Cost of film vs. digital is highly related to the amount of usage over time.
For a very light user film is way cheaper, for a very heavy user digital is way cheaper. There are other reasons than cost to go for film or digital of course but if your a very light or very heavy user then its a no brainer decision if cost matters. jco -----Original Message----- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 4:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: I use film.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Then there's the philosophical objection: a negative is an image, a > digital file is a description of an image. Personally, I don'æ have a philosophical ojection towards digital or any philosophical connections to film. I mean it quite literally; I don't know why I should go digital. I'm happy with my current cameras and lenses. I have ordered a scanner so that I can get my images easily into digital form. In that way I get all the benefits from digital image handling. I don't need instant gratification although it certainly has it advantages. I actually like waiting for the film from the lab and seeing it on a light table for the first time. In addition, film give me a hard copy I can keep in addition to a copy of the image in digital form. I'm also familiar with all my equipment and I don't need to buy another camera (or lens). I don't use so much film that cost for film and processing becomes a problem. In short, I'm quite happy... Pål
