On Apr 22, 2004, at 3:37 PM, Richard F. Man wrote:
> One major plus point for film - I don't have to worry about archiving
> the
> digital only images. So there are incremental cost to use digital too.
It seems to me that if your film is your archive, the cost of the film
and processing is your cost. And if you care about it you will buy
storage products that are acid/chemical free that will not damage your
film over time. That cost is not really cheap.
Second point is that you have to use your time work with the scanner
image even if you can batch scan. Most want to make it as close to the
original concept recorded on the film. It seldom comes out of the
scanner the way you would want it and batch processing just does not
cut it for that. Most people archive that finished digital image
because they do not want to waste their time doing it again, ever. A
scanned image is twice the size of the equivalent quality digital
camera image, and so is the cost of archiving it.
Winsor
Long Beach, California
USA
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|