That some of that new math. The real numbers would be $4.55 for the 8 keepers from film, for a saving to the digital user of $1.19. Still, not a big savings for a blatant waste of film.
William Robb ----- Original Message ----- From: William Robb Subject: Re: Behind the counter with digital > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Behind the counter with digital > > > > Bill, > > Don't these people edit out the bad shots before they bring > the camera/memory > > in for prints? Wow! They are really screwed-up. That's the > 2nd thing I > > learned how to do on my Sony. > > Bob, in my market, the cost of printing from a digital file is > nearly double the cost of printing from film. Film users can > have a lot of bad shots before digital comes close to the same > price, presuming the digital user hits 100% success via file > deletion. > Here is an extreme example: > A 24 exposure roll of cheap but adequate film: $1.79 > 12 prints made, 8 keepers (for the sake of discussion) $1.84. > Total cost for 8 keepers is: $3.63 > > Compared to: a customer comes in with 8 digital files for > printing, at $.42 per print. > Total cost is $3.36. > Customer saves a whopping $.27. > That is with 50% film usage, and a 50% failure rate: > keepers/taken > vs 100% success with digital. > > Am I starting to sound like Mafud on the subject? > > William Robb > > >
