>>  Digital benefits (imo):
>>  - cheaper to use (meaningful if you shoot a lot)
>
>I think this is wishful thinking.  I don't think digital is cheaper than
>film.  You'll need a computer of some sort.  And a printer.  And paper.  And
>cartridges.  Or you can have your digital files output on say, a Fuji
>Frontier system, at your local lab.  (back to spending money at the lab
>again)  Then there's all the time you would spend printing and trimming, not
>mention tweaking, retouching, experimenting in photoshop, or whatever.  I
>think it *is* true to say it doesn't cost you anything to take more pictures
>than you would with a film camera.  Your only cost is memory and batteries.

Keep in mind you have the option of getting rid of all your poor 
photographs. For me this is significant! I may have (on a good day) 2 
exposures out of 36 I think are worth keeping, yet I have to process 
the whole roll (and wait) to find those good ones. With a digital 
camera I can shoot and shoot all day and dump everything on my 
(already paid for) Mac, and either keep 'me or not. My last trip 
coast me $150 in processing and I kept a very small percentage of the 
results.

Cheers
Steve"3:55:56" Hilmy
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to