On 7/27/05, AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Not really. I was spending around $250-300 on film, processing
> and proofs for the average wedding. Now, my amortized costs
> with digital are around $250-300 for the average wedding. And
> I'm doing it on a shoestring as compared to most of my peers.
> One friend estimates his costs at close to $500 per wedding.
>
> The great "LIE" of digital.
>
> Digital brings more efficient workflow and a general improvement
> in the image quality, but the cost savings just do not exist.
Not questioning your facts but I'm curious what the costs you're
seeing are? I was under the (perhaps incorrect) impression that the
big cost would be film and processing so with that removed I'd expect
your costs to drop. But then again, that's the marketing message so I
imagine there's a lot more to the story.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|