That was the case in Memphis , TN and Paris, TX as well as a few other places where stopping to find a tap didn't work out. Still, I have tons of water tests from both Coasts and many cities in between. I also tested a large collection bottled water, water filters and water filtering vending machines. Here is a recent sample of tap water I picked up in Richmond, IN in December 2020. https://archive.org/search.php?query=richmond+indiana+teoli Some of you are drinking 'toilet to tap' water. That is code for recycled human waste. You never know what is in the water, all of them are perfectly clear. Yet some of the water is filthy. I tried to buy a gallon of tap water from San Francisco, Santa Barbara, Seattle, New Orleans and Boston, but had no luck. Even after writing 70+ people in these cities that should have had an interest in seeing what is in their water while getting paid for it. (newspaper reporters, bloggers, people I've done business with) No replies from any of them. That is how it is in 2021. If it was 1921 I'd have got 70 typewritten letters saying yes or no.

Some of the backstory... I happened across this company's site by chance a couple days ago. I had saved one of their sex doll modeling demo videos a long time ago for a project I was doing called 'With Due Respect Beloved One' about a crack whore that morphed into another project. That was years ago. It was in a 60GB pile of stuff that needs filing / trashing. So I looked up the company and was amazed at the variety of silicone sex dolls they made. I started to screen shoot the site to get a representational sampling of their work. To shoot every nook and cranny of the site would be many thousand of photos. In any case I shot 410 screen photos within 1-1/2 to 2 hours. Somewhere during the screen shooting marathon it hit me to make a movie of the material. Within 2-1/2 hours more I had a finished version 1 of China Doll sans sound. Film is probably a Nc-17 - so prudish people...do not view. NSFW https://archive.org/details/china-doll-d.-d.-teoli-jr. The sound was the tough part. I was planning on taking commercial CD's of Oriental (or is it Asian?) music and mixing it all up. But it just did not mix right. Years ago I had found a scoped aircheck of 'Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow' on an old reel to reel tape. That fit the movie perfectly. I had also looked at a song by the all girl band The Slits and one by Lesley Gore, but nothing fit as good. View promptly if interested. The I.A. gives me much trouble with my work.

Thanks for the info! No, did not find out about the film. I thought usage would cost much more than that. That is pretty cheap. Years ago I had written either Magnum or Getty about using an old photo from the 1940's for a book. I think they wanted $300 - $400 for using it. For books they want to know how many books, number of editions, paperback or hardcover, USA or international and tons of other things to decide on a price. Looks like stock footage is cheaper to deal with than still photos.

A gal wrote me and wanted to be buddies on LinkedIn. I used to have thousands of connections back in the day. Then one day I went too far and LinkedIn closed my account. I lost everything including the thousands of connections. I was able to rejoin a few years later, but now am very choosy who I buddy up with and also what I post there. A gal wrote me to ask to be my buddy there. She claimed to be an artist. Lots of people write me to be my buddy. I Google them and see where they are at with their 'so-called' career. Lots of BS'ers out there. This gals name was Sona Sahakian Here is her image search... https://www.google.com/search?q=Sona+Sahakian&sxsrf=ALeKk00rTyQSoHK8XwAfWHGRML0gu1fVig:1617290518758&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwisuPnWrN3vAhVQZc0KHQ5XAfQQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1312&bih=865 Well, she does art, so I approved her as a buddy. I'm visually oriented, not text oriented. Intellectuals are text oriented. I don't like reading about people much. I may do it later if something about them hits me. But in 5 seconds a Google image search sums them up pretty well. I have no time to waste. Have you Googled yourself...are you happy with your online presence?

Hey, that is an upskirt for the 1890s. Plus I'm a fan of upskirts. Can you elaborate what makes me a creep? And why would you even look at a thread like this Dom? You may be labeled as a creep.

Doing some tests with an IBT film and thought you would like to see the lab head. Lab tail is different than the head and has more notations. The tail also has the YCM color witness marks. https://archive.org/search.php?query=16mm+IBT+Dye+Transfer+Technicolor+Lab+Head

Don't know if this has been posted as yet. I came across it by chance and thought it may be of interest. https://www.fiafnet.org/pages/e-resources/film-labs-list.html

Here is a scan I did on a flatbed scanner. I just put it up for you...even has a hair! Flatbed Scan Of 16mm Fujicolor Cine' Film D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Click on it to see full res.

Yes, there is important info on the edges. Amazon.com: Physical Characteristics of Early Films as Aids to Identification: New expanded Edition (9782960029697): Bolt-Wellens, Camille: Books Here is a piece of damaged film from a 1931 stag film called 'The Radio Man.' I scanned it on the flatbed scanner. Download and magnifier OP. Or click on it and scroll it up sized. nsfw Broken 16mm Film D.D. Teoli Jr. A.C. : Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Small Gauge Film Archive : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

If it a few frame clip, it is easier to scan bits of it on the flatbed scanner or light box that run it though a scanner to extract samples. I didn't read this whole thread. If the entire film was scanned like that then maybe they wanted to be 'artsy.' If you use AEO Light to extract the sound you have to scan the optical track as well, but not much else.

You have to look at it more like megapixels. A 4K scan has a certain amount of resolution and you are getting that resolution, just not the full 4K width.

OP... Probably a flatbed scanner or shot off a light box with a camera. See tons of it on eBay. 16MM FEATURE: "FOR THE LOVE OF BENJI" (1977) - Joe Camp - family classic | eBay 16mm Feature Film Movie - King Richard and the Crusaders (1954) IB Rex Harrison | eBay 16mm Feature Film Movie - The Daughter of Rosie O'Grady (1950) - IB - June Haver | eBay

Descreening just blurs the image to make the halftone dots less visible. Sometimes it looks good, other times not so good. Here are 3 example scans for your perusal. 300 dpi descreen 600 dpi descreen 800 dpi full resolution https://archive.org/details/800-dpi-scan-d.-d.-teoli-jr.-a.-c.

https://archive.org/search.php?query=Folies+Bergère+Upskirt Too bad it was not a RPPC. Card was pricey for a litho.

Beside arguing CMOS vs CCD sensors, the camera fondlers like to debate RAW vs JPEG. 'Are JPEG's worth it?' was the title of one of their latest threads on the Rangefinder Forum. I was on that forum years ago, but the control freak that runs it banned me twice. Maybe the last ban was within a week or two of rejoining. So I sucked it up and accepted I just don't fit in. But I still read that forum periodically. Anyway, RAW and TIFF is better than JPEG...if you plan to post process. If you shoot RAW and don't post process it does not look as good as JPEG, generally speaking. JPEG has been reduced in size as well as auto post processed a smidgen. The auto post processing of JPEG makes it look better than a RAW image not post processed. Here is their thread on this subject... https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173904 For myself, I shoot JPEG and RAW and for scans it is JPEG and TIFF. But for the scan work I do now, I seldom use TIFF anymore. I found JPEG work fine. Plus I work in 8 bit not 16 bit and again it is not an issue at all. Where TIFF comes in is when I have an important image that may be worked on later. So I save it in TIFF and it looses nothing if I need to rework it. And if it was some big job that was very important then maybe I'd go with 16 bit. I found the lossy aspect of JPEG is overblown greatly. You can see more of the lossy degradation when working with video software. But for still work, it is just not a big deal. Here are 31 generations of JPEG's. You can see how lossy they are. Seldom will you post process an image 31 times, importing and exporting it out of the software. And even if you did...what is the big deal as you can see here? https://danieldteolijrarchivalcollection.wordpress.com/2019/05/01/31-generations-of-jpegs-compared/ The deal with TIFF and RAW is it gives you a little more depth or richness in capture so you can monkey with it when pushing an image in post. Here is an example of a TIFF scan worked for 2-1/2 hours in Lightroom. NSFW https://danielteolijr.wordpress.com/2015/04/12/an-example-of-what-2-12-hours-of-lightroom-can-do-for-a-photograph/ But JPEG is also a decent option if you want to use it. I shot this last week while driving around PA. Pulled in for gas, rolled down the window and boom. Shot it with point and shoot camera. Nothing wrong with it. As long as it is not being blown up for a billboard or needs 2 1/2 hours of Lightroom. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logging_Truck_PA_D.D.Teoli_Jr.jpg I got about a 10mb image of the truck after post and that is after a heavy crop as well. Click on the image and see the hi res version. Plus I have higher res than what is shown. I used to shoot everything in RAW and JPEG, even all the snapshots and crap. It got crazy having all that extra material to keep backing up and backing up that was going to eventually be deleted anyway. So I switched over to JPEG for most work and am very happy. Now, if I am out shooting IR flash or street shooting then I'll use RAW and JPEG. Otherwise it is JPEG me. And the only reason I shoot both JPEG and RAW is for editing on the computer where it wont show the RAW image.

I got maybe 1100 films in the Archive. Only 3 super 8mm have magnetic sound. It must not have been very popular. Or maybe I'm just lucky. I would always prefer optical if I had a choice. When you run the magnetic sound films on the scanner do you get any oxide shedding like R/R tape sheds? File:Oxide shedding from reel tape D.D.Teoli Jr.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

Yes, trying the shop vac route. Noise is not a bid deal for me. I don't plan to use the easel for hours on end. And even if it is use somewhat extended, I will put on my ear protectors I use for shooting.

Now when you talk about a monochrome scanner are you talking about a true B&W dedicated sensor with no color array? https://www.opto-e.com/basics/monochrome-vs-color-sensors If so, they are much sharper than a color sensor if you are comparing like size sensors. At least that is how it is with cameras. I have not tried the newest monochrome cameras. But the old Leica Monochrom 18mp was equivalent to a 30mp - 36 mp color camera, roughly speaking.

Thanks for the rundown Frank! What years was it active?

Does that mean Scanity is overpriced Perry

Could not find any info on the Xena scanner. Who sells it?