Austin, I think you miss the point here: Anthony's
standards for film processing quality are sufficiently
lower than yours, mine and everyone else on the list,
that all processors' work is fungible. It isn't that
all are equal.
Personally, I don't like getting scratched, mistreated
film back. So after trying out several processors,
I've settled on the ones that meet my requirements.
Pat
--- Austin Franklin <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > 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.
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
