Richard Ross wrote
>
>As I recall, the cost of processing colour neg film in the 60's was
>enormous compared to slides. With the advent of the minilab and RC paper,
>the situation's now reversed. I suspect this has as much to do with
>relative sales. For the average snapper, a print is much more convenient -
>I well remember people passing round their holiday slides in one of those
>dreaful battery-operated viewers....
Yes, in those days commercial colour printing was around three times the
cost of black and white. Since then the gap has gradually closed and black &
white is now actually dearer at many labs., even though the resulting prints
tend to be much the same dreary grey as ever they were.
>OM content? I've only ever used about half a dozen rolls of print film in
>my OMs in the past twenty years.
Much of my OM output continues to be on colour negative. Even twelve years
after I stupidly sold my Pen FT, full frame slides still seem to be a
colossal waste of film. When I stop vacillating about which film scanner to
buy, I'll probably go back to black and white in order to be able to view
the results in an hour or so of finishing the film.
Regards
Keith
keith_r.k.berry@xxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|