Hello Jack, So what do you do with the processed film? Are we talking slides or negatives?
-- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, July 1, 2006, 2:00:42 PM, you wrote: JD> What I want from a mini-lab is ONLY the film processing. Nothing else. JD> Jack JD> --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't understand our answer. You say that you want others to >> process >> your images. But you can't imagine turning over a card full of images >> >> to a lab. You can't have it both ways. >> Paul >> On Jul 1, 2006, at 4:09 PM, Jack Davis wrote: >> >> > Mini-lab prints from film are, for me, only proofs. Often I only >> ask >> > for a CD. >> > My weakness is the fact that I have a version of Photoshop and >> minimal >> > resistance when it comes to allowing another to "process" my >> images. >> > Can't imagine turning over a card full of images to a mini-lab. >> Maybe >> > at an in-law birthday party and lawn sale, but nothing else. >> > Point #3 IS valid for me. IOW, I know myself. >> > >> > Jack >> > >> > --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >> Point 3 isn't valid either. If lab processing is the way you want >> to >> >> go, you can drop off a memory card at any halfway decent lab and >> pick >> >> >> >> up your prints in a couple of hours. The minilab that used to >> process >> >> >> >> my color neg film claims they can produce even nicer prints from >> best >> >> >> >> quality jpegs. I haven't had any reason to try them, but I might. >> But >> >> >> >> even when I was shooting color film, I regarded those prints as >> >> nothing >> >> more than proofs. I would then scan the best frames and make my >> own >> >> prints. I never found a lab that did a better job at a reasonable >> >> price. >> >> Paul >> >> On Jul 1, 2006, at 1:30 PM, Jack Davis wrote: >> >> >> >>> Jens, >> >>> Actually, your point #3 is the only one that has true application >> >> if >> >>> one considers digital in general. >> >>> All are valid if specific brands are considered. >> >>> >> >>> Jack >> >>> >> >>> --- Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> 1st >> >>>> Speed, is one thing. 2,5 fps and 36 shots in a row. >> >>>> No Pentax DSLR can do that. >> >>>> >> >>>> 2nd >> >>>> Annother thing is that there's NO crop factor. Meaning more wide >> >>>> angle for >> >>>> the buck. >> >>>> >> >>>> 3rd >> >>>> It's so easy to shoot a film, give it to the lab and then pick >> up >> >>>> nice >> >>>> photographs. No hazzle with editing in the computer, cropping, >> >>>> resizing, >> >>>> printing etc. >> >>>> When the last shot is finished, your work is already done! >> Digital >> >>>> photography is for people that are either rather uncritical or >> >> have a >> >>>> lot of >> >>>> time on their hands. >> >>>> >> >>>> That three very good reason to shoot film. >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards >> >>>> >> >>>> Jens Bladt >> >>>> http://www.jensbladt.dk >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >> >>>> Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> vegne >> >> af >> >>>> Jack >> >>>> Davis >> >>>> Sendt: 1. juli 2006 18:18 >> >>>> Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >>>> Emne: Re: Coming Soon - A new K-mount Film Camera >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Adam, >> >>>> I'd be interested in knowing what it is that you "want" that >> film >> >>>> alone >> >>>> satisfies. >> >>>> I'm not doubting your word, just mulling the digital switch. >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks, >> >>>> >> >>>> Jack >> >>>> >> >>>> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> People are still buying them. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> In fact some of us are quite happily shooting film, and intend >> to >> >>>>> shoot >> >>>>> film as long as it's available. Digital is nice, but it doesn't >> >> do >> >>>>> everything I want. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -Adam >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Don Williams wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> I don't quite understand why new 35mm bodies are being made at >> >>>> all. >> >>>>> Two >> >>>>>> film makers (that I know of) have stopped making 35mm film and >> >> the >> >>>>> sales >> >>>>>> of digital cameras keeps climbing -- and the prices keep >> coming >> >>>>> down. >> >>>>>> Will good high res film continue to be available? If so I >> think >> >> I >> >>>>> ought >> >>>>>> to get the Wild/Leica Microscope camera out of the cupboard -- >> >>>> where >> >>>>> I >> >>>>>> put it when the *ist D arrived. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Don >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Bob Shell wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Jun 30, 2006, at 8:30 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> This little guy's been around for a year or two. From the >> few >> >>>>> reviews >> >>>>>>>> I've read about it, it seems to be mechanically very similar >> >> (if >> >>>>> not >> >>>>>>>> identical) to the K-mount bodies offered by Phoenix, >> Vivitar, >> >>>>>>>> Promaster, etc. However, the last time I picked up a >> >> Promaster >> >>>>>>>> K-body, IIRC it was made in China or Thailand. The VSL43 is >> >>>> made >> >>>>> in >> >>>>>>>> Japan, so I may be completely wrong about the similarities. >> >> The >> >>>>>>>> reviews do suggest that it has a very nice viewfinder. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> It's made by Cosina in Japan. Same innards as some of the >> >>>> Vivitar >> >>>>> >> >>>>>>> SLR cameras. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> The Promaster you saw is a rebadged Seagull from China. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Bob >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >>>>> [email protected] >> >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> __________________________________________________ >> >>>> Do You Yahoo!? >> JD> === message truncated === JD> __________________________________________________ JD> Do You Yahoo!? JD> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around JD> http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
