Aaron Reynolds writes:
Man... $13,000 for the one that plays 33 and 45 rpm, and $20,000 for the
one that plays 78s as well...
If I was rich, I'd totally have one of these. ;)
I bet they're not much use to rappers... :)
Cheers,
- Dave
David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec)
Quite true. I can appreciate your point.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Tom Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
I would think the reletive value would depend on whether you have $30
No, they will stop making film when they can no longer make a profit on it.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 4:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital cameras
Sorry to say but it's crap that doesn't work too well. Not to mention the
low resolution.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kevin Waterson
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 6:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Johnston
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Mafud wrote:
And your free set-up depreciates
And the sun will explode in ten million years, too, so I don't see the point
Hi,
Mike Johnston wrote:
But here's the real rub for your argument. IF you could see a full-color
proof the size of your computer monitor for each shot you took, would you
really need to print every single photograph you shot? If you could somehow
preview your 24-exposure roll before you
My boss is a devoted sports photographer who was spending a huge amount
of money on Ilfochrome prints at a very good custom lab. I asked him to
let me see a sheet of his transparencies. I scanned them on our Agfa
Duoscan T2500 at 4000 dpi, then printed the 50 meg images on Ilford Fine
Art paper
On Thursday, November 22, 2001, at 01:47 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
E. Medium format digital is alive and well in product (still life)
shooting.
It's alive and well in studio shooting in general. Most (if not all)
current digital backs work properly with strobe, and this change has
On Thursday, November 22, 2001, at 01:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But we all know if you buy one of an object, (in this instance, a
camera-printer-computer), and use it, you ~will~ replace it.
What if it's well-built and lasts a long time? ;)
We bought our big digital printer when I was
I see a humor in it. It is true also. I'm not making fun of another's
plight.
Let me tell ya, if the people in refugee camps are running around with
disposable cameras and getting film processed I'd be surprised. If they
are, we better stop sending cash.
Disposables are probably just about
- Original Message -
From: aimcompute
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
I see a humor in it. It is true also. I'm not making fun of
another's
plight.
Let me tell ya, if the people in refugee camps are running
around with
disposable cameras and getting film processed I'd
Mafud wrote:
What we're seeing right now is soaring sales in film cameras, APS and high
dollar sophisticated PSs leading the way.
I wonder why?
You're gonna have to cite your sources here, Mafud. What you say simply
isn't true. APS is in the doldrums and single-use cameras are sales volume
Digital will pay for itself depending on the initial price of the
hardware, the individual's film usage, the amount of prints made, and
the longevity of the digital hardware. And maybe other factors such as
picture-to-publication time and reduction in processing staff.
Mike made a good
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
What we're seeing right now is soaring sales in film
cameras, APS and high
dollar sophisticated PSs leading the way.
I wonder why?
You're gonna have to cite your sources here. What you say
simply
I can't beleive how many single use camera we take in at the
lab. There is a demographic to them though. The teenagers, for
whom money still grows on a tree in their parents back yard use
them, for the most part. Once they get a little older and get a
job, they seem to gravitate towards
: John Mustarde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Digital will pay for itself depending on the initial price of the
hardware, the individual's film usage, the amount of prints made, and
the longevity
Thats why i did not take out an extended
warranty ,offered by Staples, on the $29.00 optical
logitech mouse i just bought.It breaks, its gone.
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You get what you pay for. Anyone who expects a printer that costs
less
-
From: David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Thats why i did not take out an extended
warranty ,offered by Staples, on the $29.00 optical
logitech mouse i just bought.It breaks, its gone.
Dave
In a message dated 11/22/01 10:40:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Most of the big catalog guys in Toronto have moved to digital. Even the
smaller studios are considering it.
-Aaron
Yes. I expect that given the rapid advance in technology, meduim format will
be
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:37:00 -0500, you wrote:
You get what you pay for. Anyone who expects a printer that costs less
than $100 to last is nuts.
I want to praise Epsons' service department, while slightly damning
their printer. We bought an Epson Stylus Pro 5000 with Fiery RIP in
late 1998.
Aaron wrote:
Most of the big catalog guys in Toronto have moved to digital. Even the
smaller studios are considering it.
I'll bet anyone using the Contax 645 system is considering it now with the
Contax digital on the horizon. Being able to add a digital body, even in 35mm
format, without
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 12:46 AM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Tom R. wrote:
Let's see? From my view point you are trying to sell me an idea. Someone
who
is trying to sell me something is a salesman.
I think that's nonsense. Are you paying me
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/22/01 11:17:13 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Disposables are probably just about the most expensive kind of camera
one
In a message dated 11/22/01 8:20:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Had you qualified your remark I may have let it stand, but as stated, it
is flat out wrong.
I spend as much as six weeks a ~year~ (April, October) in the environs of the
Department Du Nord (Milo,
Tom R. wrote:
To paraphrase and old saying; figures don't lie, but salesmen do figure.
First of all, Tom, I'm not a salesman, not in any way, shape, or form. I
have no connection, official or unofficial, to any company and no financial
interest at all in selling anything except my little
In a message dated 11/21/01 4:29:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now tell me I'm not running cheaper than you are. I think everything
considered it's a _lot_ cheaper.
--Mike
P.S. To Mafud's earlier comment that I'm running through AA alkalines at a
steady clip,
Unfortunately, AFAIK, this doesn't apply to amateurs
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Every object/item you buy depreciates. Every shot you make further
depreciates your set-up. The set-up thus has to be replaced, probably at
the
same or higher value. At that point, and unless you don't intend
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 7:21 AM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/21/01 4:29:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because you are paying for film.
And your
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
__
Mike, as long as you have to replace supplies and depreciate
equipment, it is
costing
In a message dated 11/21/01 9:06:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unfortunately, AFAIK, this doesn't apply to amateurs
But hey, we all know that in the heart of every amateur beats the heart of a
pro. :))
Mafud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is
In a message dated 11/21/2001 9:33:25 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But hey, we all know that in the heart of every amateur beats the heart of
a
pro. :))
Nonsense.
Ed M.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
In a message dated 11/21/01 9:25:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm, doesn't a conventional camera depreciate as well?
William Robb
Yup. But at some point, the depreciation stops but the camera is still
useful. Witness the number of 30 plus year-old PENTAX horses
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/21/01 9:25:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm, doesn't a conventional camera
Yes, it does - as do all consumables. Perhaps the point to be
considered is not so much monetary depreciation, as obsolescence. Thus
far, even old cameras, while ~maybe~ not being worth as much as when
new, are still able to function well and make good photographs. IOW,
it's a mature
Yeah but if in 30 years there is no more film you can still use a digital
camera.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital
Yeah, but in 30 years, when there are no more pixels, what'll we do?
We're using pixels at an alarming rate! At some point we'll run out.
Kent Gittings wrote:
Yeah but if in 30 years there is no more film you can still use a digital
camera.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
William Robb wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm, doesn't a conventional camera depreciate as well?
Yup. But at some point, the depreciation stops but the camera
is still useful. Witness the number of 30 plus year-old PENTAX
horses that get hitched up every
One point that you did not make, Shel, is that Digital cameras and printers
are disposable
I'll continue to keep the LX and MX in good repair because essentially they
are mechanical marvels with little in the way of electronics. I'm sure you
feel the same about your Leicas, etc. Digital
Hmmm, doesn't a conventional camera depreciate as well?
William Robb
---
Hardly at all if you judge by the prices folks ask for
their used equipment here on the PDML. BSEG
---
Len
---
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the
: Digital cameras are FREE
Yeah, but in 30 years, when there are no more pixels, what'll we do?
We're using pixels at an alarming rate! At some point we'll run out.
Kent Gittings wrote:
Yeah but if in 30 years there is no more film you can still use a digital
camera.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
But to duplicate your traditional setup detailed below, here's what I'd
do:
I'd get a good deluxe p/s for $400-$700. I'd buy a Canon S600 printer
for
$150 and Epson Matte Heavyweight paper, which is 25 cents a sheet for
8.5x11. If you want to be really
In a message dated 11/21/01 11:34:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's happened as other technologies have been made obsolete by electronics
and there is no reason to doubt that the same won't, (eventually), happen
with film. when this does happen I cant see anything
In a message dated 11/21/01 11:47:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah but if in 30 years there is no more film you can still use a
digital
camera.
--
Shel Belinkoff
As I noted elsewhere, KODAK will stop making film when they can no longer
sell one-use
In a message dated 11/21/01 12:49:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yah, my figures where skued to make my point. Yours weren't?
You're low on your figures Tom.
Mafud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
In a message dated 11/21/01 12:56:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hardly at all if you judge by the prices folks ask for
their used equipment here on the PDML. BSEG
---
Len
But Robb was talking about ordinary cameras, not PENTAX cameras ABSEG
Mafud
[EMAIL
In a message dated 11/21/01 1:22:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In another five years I
would expect 90% of commercial photography to be digital. I suspect that
film will be the media of choice for fine arts photography for quite a while
yet.
Agreed.
Mafud
[EMAIL
In a message dated 11/21/01 1:22:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The investment in equipment is much higher for digital at present, for
materials it tends to be lower.
But oh, that cost in depreciation!
Mafud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is
Just an addition to this thread is the e-film technology.
In short, (e)-film is a roll of film that isn't really film.
It is a digital image capturing device that fits into
your existing 35mm SLR camera body.
It works just like 35mm film, except that there is no film. The
device captures and
:09 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Just an addition to this thread is the e-film technology.
In short, (e)-film is a roll of film that isn't really film.
It is a digital image capturing device that fits into
your existing 35mm SLR camera body.
It works just like 35mm film, except
Is this the same vaporware that's been around for several years?
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Just an addition
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I noted elsewhere, KODAK will stop making film when they can no longer
sell one-use and PS cameras to people without electricity.
Kodak will stop making the *cheap film that those cameras use* when they can no
longer sell those cameras.
The Kodak films preferred by
Kodak will stop making the *cheap film that those cameras use* when they
can no
longer sell those cameras.
The Kodak films preferred by readers of the PDML will go away much sooner.
:(
Scary thought. Only Max 800 and SG800.
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
I have no idea of what rechargeable batteries you use, but
~any~
rechargeable
battery has a buy-in price equal to at least 12x the cost
of regular
batteries. And with use, your rechargeable
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SNIP
And the sun will explode in ten million years, too, so I don't see the
point
in going to school.
--Mike
Tried that one on my mother one morning back in High School. The point in
going to school was illustrated to
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/21/01 12:49:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yah, my figures where skued to make my point. Yours weren't?
You're low
-
The optimist's cup is half full,
The pessimist's is half empty,
The wise man enjoys his drink.
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Just an addition
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
Is this the same vaporware that's been around for several years?
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: Digital
Mafud wrote:
As to long lived production: can we say Brownie?
:^) I last used my Brownie just back in '89 -- had
four shots run in the local paper along w/ a few
from a Canonet GIII of our band for an upcoming gala
(this from
Mafud wrote:
And your free set-up depreciates
Seriously, the whole point, originally, was that depreciation doesn't
matter. To simplify the original argument:
Say you buy a film camera for $700 and pay ongoing film and development
costs of $350 per year. You also have printing costs of $400
Tom R. wrote:
Let's see? From my view point you are trying to sell me an idea. Someone who
is trying to sell me something is a salesman.
I think that's nonsense. Are you paying me anything? No. Do I care if you
accept my views as your own? Not in the slightest. In fact, I don't expect
you to,
Mike ...
If you mean using digital cameras, well, I'm not particularly interested
at this point. Digital cameras don't work properly for much of my
photography. However, I do scan some of my work and put it up for all
to see, and it's quite possible that, given a good photograph and a good
On 21 Nov 2001, at 23:46, Mike Johnston wrote:
Digital is coming to your lives as photographers, just as it came to mine
(whether we also stick with film or not). The only difference between any of us
is WHEN we jump in. I jumped a little later than a lot of people, and a little
earlier than
In a message dated 11/21/01 11:21:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seriously, the whole point, originally, was that depreciation doesn't
matter.
Costs and depreciation only matter when you have to replace an object. If
what you're saying is that ~until~ you replace
Graywolf growled:
Everybody who thinks that Mike's outfit below will match my outfit in
photographic capability raise your hand.
Funny--but you were specifically talking about Wal-Mart 4x6s. My digital
camera makes prints that compare favorably to those, especially since I'm a
better printer
Yeah, but in 30 years, when there are no more pixels, what'll we do?
We're using pixels at an alarming rate! At some point we'll run out.
Aha! You see, there's the film mentality for ya. I know whoever wrote this
was joking, but the joke is revealing. We've always had to worry about
running
Hello All.
Maybe my last words on digitals:
A. Low-Megapixel digitals works for snapshots, eBay and web viewing.
B. On camera digital flash sux.
C. Digital SLRs come very close to being as useful as film cameras (any,
including one-use).
D. Digital will replace (by driving out) Polaroid.
E.
Tom R. wrote:
I would guess your figures are skewed every bit as much as your arguments.
Come on, Tom, let's stay gentlemanly here. That's a pretty insulting thing
to say. Actually, the figures I gave are exactly what I pay, and I even
named exactly what I buy so you can check them for
I wrote that, but since you've taken it out of context - as a retort to
a comment about running out of film - you've lost both the immediacy and
the humor of the remark. My point was that we won't run out of film,
just as we won't run out of pixels - or will we?
I heard some very interesting
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:14:48 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote:
One more thing I've forgotten to mention. If you shoot slides, you'll pay
approximately 40¢ per frame. Call it $14.00 a roll. (Is that about right,
Isaac and Aaron?)
So if you shoot a measly 100 rolls a year (that's only 2 rolls a week),
In a message dated 11/20/01 2:18:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which means, in turn, that if you buy a $2,000 digital camera, a flash media
card, a card reader, and a copy of Photoshop Elements, the camera will
completely pay for itself in approximately two years. If
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 07:20:14PM +1100, Leon Altoff wrote:
If my
computer crashes I loose all of them, unless I back them up onto CD
rom, which if it's scratched can cause a whole image to be corrupted
whereas a scratch on a slide can be touched up.
But don't forget that you can make
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 05:04:18AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/20/01 2:18:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which means, in turn, that if you buy a $2,000 digital camera, a flash media
card, a card reader, and a copy of Photoshop Elements,
In a message dated 11/20/01 4:21:27 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This doesn't work for me.
If I shoot 100 rolls of film I end up with a drawer of slideboxes that
I can pull out at any time and view with a slide viewer or projector.
I can lend them to people, scan
In a message dated 11/20/01 5:14:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I love prints and slides but also think that digital images have their
advantages too.
eBay and email.
In fact I find sharing digital images much easier (pop it into an email, put
it on a
webpage).
In a message dated 11/20/01 5:22:36 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but an ink cartridge is cheap compared to the priceless memories
of your grandkids having fun, right? (I'm too young, but I hope one
day I'll be able to experience first-hand.)
Umm-no. I can't be
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11/20/01 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: Digital cameras are FREE
In a message dated 11/20/01 5:14:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I love prints and slides but also think that digital images have
their
advantages too.
eBay and email.
In fact I find
On Tuesday, November 20, 2001, at 06:13 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/20/01 5:22:36 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but an ink cartridge is cheap compared to the priceless memories
of your grandkids having fun, right? (I'm too young, but I
In a message dated 11/20/01 8:45:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Mafud, do you want in on the PDML digital challenge, too? You're a big
proponent of the wet darkroom, I'd like to try to blast your socks off
with one of these prints.
-Aaron
Mmmm-OK.
But
On Tuesday, November 20, 2001, at 11:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But remember, I already know real digital is alive and well in medium
and
4x5 formats.
Certainly, that's not an issue. What we're looking for is a variety of
opinion from people demanding of their printing and who know
Leon A. wrote:
This doesn't work for me.
If I shoot 100 rolls of film I end up with a drawer of slideboxes that
I can pull out at any time and view with a slide viewer or projector.
I can lend them to people, scan them, show them at meetings and so on.
If I shoot 3600 digital pictures at
80 matches
Mail list logo
