Have you worked in a minilab?

[philbirch]

I'm writing a story and the character works in a studio that uses a minilab to process films sent in by pharmacies and newsagents. I'd like to 'flesh' the story out a bit by explaining how the machine works and what my character does when he's processing the films.

This story starts in 1979 so the machine we are using must be a late 70's model.

can anyone help?

[mickeyobe]

Nov 7, 2014 12:18:07 GMT -5 philbirch said:

I'm writing a story and the character works in a studio that uses a minilab to process films sent in by pharmacies and newsagents. I'd like to 'flesh' the story out a bit by explaining how the machine works and what my character does when he's processing the films.

This story starts in 1979 so the machine we are using must be a late 70's model.

can anyone help?

Phil,

I would really like to help.

But the only machine I had in my mini lab was not very efficient.

It was a well used aging 1932 model MickeyO.

I honestly cannot recommend it. Replacement parts are hard to come by.

Sorry.

Mickey

[SidW]

Phil, Sorry, I worked upstairs, doing the enlarging, in the 1950s. Downstairs they had a big machine, they fed in films at one end, and all that could be seen was a massive rotating drying drum. The photos came off it in long strips that had to be cut.

[mickeyobe]

Nov 7, 2014 20:26:09 GMT -5 SidW said:

Phil, Sorry, I worked upstairs, doing the enlarging, in the 1950s. Downstairs they had a big machine, they fed in films at one end, and all that could be seen was a massive rotating drying drum. The photos came off it in long strips that had to be cut.

Reminds me of Charlie Chaplin's movie "Modern Times".

Mickey

[philbirch]

Nov 7, 2014 20:26:09 GMT -5 SidW said:

Phil, Sorry, I worked upstairs, doing the enlarging, in the 1950s. Downstairs they had a big machine, they fed in films at one end, and all that could be seen was a massive rotating drying drum. The photos came off it in long strips that had to be cut.

Thanks for your input. I guess back then it was black and white. I've found a few videos on youtube showing someone using one. I have no idea of the vintage, but after talking to the guy who operates the one at ASDA it appears they haven't changed much in all the yeas.

[SidW]

I've remembered more. Most customers used roll film, and the machine was for that, B&W as you guessed (still 1950s). The machine did En-prints, standard fixed ratio enlargements from whole neg, slightly smaller than postcards. I was doing En-prints from 35mm film, B&W, using an enlarger.

[philbirch]

Thanks for this info. en-prints is a word I haven't heard for years. En prints are 5 x 3½ inch prints. Superseded by the 'maxi-print' a massive 6 x 4 inches. So the medium format guys would have puny 3½ x 3½ inch prints like the 126 users, whereby us 35mm guys had 5 inches, not 3½ inches.

[Stephen]

The three and a half and the four inch were the paper roll widths, which governed the sizes for n prints, the mass markets "normal" sizes, the next was 5 and 7 wide etc, but most mini labs could only take the smaller stuff, it needed a bigger Kodak or Durst processor for larger sizes. The 4 inch paper worked well with 6x7 and 6x9 on 120.......but retail shop mini labs were mainly for 35, 126 or the smaller 110.

The really scary n print was the Kodak disc to n print size, similar ratio to Minox prints! How any body at Kodak though that the disc system was worth anything is beyond comprehension. It sorted out choosing negatives for re-prints, but little else, the grain was horrendous.

We never had a machine in shop, all was sent to Kodak or a Kodak approved lab. The quality from Mini labs is consistent, and that's the problem, too little individual adjustments to the neg. Also the lens quality used was in normal darkroom terms pretty dire. Some durst used fixed aperture lenses and varied the exposure by multiple flashes of light, risking the film neg heating up and slightly moving during exposure.

After saying they were consistent it all depended on relatively under trained staff using the equipment. At the lab we used, staff were trained for 6 months before being allowed on the production line un-supervised! and as an aside it was always mentioned that staff on the Kodachrome line at Hemel Hempstead(UK), were under constant supervision for 24 months!

Mini lab staff got nothing like that, and Durst claimed virtually un-trained staff could run the machines.

Stephen.

[philbirch]

Nice. My character gets very little training but becomes quite the expert.

[philbirch]

Bumping this one again as there are a couple of newcomers and more people recently using the forum.