On Apr 11, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 11 April 2011 22:01, John Sessoms <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You're confusing economic infeasibility with "impossible". Every day I use >> stuff that was "impossible" when I started in photography. >> >> If there's really a market for something like this, some genius will >> eventually figure out how to do it and where to sell it. >> >> And I think there *is* a small market, even if it has only a narrow window >> of opportunity (i.e. the rest of my lifetime). They may not figure out how >> to produce something like this at a price anyone is willing to pay in time >> for all of us who still love our old film cameras to buy them, but it's not >> "impossible". > > As Cotty would say, I'd eat my hat >
I think such a device could be produced now, since there have been so many advances in thin-film technology as it applies to other fields. But there is nothing to warrant the investment in a device for film cameras. It's a dying market. No one in their right mind would put their money into that kind of enterprise.. Paul > -- > Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) > Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours > Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
