In article <54j1kf$1nl8@news.rchland.ibm.com>, Jfetkovich@vnet.ibm.com says...

> I recently had a photograph published in one of the more prominent
>nature calendars (which one I won't mention now). It was a 35mm slide,
>which was just returned, and I was fairly appalled at the condition of
>the slide. I realize there are different types of scanning, and that
>drum scanning requires that the slide be removed from the mount, but the
>number of scratches on the slide is high, and the slide generally looked
>dirty, gunked up, and not very well cared for. To be fair, many or all
>of the scratches appear to be on the non-emulsion side, and so might not
>affect subsequent prints made from it. I did what I could to clean the
>slide up, which was basically airgunning it and applying some PEC-12,
>which is a chemical used to removed oil-based stains, such as
>fingerprints and drum-scanning oil.
> This was the first image I've had published by this method, so I have
>no past experience to compare against. It looks to me that if I wanted
>to have a print enlargement of any substantial size made from this
>slide, the result would be poor due to the wear and tear.
> I am hesitant to complain because I would like to continue to have
>images published by this publisher (or at least have a chance), and I
>figure if I complain they can just tell me to take a hike and not submit
>anymore.
> Can anyone more familiar with the scanning process tell me how much
>wear and tear is normal? Any other people had slides scanned that were
>mauled in the process? I would appreciate feedback to learn what
>normally happens to scanned slides. Thanks,
>John Fetkovich

You have described a pet peeve of stock photographers - slides damaged
in the process of reproduction, by people who do not care to protect the
condition of the slide. I have had slides come back with no damage but
for the slide mount (easily replaced); with finger prints all over the
slides, etched into the surfaces (inexcuseable!); and with scratches
(also inexcuseable!). After cleaning them, I decide what can be reused,
or for what I have a useable second slide. The others are "sold" to the
company that destroyed them - they get all rights to the use of the
slide they destroyed for a reasonable price (high - remember, it can't
be used again easily, and would take expensive retouching to recover).
Why would you want to sell USES to someone who destroys your work
and makes it impossible to sell uses of those slides to other people?
Instead, charge them the high price for outright purchase, and maybe
they will get the idea.... (Drum scanning DOES NOT imply scratches or
permanent finger prints - those are the result of carelessness, and
you should be compensated for the loss!)
Hope This Helps