ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Review on Canon FS4000/film is dead



Everything except the "very expensive" part is solved already.

Also cost comparisons between film and digital that imply thousands of 6x4 
prints are misleading in the extreme.

With film, a print is necessary simply to see the picture. The digital 
picture doesn't need to be printed at all unless you want to make a 
display print for hanging up.

mgduncan@esper.com (Mike Duncan) wrote:

> >From
> >> http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/Canoscan4000.html
> >"The CanoScan FS4000US will be my last 35mm scanner. It's more than 
> adequate
> >to capture the detail in my images going back to the 1960's. Digital 
> cameras
> >are improving so fast that I doubt I'll be using 35mm after 2002. 
> Current
> >digital cameras approach 35mm in quality. There's plenty of debate on
> >whether they've surpassed 35mm already, but they certainly will by 
> 2002. Any
> >digital camera you buy today will be obsolete in a year or two, but 
> you have
> >to weigh the cost of the camera against the savings in film and 
> processing.
> >The scale is tipping ever more strongly towards digital. Film sales 
> will
> >soon start dropping like a rock; prices will go up and less popular 
> films
> >will disappear. It's over for film."
> 
> I used a digital camera at work 2 yrs ago, and the biggest problems 
> were:
> It ate batteries.
> It didn't focus close enough.
> It was awkward to use.
> It was slow viewing and transfering images.
> You've only got one effective sensor speed.
> It was very expensive.
> 
> I believe it will take a few years before the quality and cost issues 
> equal
> film.  It costs $7 to develop negatives and get double 4x6 prints.  How
> much does it cost to print digital prints?  At least $1 each for 4x6.  
> Film
> is much cheaper.  The scale is still strongly tipping towards film.
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Duncan
> 
> 
> 




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.