Today I accidentally put an "old" (April 2004) CD in my computer. That was a Irfan View slide show, featuring scanned shots made with a MZ-S. They really looked very good! It made me wonder, that if the film manufacturers had made it possible for me to get film scanned to high quality files, rather fast (two - three days) at a reasonable price, film might have been able to survive quite a bit longer. I - for one - wouldn't have gone to digital just yet, if I had more obvious/better scanning options, than to buy a 500 USD (Epson 3200) scanner and use way to much time getting mediocre results.
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 31. januar 2005 01:52 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: Film Still Best for Many Applications? (was Ruminations... ) there are tools to do this automatically, and they aren't even that expensive. it's not like every bit in every image needs to be fondled like some people here do. Herb... ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 7:05 PM Subject: Re: Film Still Best for Many Applications? (was Ruminations... ) > The issue with the guys I know who have gone this route (I know a couple > myself) is the time factor. > They can drop film at the lab, and pick up proofs a few hours later > or..... > They can shoot a few hundred digital exposures, post process them, then > bring the files to the lab for printing. > Some people would rather not work in front of a computer screen, the same > way they would rather bring their film to a lab.
