----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 7:36 AM Subject: Re: OT: CD-RW Question
> In a message dated 11/12/01 1:08:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > "Quite expensive compared to a wet print if you are doing your > > own printing, probably 4 times more expensive." > > Interesting. Your price valuation was for a 4x6? What do you estimate for an > 8x10? No, my price valuation was for an 8x10. It is not economical to do 4x6 prints on an inkjet. I can get a 4x6 proof (straight optical print, colour corrected, but no burning, dodging or spotting) for Can$0.23, the same from an inkjet would cost over a dollar. Of course, with the inkjet print, I could do some burning, dodging, spotting and contrast control as needed. > > > "if you are paying someone to do printing, then suddenly it looks > > pretty good from a cost standpoint also." > > But still "expensive" compared to self-printing in a lab? Very expensive compared to doing it yourself. Of course this presumes that the person is an adept darkroom worker, or that just straight prints are required. If the megative required extensive burning or dodging, the inkjet print may well be less expensive because of redos. They do have to be judged on their own merits. Like an apple and an orange, you can only compare them in some ways, and not others. They don't look (taste) the same, but both can be very good, or very bad. Also, I still think film is the best way to take a picture. I have yet to see a 100% digital print that I like. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
