Picture Developing

[+ imagooddog]

Over the years I have had several escorts that I could have taken pictures of (sexy nudes) with my 35mm camera but did not because I had no idea of where to have them developed. (Too shy to take them to Walgreens and have them alert the authorities)! I know one answer is to get a Poloroid (shitty quality) or a new digital camera and print my own. So, any suggestions on how to have a roll of 35mm developed safely and with disgression without getting into trouble?:-)

[Guest Merlin]

I have often taken nude films to Walgreens, and of course, they did not call the authorities, because ordinary nudes are not illegal. Obviously, you should not be taking photos of guys under 18, since it is illegal (I assume you do not do so). I would be reluctant to take in photos of someone who looks under 18, because they may call the police and you would have to convince them that he is over 18. If you are still in doubt, call they anonymously and ask if they have a problem with nudes. In larger cities there will be a professional camera store which will develop. Again call first. There are mail in places that invite such film for developing, but I wonder if they keep a copy for themselves. Othewize, digital is the way to go.

[+ deej]

A lot depends on where you live.

 

In my neighborhood (boystown, Chicago), Walgreens won't flinch at racy pics. The little old ladies that work there have seen pretty much everything there is to see. You can't shock them.

 

Lacking that....

 

PhotoRun in LA (http://www.photorun.com) is a great alternative. They're gay owned and operated, reliable, reputable, and efficient. They do work for all the pornstars and studios, so nothing you send them will shock them.

[Guest Jocoluver]

The ONLY way to go is digital!!! Immediate and you can do your own "editing"}>

[+ deej]

>The ONLY way to go is digital!!! Immediate and you can do

>your own "editing"}>

 

True enough, but there are reasons not to go digital.

 

With most digital cameras, there is a moment of pause between when you push the button and the camera records an image. Capturing "action" shots (like go-go boys dancing on the box) is a hit-or-miss proposition. Also, rapid-fire photography isn't generally possible with a digital camera.

 

Nothing will ever replace a good 35mm SLR for that kind of photography. Even a cheapo disposable camera would be better than most low-to-medium end digital cameras if you're shooting "action".

 

My Sony Mavica makes WONDERFUL pictures as long as they're "posed". If I'm trying to capture action, tho, I long for my Canon SLR with really fast shutter speeds and a power winder to advance the film.

[Guest bottomboykk]

>Nothing will ever replace a good 35mm SLR for that kind of

>photography.

 

With the upcoming technologies in digital photography, this will probably not be the case within 3-5 years. They are making great strides, and we probably won't recognize the cameras we'll have in that time frame. So never say never!

[Guest]

I've taken my film of nude escorts to Target, supermarkets, and drug stores without much of a thought. I supposed I'd be a might blush a bit if I took it to the 1-hour counter, where the clerk would have seen the escorts himself, but I just do the 2-day developing. I should mention, however, that the youngest escort I've photographed nude was 26--most have been in their late 20s or early 30s. I would be a little cautious at sending in film in which the guy "exposing" my film looked like he might have been under 18, since I would hardly have "hard evidence" to the contrary. Magazines, etc., who specialize in the 18-24 crowd, of course, carry copies of their models' driver's licences and releases.

[+ deej]

>will probably not be the case within 3-5 years.

 

Yep. And it really IS getting better by the day.

 

Several years ago, I bought my first digital camera, one of the early Casio models, for $400. My mother choked loudly, just as she did when I paid as much for my first new car as she paid for her house 30 years before.

 

Everything is relative.

 

Now, five cameras later, I'm still spending $400 each time but I'm getting more and more each time. It's getting really close between digital and 35mm SLR, but the gap still exists.

 

> So never say never! >

 

And how the hell many times have I said THAT around here? LOL!

 

Just so nobody thinks digital cameras can't do OK....

 

http://www.cockring.org/PornoPaparazzi/2002/02Grabbys/deej/thurs/ij--mvc-033s.jpg

[Guest lipstick]

Ah yes! I too have had such a dilemma when I first started taking photos of some of the guys I've hooked up with. I guess for your own comfort of mind, not to mention any type of harassment or awkwardness, I think the best thing to do is to find a Gay-friendly establishment. I'm in San Francisco, so I guess it's much easier for me at the Castro, and some of the South of Market areas are very cool about it, 'cause they have told me they get these things ALL THE TIME. I first tried calling some of the professional photo studios to ask if they did individual development. They didn't, but they were very happy to make recommendations, but with the provisio, as the other guys have indicated already, that it better not have ANY under-age stuff. In fact, I think most of us, in addition to our filthy minds, do have some sort of artistic sensiblities, and it is really cool when the folks at the Castro Ritz Camera compliment me on some of my shots.

 

Now THAT is embarassing!!

 

But the main thing is to ASK first.

 

Good luck and have fun!!