Everything you need to print a 4 x 6: Velox was an early photographic paper invented by Leo Baekeland (Bakelite). George Eastman purchased the company and rights from Baekeland in 1899...

dc3legs Loc: Tucson

Velox was an early photographic paper invented by Leo Baekeland (Bakelite). George Eastman purchased the company and rights from Baekeland in 1899

(Download)

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Cool bit of history!

BebuLamar

You can't print 4x6 with those things. The 4x6 was not popular until around the 80's.

srt101fan

BebuLamar wrote:

You can't print 4x6 with those things. The 4x6 was not popular until around the 80's.

Is 4x5 close enough?.....

Iron Sight Loc: Utah

Interesting!

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Very cool.
--Bob

dc3legs wrote:

Velox was an early photographic paper invented by Leo Baekeland (Bakelite). George Eastman purchased the company and rights from Baekeland in 1899

PWL46 Loc: Michigan

My parents had many prints from the 30s and 40’s that were definitely not 4x6. There were many that were much smaller and then a larger 3 1/2 x 5 ish. When I started processing my own film/prints, I mostly did 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. Lots of great memories (and smells) of those days “in the dim red light!” I have boxes of processing equipment that I would love to give to someone, but can find any “takers.”

EdJ0307 Loc: out west someplace

dc3legs wrote:

Everything you need to print a 4 x 6

I have a computer and a printer. That's all I need - now.
Used to be I needed an enlarger, an easel, developing trays, print dryer, darkroom, chemicals, photopaper, and other miscellaneous equipment. The good old days.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

dc3legs wrote:

Velox was an early photographic paper invented by Leo Baekeland (Bakelite). George Eastman purchased the company and rights from Baekeland in 1899

VERY very impressive collection........nice to see these types again. Thank you.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

BebuLamar wrote:

You can't print 4x6 with those things. The 4x6 was not popular until around the 80's.

American lab managers of the day were unaware of what their 35mm film customers wanted. In the 1980s, 35mm film sales skyrocketed, mini-lab sales sky-rocketed, 4x6 and similar aspect ratio frame sales skyrocketed, and traditional labs like the one I worked for lost a lot of customers.

Eventually, we built one special automatic printer to handle 35mm film for 4x6 and 8x12 print sizes. When we bought digital gear, many years later, we could print any size up to 12x22" on our Noritsu mini-labs, so problem solved.

My first darkroom experience at age 10 was with Velox paper and a 4x5 Yankee contact print frame that I still have in storage. I even have the little 7.5 watt orange safelight bulb that came in the kit... It still works.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Thanks, I have the box. Now I know a little more about what it was made for.

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

srt101fan wrote:

Is 4x5 close enough?.....

If you had 4x5 negatives.

ecurb Loc: Metro Chicago Area

PWL46 wrote:

My parents had many prints from the 30s and 40’s that were definitely not 4x6. There were many that were much smaller and then a larger 3 1/2 x 5 ish. When I started processing my own film/prints, I mostly did 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. Lots of great memories (and smells) of those days “in the dim red light!” I have boxes of processing equipment that I would love to give to someone, but can find any “takers.”

Call a college art dept to ask if any of their students are working with film. I donated a couple enlargers and the rest of my darkroom gear to a local community college student after the schools demolished their darkrooms because the new dept heads were idiots.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

ecurb wrote:

Call a college art dept to ask if any of their students are working with film. I donated a couple enlargers and the rest of my darkroom gear to a local community college student after the schools demolished their darkrooms because the new dept heads were idiots.

Demolishing darkrooms at a community college is not an example of idiocy. It is a sign that the photography marketplace puts little value on film photography, and the community college didn't have enough student interest to justify the cost of space, instructors, etc.

Film/analog photography has a secure place in the art world (and in a college or university art department), but most who take photography in a *community* college setting want practical knowledge they can use on a job. In 2020, that knowledge is nearly all digital imaging. Even most of the better photography schools have dried up and blown away... most died over a decade ago.

Before 1996, the photography company I worked for had no digital equipment. We had four labs, and each of them processed thousands of 100' rolls of 35mm, 46mm, and 70mm film per year. Three of them processed 120/220 and 35mm short roll films. All printed optically.

Digital imaging, the Internet with its social media giants, and the advent of the smartphone killed off film photography and soon after, the mass portrait industry.

By 2007, we had shed three labs, switched 100% of our processes to digital imaging, and moved all digital equipment into one 90,000 square foot building. By 2011, we were sold to our largest competitor. They closed that lab in 2015, and were themselves sold a couple of years later.

Developing and printing FILM is a niche market now. A few good labs still do it. Some artists and hobbyists still do it. But only the very high end of the commercial market still uses film, and that is primarily for the swings, tilts, and shallow depth of field possible with a large format view camera.

AnotherBob

rmalarz wrote:

Very cool.
--Bob

Indeed.

/Another Bob