After much debate this new section was inaugurated towards the end of July this year under the management and guidance of James Eslinger. The section got off to a flying start with lots of great information from some very knowledgeable contributors and still the occasional new topic is created.

However, James has disappeared from the forum, his last post was on 4th August and he logged in on the 5th - after that I don’t know. Towards the end of September I asked Admin if he knew anything but the answer was no. There are two reasons for my concern, the first being that if you read James's posts, he comes across as a very pleasant chap, the kind of person that I for one would like to get to know a little better so if you do read this James - come back soon.

The second reason for my concern is that when James proposed the PP section, I was all for it, and if it dwindles away I truly believe a great asset to the forum will be lost.

Post Processing is fun for some and a nightmare for others. The PP section is where members could come and either share their expertise or learn how to do simple or complex things with their images, and all without crowding out the Main Photography section. The Macro and the People sections prove the value of divorcing specialised subjects from the mainstream (have you noticed the absence of spider eyes in close up in the Gallery? ) The People section instantly comes to my mind if I'm struggling with portraits and so on.

What I'm asking for is that someone carries on the work that James started and get the PP back on track. For your information I have read every word posted in the PP section, it is well behaved, contains no politics, is humorous and not condescending.

The section needs someone to publicise its existence and encourage greater usage.

In the video, the camera is clearly labeled “No. 3-A Folding Pocket Kodak Model C.” (LOL, this is not a “field camera.”) The No. 3-A’s where produced between 1903-1915, so the suggested date is plausible.

But the date of the camera is irrelevant with regard to when the film was actually exposed. Like A.J.R., I’m virtually certain this is Kodak Verichrome Pan and not the earlier Verichrome Safety Film; and as was pointed out the former wasn’t introduced until 1956. (Even if it is the “Safety Film” version, that only became available in 1931.)

Setting aside the problem of getting stable, printable negatives from film exposed, let’s say, in the latter 1950s; these cameras used 122 film, which looks a bit like 120 but is much wider (and a tad longer, I think) producing “postcard format” ( 3.25 x 5.5 in.) negatives. That poses a real problem when it comes to finding a mainstream commercial lab that still has the necessary equipment to process large format roll film. I don’t think The DarkRoom (good folks :) ) as suggested by jiminee1 and jmccl can do it as 120/620 seems to be their max size; but there are some specialized houses like Film Rescue International http://www.filmrescue.com/old-still-film-developing/# that can apparently can handle the job.