Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Leica and digital
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:11:47 -0400

Hi Gib,

> 1) If film and digital images are roughly comparable in quality, digital
> is much more convenient for me. Since I do most of my own printing, I
> would save a good deal of time taking film in for processing, getting
> prints or contacts so I can see what's there, and then having the best
> negs or slides scanned.

From experience, digital isn't that much of a time saver...unless you have
someone else do the printing.  It is a significant time sink having to
print, as it takes about one minute per 4x6 print, and...the time to get the
image into PS, and set-up the printer etc.  Changing inks, head
cleaning...the list goes on.  Anyone who believes they are, in the long run,
going to save time isn't being realistic.

> 2) I would also save significant $$. I now pay for film, processing, and
> scanning. None of that would be necessary.

Well, it costs about $1 per print from a digital printer...so I'm not seeing
the significant money savings.  For me to buy the film, develop and get
double 4x6 prints from a 36 roll costs me about $17.  The same thing from
digital would cost me $72...

> Do I think the current level of digital imaging is equal or better than
> film.

It depends on the print size.  For 4x6 absolutely.  For 11x17...not really.
In between, that's a personal preference as to what qualities of each you
like/dislike.

Regards,

Austin

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html