On 8/7/05, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Frank > As long as you use film, a *good* scanner would be number one on your > enablement list, or not?
Honestly, no. As you saw, it wasn't on my "list of desire". Here's my thinking: First, I'll likely end up going digital at some point. Why waste money on a scanner only to end up not using it when I go digital? Second, I really don't care that much how things look on a computer screen. That's why my scans are so dirty (literally - you can see dust and smudges from the scanner on many of my posts). I'm never going to get the scans to look as good as the prints anyway (and actually, my prints look pretty good - ask Bill Robb, Ken Waller, anyone else who saw my stuff at GFM and was surprised by the print quality, or ask any of the Toronto guys who've seen my stuff). I take photos with film to make them into prints. The scanning and posting part is just for fun. I mean the getting them made into prints is for fun, too, but a different, more serious kind of fun, if you know what I mean <g>. I guess a film scanner might save me some printing costs. But, if I printed less I wouldn't be as happy. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
