The Eastern Congo 



was 2d. per foot, for developing it id. per foot, and for 

 printing ^\d. per foot. Added to this was the import duty 

 into England of 5^^. per foot on exposed and undeveloped 

 film, bringing the actual cost per foot of the finished pictures 

 up to ii|^., without taking into consideration the cost of 

 obtaining the films, postage, wear and tear of camera, and 

 losses through damaged and perished film. 



Loss through the latter cause was often a considerable 

 item. I well remember receiving a consignment of two 

 thousand feet of negative stock from a Birmingham firm 

 which reached me in Africa. It looked well enough when I 

 inspected it with the aid of a small travelling dark lamp, 

 and having none other at the time, I loaded my camera with 

 several rolls, setting forth to hunt up a herd of elephants 

 that I knew were in the vicinity of my camp. As luck would 

 have it, in the course of the day I found a number of these 

 animals bogged in a marsh and offering a wonderful chance 

 for filming them, which I set about doing without loss of 

 time. My chagrin can be better imagined than described 

 when I came to develop pieces of these films, which I thought 

 would be absolutely unique, and found that the stock was 

 quite hopelessly perished — all of it — not one single foot was 

 of any use ! The worst part of such a catastrophe in the 

 African wilds is the fact that the camera-man is quite helpless 

 on such occasions, for fresh supplies of any kind cannot reach 

 him from England under many months. 



As I passed through late German East Africa shortly 

 after the war there was no parcel post organised, resulting 

 in a considerable delay in sending my films home for develop- 

 ment. On this account, and owing to other delays at home, 

 some of them remained undeveloped for nine months, without 



260 



