Damn spell checker.
At 11:27 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, I wrote:
>Which means that I can ac heave higher quality with my cheap film scanner
>and even
>cheaper HP Printer. This is very sad.
>
>At 09:23 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>> >But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently
>>looked at the B&W prints of my grandfather and I was amazed what quality
>>they had 50 years back. 4x6 inch prints where you would need to go really
>>close to see all detail. I think the present concept of 10 lines per mm for
>>
>>prints is really poor. I like holding pictures closer to see if there are
>>additional details and am often disappointed with the quality (especially
>>color)
>><
>>
>>my Ritz Camera locally uses a scanner and digital laser processor. it
>>outputs ontp photographic paper at about 300 dpi. the dots are visible to
>>the naked eye.
>>
>>Herb....
