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: OT:X-ray fogging



> Johnny writes:
>
> > Here are the possibilities as I see them.
> >
> > 1. You are right. There is no substantive
> > difference between commercial film processors
> > anywhere in the world. Everyone who uses
> > custom labs is wasting their money.
>
> This is generally true, at least with respect to ordinary C-41 and E-6
> development.  If anyone disagrees, perhaps he can point me to
> some examples that
> show an obvious difference between one lab and another.
>

Everyone disagrees, but you've already said you don't see any difference, so
what's the use?  Everyone else on this list, professional photographer,
expert photographer, and otherwise are all wrong and you are, obviously,
right.




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.