As some people know, I recently did a slide show at Ithaca. When I began to prepare for the show, my initial thought was that I should go digital. Then I looked at the price of a digital projector, the cheapest about $1000 and thought again. I didn't want to rent a projector, also not cheap. I figured I needed to practice with the equipment and that the day of the talk was not a good day to learn about digital projectors. My camera guru at the camera shop also pointed out to me that most digital projectors only project an image of about 2300x 2300 pixels and that if my projected image were going to be large, ie. 3 or 4 feet, it would be badly pixelated. He seemed to feel that the kind of resolution required for close up lace photography would not be possible with this pixelation, which incidentally is about the maximum I get on the "super high quality" setting of my camera. "You may never switch to digital", he said. And he is a graduate of the photography department of the Rochester Institute of Technology. I know for a fact that on the super high quality setting of my camera the image is rarely clear enough to be printed at the size of 8" x 10" which caused me to think he might be right. As a result, I ended up buying an expensive new lense for my SLR and spending a small fortune processing slides at exactly the same moment in our history when slide processing went from a day long process to one taking 2 weeks, due to lack of demand and the closure of the Kodak slide processing center in Fairlawn, NJ. The expensive custom lab that I found during this hair raising process asked me curiously why I was using slides since apparently his entire clientele, such as it is, is artists making slides of their work. Have others tried to do digital slide shows and were the dire predictions of my camera guru correct? Devon
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
