My processing costs are going to double if I include scanning at processing time. The lab technician stated that at their highest resolution the scans should be good for at least an 8x10 print with a decent photograph. I think he said they would be scanned at 2456*3636, or something close to that. I didn't write it down. My other current option is to scan them myself on a flatbed (8400F), which is time consuming and, for me, frustrating.
On 5/4/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been working with a couple of negatives for the past day or two, for the first time in about a year. I've got a lot experience with the process, I've probably scanned about 3000-4000 negatives and transparencies over the past 20 years. There is no way I'd consider doing that as part of a paying job today. It's way too time consuming to do myself, even if had the appropriate scanning equipment already. Buying professional quality scans for 50 exposures is going to eat up a lot of your profits unless you can pass the costs on to your client. Godfrey
-- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
