Well, I actually like PP (Practical Photography, UK magazine) much better
than PP (Popular Potography, US magazine) but its the price/ads ratio
difference (pound/euro*amount_of_ads rates vs. US-dollar/euro*amount_of_ads)
that let me choose for a subscription on PP US. Occasionally I buy a PP UK
if it contains articles I am especially interested in.
Not that PP UK contains better tests, jut better photos printed on more
expensive paper, more tips and articles that don't spread over 20 pages
(continued here... continued there...).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Meier [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:41 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: LS-4000ED Dmax 4,2 or rather 2,3?
> --- Hersch Nitikman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I just went back to the Popular Photography issue
> > that reviewed the new
> > scanners, and what I saw was very different from
> > what was said here earlier
> > today. They rated the LS-4000 Very highly. In fact,
> > maybe too highly...
> Well, PP seems to write a lot of things to please its
> advertisers. There are a lot of articles that are
> flawed and don't really tell you the whole truth. It's
> not that everything they write is wrong but you have
> to take it with a grain of salt. I have to admit that
> I also did subscribe for PP but at $3/year there is
> enough information that is worth the $3.
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail