At 10:07 AM -0400 6/7/01, Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video wrote:
>[...] Finally, at my COO's urging yesterday I redistributed a memo
>to all sales associates reminding them that B&H policy is to be as
>forthcoming with the provenance of film as we have been with hard
>goods, i.e., tell the customer and let the customer choose.
Thanks! That's really good to hear. Glad B&H's customer service is
as responsive as ever. :)
At 10:23 AM -0700 6/7/01, Bob Meyer wrote:
>Since part of my order is going to be a batch of Kodak
>Gold for my 12 year old son to take to the U.K. next
>month, maybe I'll pay for USA stock for that, since
>there will be no way to ever replace the shots.
>Compared to what I'm spending to send him there, the
>difference in film cost isn't much, I guess.
Well. You know, my whole Kodak Gold fiasco really got me thinking
about film quality. And basically I've decided not to buy consumer
film anymore. It just isn't worth it. The bulk of the cost of making
prints is developing the film and printing the photos. The film cost
is only a small chunk, and the difference in price between crappy
consumer-grade film and pro film is an even smaller fraction of the
overall cost.
I used to buy cheap film for snapshots at parties or whatever and
buy pro film for everything else. Now I think, well. What if I happen
to have film in my camera from a party and the most incredible photo
op comes up and I have to shoot it on lousy film?
- Neil K.
--
49N 16' 123W 7' / Vancouver, BC, Canada / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The satin finish provides darkly deviant good looks
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
