Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. norseman

    norseman

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      20

    • Content Count

      13,117


  2. Incorrigible1

    Incorrigible1

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      14

    • Content Count

      10,833


  3. Huntster

    Huntster

    Sésquac


    • Points

      9

    • Content Count

      19,229


  4. SWWASAS

    SWWASAS

    Sésquac


    • Points

      7

    • Content Count

      4,759



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/12/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    That sucks. Drag it got to that point. I've never ridden a snow mobile, how hard would it have been to back up that trail once he saw the moose? Give it a few minutes to let the moose go on his way.
  2. 3 points
    But did he have to...from the get go...he kept pushin' forward. Moose's backyard the snowmobiler entered, I think it's a shame is all in my opinion. Got nothin' against huntin'...just sad ta see a animal killed for no apparent reason. Least he could have done when he drove by, is put a round or two in its head, end it. Just my opinion is all. Pat...
  3. 2 points
    I don't believe that is correct. True no-glow trail cams transmit IR light above 940 nanometers. Kindly provide a list of the mammals that can see IR light above that level.
  4. 2 points
    Thats why introducing a gun into the equation keeps everyone honest. You do not hoax armed hunters.
  5. 2 points
  6. 2 points
    Some of you might enjoy these pics and this report. Thanks @Lamplight for coming forward and sharing.
  7. 2 points
    I just got back from an exploratory trip to the Mogollon Rim in Arizona. I split my trip into 2 three day camping trips. First section of trip was not BF related, but the second portion was to explore an area that I have never visited (Mogollon Rim northeast of Payson). Based on the SSR Bigfoot reports map below, I targeted to explore the area around Bear Canyon Lake and Knoll Lake. I and a colleague spent one night near Bear Canyon Lake (first photo) and 2 nights near Knoll Lake (2nd photo). These lakes are man-made (both got dams) and are very popular for fishing. Saw lots of people camping in both places the first week of June. On the last day we swung by Woods Lake and it was a zoo of people. My guess is that these Forest Lakes are very popular for folks in Phoenix who are trying to avoid the summer heat and want to do some fishing. Protocol was to hike during the day on abandoned jeep trails and look for tracks or signs. We did limited off-trail hiking to explore some of the canyons. At night, we hiked 2-3 miles into some of these abandoned jeep trails – mainly to better listen to the wildlife and avoid noise from other campers. We heard owls, nighthawks, and other birds that I don’t have the knowledge to categorize. We did not hear any coyotes at night. We saw 2 white tail deer and the skeleton of an elk (probably left by hunters?). We also ran into a dead deer and saw the cougar that killed it (see story below). We saw plenty of deer and elk footprints and scat. We saw no bear or bear scat. We saw no BF footprints nor we heard any anomalous sounds (day or night) while we were there. My Thermal Imager paid for itself on this incident The first night near Bear Canyon Lake, we decided to walk down an abandoned jeep trail that headed north from the lake parking lot and followed Bear Canyon all the way north. This jeep trail is not shown on the topo map. See topo map below with the purple line showing approximately where the trail is. I wanted to explore it because it followed the canyon closely and I figured many animals will be going down to the canyon for water. Also, this trail passed by a power line and was close to quarry (common features of areas with BF presence). We hiked about 1.8-2.0 miles north and headed back around 9:30 PM. On the way back, at about 0.5 mile from lake parking lot (~10 PM), we both saw eye-shine to our right up the hill. (We were using regular white light flashlight and not following the BFRO rules of red-light in order to avoid tripping and falling). We clearly saw 2 eyes but they were not moving. I got my thermal imager out of the bag and set it on white hot with red hot for picking up above average thermal signature. We picked up two red hot signatures that were not moving – one medium size and one small. (The small one was a hot rock). I gave my thermal imager to my colleague and told him to scan the area while I was going to walk to the medium size target to see what it was. The target was about 30-40 ft away up the hill and I could not tell what it was with thermal or flashlight. When I got within 10 ft of it, I shined my flashlight and clearly saw a small dead deer (looked like a fawn). I told my friend that I was going to get closer to take a photo when he said there was a bigger red hot target above me that was moving. Then he said it was a cougar and to get the out of there quickly. The cougar was about 30-40 ft from me per my friend’s assessment. I quickly retreated and took back my thermal imager to see what he was seeing and indeed saw a large 4 legged creature moving sideways (not towards us). We quickly packed up our gear and left. That deer must have been killed recently because its signature was just as hot as the cougar. We did not hear any struggle of the deer (on the way north or south). Even when the cougar was moving, there was no noise. I believe that had we not had the thermal imager, I would have gotten closer to the dead deer and taken that picture and maybe the cougar would have protected its food. Lessons learned for me, when hiking at night: - Look for eye-shine (left and right of trail) as you are hiking - Keep your thermal imager ready to better detect wildlife When I camp solo, I usually do not hike at night and stay put at campsite. But in this case, my colleague and I wanted to explore at night. There are risks when hiking at night and we humans have the disadvantage.
  8. 1 point
    I don't know. During one encounter when I heard one moving around, I tried very hard to get it to break cover by moving towards it. I could hear thumps and thuds as I tried to close on it and it moved tree to tree away from me to maintain cover. But I never got so much as a glimpse of it broad daylight. A Flir would not have done any better than my eyes. There were a large number of blow down trees in that area that prevented me from moving very fast because I had to crawl under or over them. The only way that the BF could maintain cover that I can think of, is that it was crawling faster away from me than I was able to move towards it. If it had been upright I would have likely seen it. Finally it got tired of the game and growled at me. After the growl, one behind me broke off a tree with a huge crack. It had flanked me when I was trying to get the other to break cover. I withdrew in a direction away from both sounds which was 90 degrees from the direction I had been moving. I was lucky that direction was out into a clearcut. Neither one seemed inclined to want to show itself even to scare me off. That was the only time I thought about unholstering my weapon around a BF. The one that growled was obviously ticked at me. If either one of the two had done a bluff charge and showed itself, I probably would have gotten the gun out. Since they didn't show, I figured I was safer just moving away. In retrospect it was dumb to try to corner the BF. You take away any animals means to escape and it gets dangerous.
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
    I had a private conversation with Cliff one time and he told me "Finding Bigfoot" will never find BF. I think at one point when the ratings started to drop the producers wanted to spice things up by faking events like Mountain Monsters were doing. The on screen characters revolted and threatened to quit. So the producers dropped those plans. Because of that I have a bit of suspicion that the production staff may have been doing stuff that the on screen characters may not have been aware of. Returning a wood knock or howl would have been very easy for someone in the production staff and Cliff and bunch would have never known. Over time even BF believers stopped watching the show for various reasons. I think that was the point where the ratings really tanked.
  11. 1 point
    Not true. http://wwfgap.org/projects/thermal/index2.html
  12. 1 point
    You have a skewed definition of definitive.
  13. 1 point
    Here is an example of deer walking in high grass which partially blocks out their heat signal. Unless the sasquatch in perfectly still AND below the grassline, you will see him. If the sasquatch is both, you would never see him to begin with. That would be an outlier. I'm looking for sasquatch moving at night, however stealthfully that may be. In the end, it cannot escape the reality of its own heat signature. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkH-lWDLv1o p.s. I almost always do "black hot".
  14. 1 point
    Show me precedence! Amateur naturalists absolutely have made discoveries with bullets, butterfly nets, fishing nets, cages, hair and scat samples and even picks, trowels and brushes...... In fact that’s generally how it’s done. The scientist sits back at the university and checks his mailbox every day. While the undergrads toil in the field. But show me a cryptid species that was proven REAL by video analysis...... Yeti? Lock ness monster? Yowie? Ogopogo? You have a inflated perception of your own self worth. I like much of your work, not that I always agree with it. But you think what your doing with video analysis is the key to unlock the mystery! Which is quite laughable. I do not like belittling you or your work. Again I think the PGF is real and you and others have helped with that belief. But holy cow! Drones may very well be an answer to the mystery because a swarm of them is out there taking blood samples of every animal in the forest...... but it won’t be because somebody’s drone had a video recorder. Science needs physical proof. Whatever you think proof means to you? Doesn’t matter. I could care less what you or anyone else THINKS video proof means to them personally. It’s subjective..... left to the eye of the beholder. Nonsense. And neither does science. If our world was still ran that way we would still be burning witches at the stake! The PGF is very compelling. But it’s old. And we still have to get past our own prejudices and realize that physical proof is the ONLY key to the mystery. 50 years later that fact should be crystal clear but it’s not. And I blame people like you for muddying the waters. If shooting one isn’t your thing? Then use a different method to come up with physical proof. Shotgun brushes wired across trails for hair samples. Biopsy darts. Scat collection kit. Any of those things have the potential to unlock the mystery. Albeit less expedient than a bullet. Even the guys crunching the numbers at the SSR are doing their part. Getting ahead of the creature versus debating about something that happened 50 years ago.
  15. 1 point
    Hunters here in BC have been using vegetable oil in the saws used to quarter large game animals (Moose, elk, bison) in the field for decades, to avoid contaminating the meat.
  16. 1 point
    I completely disagree with your premise they are no better than a trailcam. Thermals generally cost anywhere from 10-60 times the cost of a trail cam and have not been readily available until recently. Trail cams have been around for a while. I've got thermal videos of chipmunks chasing each other up a tree. Their itsy-bitsy little bodies are easily visible and jump right out on the thermal. If a sasquatch is behind a bush or tree, its cover is only good for as long as it doesn't move. I feel very comfortable saying that if they're out where I am, and moving at all, they'll show up on thermal.
  17. 1 point
    Depends. The crick was noisy, Patty was in a depression and the wind could have been blowing the wrong way. The reports say Rogers horse spooked. I think they all spooked each other and Patty left for the hills. Horses and mules generally are good at detecting things long before you do. But there are exceptions. And human eye sight is better. But smell and hearing are much worse. Some younger horses and mules will spook over a stump or a rock. A boogie man that jumps to life to get them. Only to realize it is nothing and then they settle back down. Mules are better in the mountains because they have a fight or flight response. Horses being swift plains animals are generally just a flight animal.
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
    I found the Sasquatch Chronicles episode; below is the introductory text from the email the guest sent to Wes Germer, followed by the link to the episode which is on the open side of the site. SC EP:246 Law Enforcement Night A Law Enforcement Officer writes “Hey Wes, I will make this as short as possible. I have a video form a trail cam. The video is not conclusive as it doesn’t show the face. Here is the history of the video. I am a 20+ year Law Enforcement Officer, three of which were done as a Game Warden. I received this video from a collage friend of mine. He was assigned to a federal task force working guerrilla grown Marijuana. This group would go into remote areas of Northern California and set trail cams in an attempt to catch the growers on film.. This particular trail cam was 27 miles back in the Sequoia National Forest, not accessible by vehicles only ATV then foot. He retrieved the trail cam and found the attached video. He did not know what to do with it as he was afraid of repercussions etc. I openly speak about the subject and my beliefs and another officer referred him to me and he provided me the video. I only ask we discuss what to release about the video before sharing if you decide to. I also have experienced events, i.e. tree knocks, footsteps, and extreme fear for unexplained reason. I have also found a few footprints.” I spoke to the Law Enforcement Officer today and he said that trail cam appeared to be ripped off of the tree and this creature had buried it in leaves. He said the cameras are in such remote locations that they are only set to record 5-10 clips so that guys do not have to go out constantly to replace SD cards. They setup the cameras to bust drug trafficking. The officer did not make any claims as to what it is but he served as a game warden for many years and says “it is not a bear… this thing ripped the trail cam off of the tree and started putting leaves over it.” https://sasquatchchronicles.com/sc-ep246-law-enforcement-night/ I've always thought this was likely legit, the hair color matches that witnesses often describe as auburn, reddish brown or like an orangutan and it is not unusual to hear of game cams being targeted by Sasquatch. I just ran the video clip for my wife who had not seen it previously. She is not "into" the subject, but has come to accept that Sasquatch is likely real through hearing witnesses at the Big Sky Bigfoot Conference and close friends of ours who had a sighting. Her comment was that the apparent limb visible on the left before the lens is covered "...looks like a hip" due to the way it shifts a bit in relation to the arm movements.
  20. 1 point
    South fork of Sherman creek off of hwy 20 (Sherman pass) Found what looked like Black bear hair. Found where he was scratching up a post at the USFS corral. I usually park here when I bring the horse trailer. Someone cut the head and buttons off of a rattle snake ahead of me on the FS rd. Saw some deer is all. Pretty uneventful. I didn’t crash....that was a plus.
  21. 1 point
    Not sure what the source was for making a statement there were three films associated with the P-G film. But it is completely false. To my knowledge there were only two films: one of the subject and one of the footprints in the ground. Both of these films were shown at the scientific & press showing in Vancouver, British Columbia in late October 1967 and when I spoke with the late Bob Titmus about the matter (October/November 1987) he told me that when he saw the films and spoke with Roger Patterson, he was more convinced than ever about their authenticity and made a decision to go down to the site to make an inspection of the area, as he felt the trackway would tell him immediately if this was a real film. He was 100% convinced they were real. Also, a newspaper article from that time period mentions films (plural) and in Ivan Sanderson's second Argosy write up on the matter [Sanderson, Ivan Terence. “More Evidence That Bigfoot Exists.” Argosy, April 1968, pages 72-73. (Article makes mention of “What proof do we have, other than the films taken by Roger Patterson...” Another indication, without a doubt, that two films were shot October 20, 1967 by Roger Patterson]. The second film of the trackway is likely in storage somewhere in the BBC vaults in England and Pat Patterson, after Roger died, loaned it to them, with no experience in lending out original material. Several inquiries have been made about the second film but to my knowledge nothing has come of it. Daniel Perez Bigfoot At Bluff Creek (1994, revised 2003). Bigfoot Times, 1998 to present
  22. 1 point
    You've been WAITING? You're time would have been better spent seriously solving the question of existence beyond opinion. Unless going around in circles ad nauseam is something you just like to do. Personally it's never been my cup of tea. On topic, these reports are compelling but people just read them and move on. Sure, they're interesting but there's thousands of them and not one shows a lick of proof. Is that okay? Must because no matter how seemingly compelling or truthful a report may sound it's a dead end. Always has been. When is enough enough for everyone? Looks like never to me. Just like the reports we read, and some are pretty amazing, people still find footprints (just like before), people still guess at stick structures (just like before), people still hear a howl or two....but that isn't progress. What WOULD be progress? A body? Well, yeah, that would do it, we ALL know that. Is it going to happen? More than likely not. So what does that leave for choices? Not a whole heck of a lot. But if everyone's fine with that then great. My 'rants' as you seem to like to call them (not too derogatory, but who's counting anyway, right?) stem from something that is hands down the EASIEST thing to do. But if everyone want to do things the hard way then go for it. I've watched everyone here fail to get proof from the field for nearly six years, including myself, but so few want, or have tried, to do things differently along with what they're already doing. THAT is what logically doesn't make sense. Not a rant, Twist, just an observation. And it's one that I find just short of impossible to understand. Always have. So, wanna report? Here's one of my favorites and it ISN'T 40 years old: https://sasquatchchronicles.com/hog-hunter-watches-bigfoot-kill-hog/
  23. 1 point
    There was evidence before and after the film was filmed. There were only two people at the time of the film. Not several. The film is a thing of beauty hoaxed or not.
  24. 1 point
    POST 1 This summary of my interviews with Frank Ishihara has been delayed awaiting corroborative information from sources both inside and outside the United States. Despite the delay I have chosen to summarize the majority of the information, presented below. I will post any corroborative information relevant to these interviews in this same location should it become available in the future. I contacted Frank Ishihara in May, 2017. I expressed my interest in his knowledge about Kodachrome processing generally and specifically about the issues surrounding the Patterson Gimlin Film. I found him to be quite open to the idea of our discussion. Prior to our interviews I sent Frank several items: the William Munn’s book WHEN ROGER MET PATTY ( 2014), and photocopies of several email messages authored by Frank in 2006 relevant to film processing issues. My goal was to interview Frank about his knowledge of 16mm Kodachrome film processing in the Seattle area during 1967. By talking about the circumstances of film processing in Seattle I hoped to learn the likelihood of a ‘garage lab’ or subterfuge on the part of lab employees somehow being responsible for the processing of the PGF. The interview was framed with Frank’s understanding 1) any portions of our conversations he deemed confidential would be maintained as such, 2) argument has been published to support the PGF as having actually captured on film a real creature, that the answer to the processing questions was a worthy endeavor, and that 3) I would be offering incentives to another witness (Al DeAtley) to speak with me about the processing timeline. After he indicated he had reviewed the documents we conducted our first interview by phone. Our primary interview occurred on June 19, 2017. Over the summer we had several conversations and exchanged a number of emails. We ended up covering a number of topics. I began the initial interview after making certain Frank was clear on three points. 1) We discussed Bill Munn’s book and I made clear Bill’s opinion the film is genuine, that Bill bases his opinion to only what is seen in the film. 2) I explained my background and my intention of documenting my work by affidavit, and 3) that after we had covered a few topics I would focus the last of my questions on his 2006 email messages. I felt it important our interview be framed as a worthy endeavor without influencing Frank’s personal feelings as to whether the Patterson Gimlin film was real or hoax. POST 2 TOPICS COVERED IN THE INTERVIEW: Qualifications and work experience of Frank Ishihara, Frank talked about his education as a chemist at UCLA, his eight years as an Army reservist during the Korean conflict, his initial work at Dynacolor as a lab supervisor, head of chemical mixing, then head of quality control, eventually supervising several shifts of Dynachrome, Kodachrome K-11 and K-12 systems. Frank explained his innovations to the Kodachrome process. We discussed Frank’s recruitment by Technicolor to install Kodachrome processing laboratories at four locations: Seattle Washington (October 1965 thru March 1968), Long Beach California, Rialto California, and Phoenix Arizona. These installations employed Frank’s innovations to the K-12 process including one of the patents he held jointly with his Seattle boss, Leonard Tall. Frank said the goal of the Seattle installation was to introduce a local K-12 processing service to the Pacific Northwest. Dynacolor’s relationship with Kodak/Kodachrome processing We covered the progression of events leading to the availability of K-12 processing in Seattle. Frank explained the suit against Kodak (US versus Kodak, 1954, for anti-competitive practices) and the resulting consent decree that eventually forced Kodak to license the Kodachrome process to competitors. The decree also morphed into a variety of requirements of both Kodak and any licensee, ostensibly for the protection of both. (The requirements are discussed below) Frank explained how Dynacolor purchased such a license early on and not only processed the original Kodachrome film stock (K-11) but also formulated a generic 16mm film stock called Dynachrome, a process very similar to original Kodachrome. Eventually, Dynacolor was licensed to process Kodachrome II film stock (K-12) when the original Kodachrome was discontinued. Dynachrome generic film stock and processing were developed as a consumer/mail-order transaction, a feature Frank later employed with the Seattle K-12 lab installation (see below). The generic film stock was also marketed by Ferrania in Europe. Both Dynachrome and Ferrania were purchased by 3M in 1964. Kodak alone produced K-12 film stock. Discussion about the Northwest division of Technicolor and K12 processing in Seattle Frank talked in detail about his former boss, Leonard Tall. Leonard owned a collection of five camera supply stores during the ’60s and was consequently sensitive to the needs of the consumer photo industry in Seattle. Tall joined the Technicolor corporation in Los Angeles but over a period of time developed a disenchantment with the corporation. He eventually returned to Seattle with a Technicolor plan for establishing a Kodachrome II processing laboratory serving the Pacific Northwest (Tall later co-founded CX Corp., a provider of the majority of photofinishing equipment in the US). Frank said the Seattle installation was focused on branding the name Technicolor as the sole local provider of K-12 processing and doing so with a consumer-direct mail order component for processing. Considerable thought was put towards making the investment pay off as the installation costs were considerable. Technicolor purchased a license from Kodak and then recruited Frank from Dynacolor to install and supervise the K-12 lab in Seattle. Frank’s modified both a Pako linear processor and the K-12 process itself while staying within the requirements of the Kodak specs. In some cases, the modifications were patented. Custom boxes and envelopes were created for handling processed films (clearly labeled TECHNICOLOR and printed in Seattle). Frank redesigned the ‘twin-check’ system that he initially used at Dynachrome, adding the mail-order component to the operation. After the Seattle installation Frank went on to install K-12 processing in Long Beach, Rialto and Phoenix, incorporating several changes to the Pako processing machines unique to the Seattle plant, including at least one alteration that was subsequently patented. Frank reviewed his resume and verified he was in charge of the Technicolor K-12 lab in Seattle from October 1965 to March 1968. He said he didn’t remember taking off any sick days in the time he was in Seattle. (personal email, June 23, 2017) Frank said the operation was shut down Friday morning (6 am) and not started up until Sunday night (6 pm). Nothing could be processed between Friday morning and Sunday night without special arrangement, an event that was provided for and occurred once in Frank’s memory. Frank recounted working with the Seattle laboratory Alpha Cine saying he knew the supervisor there during his time in Seattle. He recalled Alpha Cine did ‘out-lab’ work for Technicolor NW. Frank said Technicolor did all Kodachrome processing for Alpha Cine. In response to my questions Frank wrote, “Never heard of Forde that I can remember since I never had contact with such. I had the only Kodachrome processing operation in the state of Washington. The nearest other Kodachrome processing lab was in San Francisco”. (personal email, June 23, 2017) Discussion of the specifics of the PGF We spent considerable time talking about Bill Munn’s study of the Patterson-Gimlin Film. Frank reviewed Bill’s web site and also read Bill’s book “When Roger Met Patty”. Frank indicated he was open to meeting with Bill for the purpose of determining the film stock and potential processing solutions. At the time of our discussions Frank considered the possibility the film had been produced with 16mm Dynachrome film, a consideration that opened alternative processing solutions. After examining still from the film Frank said he was doubtful it was Dynachrome. Frank believed the stills from the film showed more resolution than afforded by Dynachrome. He said Kodachrome 16mm film stock had in the edge print “Kodachrome” or Kodachrome II” every eight inches. (Bill Munns has since advised me he has found definitive proof the PGF was made with Kodachrome II film stock.) Frank always displayed an interest in examining the original film. On several occasions he said he could prove the film was not processed at Technicolor if he could somehow examine the original film. He explained his alteration of the Pako processor installed for the Seattle lab left latent, tell-tale markings on the emulsion side of the 16mm film stock. He said the markings are not visible in the image area of the film but only along the edges of the stock. I got the impression from Frank the markings were difficult to detect and that you had to know what you were looking for to see them. We talked at length about the problems involved with after-hours film development on weekends. Nothing could be processed from Friday morning till Sunday evening. Frank said the laboratory had a procedure for after-hours operation just for such an occasion as the PGF processing. Frank described one occasion when they did after-hours processing for the government; Leonard Tall called Frank on a Friday evening saying a film needed to be in Washington DC on the following Monday. They (Frank and Leonard) processed the film. Only Frank and Leonard went into the lab on that Saturday and they processed the film together. Frank indicated that Leonard Tall was the only other individual at the Technicolor lab capable of processing a Kodachrome film outside of normal hours. Together they did the government order and “reviewed that picture” before releasing it. Frank said operation of the lab was complicated enough and involved enough people that it made no sense for someone to keep any processing a clandestine operation. Their lab had procedures in place for after-hours processing and the staff would have been very happy to do a professional job for a fee. Working outside lab policies could risk a mistake that would invoke a violation of the license with Kodak. Frank said, “ Leonard Tall would not risk losing the process for a few hundred bucks by letting someone else other than my team run it. Then, there is no covering up a screw-up”. From Frank’s email message of June 23, 2017, discussing the complexity of secretly processing the PGF: “DeAtley's remarks do not hold water. I would give DeAtley a lot of credit for being able to find any lab on the west coast, make contact with a management person (on the weekend?) to authorize and bring in operators(s) to process it (the film), then pay them off. Now we are looking at thousands of dollars. And he would have to negotiate deals with more than one person, maybe weeks in advance.” Frank said keeping the after-hours processing a secret made no sense. In the early weeks of August 2017, I tried to contact Frank for clarifications on several topics. He did not answer my emails or return my calls. In October I was contacted by Frank’s daughter. She indicated Frank entered the hospital on August 8 and was never discharged. He passed away on October 8, 2017.
  25. 1 point
    Yes, you would think so... but that's not how it worked in my experience at least. Bill, I consider you a friend, we have discussed more than a few things in private and we have shared information and ideas as well. I respect your work and opinions always, but I have to say that you are not quite correct on this one. I have worked in a large commercial photo processing facility and as far as I know, you haven't. As I have stated countless times, lab work was highly compartmentalized, each person had a certain specialty. For example: If I am "the guy" running the processor, that's it. I probably know nothing about chemical analysis, chemical mixing, quality control etc. My duty is to put the roll onto the processor (in darkness) and make sure it makes it through to the other end (light). Cross-training? No, not in my experience. The pay level differences could never justify it. If someone was out for whatever reason it meant that you just had to work just that much harder. If a crucial absence occurred the top brass guys would step in. After all that's why they were in their positions. As far as "guys" trained in "helping to run the Kodachrome processor," in my experience that's not the way things went. If a processing person was absent for whatever reason the rest of the crew would have to work twice as hard in order to compensate. I dreaded those times, they were hellish and I still have nightmares about them to this very day. I finally learned my lesson the hard way. After 8 years of employment with my particular lab, they finally had me train a young lady to do my work and I did so enthusiastically thinking that my burden would finally be relieved somewhat. As soon as I had thoroughly trained and certified her, I was called into the office one bright morning and terminated. I know for a fact that she was being paid less than half of my salary. With this as their operational policy, its not surprising to me that this company ceased to exist shortly after my "departure." And so it goes... Perhaps I didn't work for a "good business", but I certainly did learn a lot about life...
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×