Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alan, I think you are being a bit too harsh here. For many people, the only available options are 4x6 machine prints or inkjet prints. I will submit to you that I can make a better print on my Epson Stylus Photo 700 than the minilab can. I recognize that I could make an even better print if I spent 3 hours on it in the darkroom, but my life is such that I simply do not have those 3 hours. I could also pay a professional lab to make custom prints for me, but I find it more satisfying to make them myself, whether digital or not. Even taking into account the image degradation introduced by scanning etc., I can still see the quality leap that the Leica gives me compared to my Pentax. And don't forget that prints are not always the ultimate goal. Most of the colour images I shoot are never printed; they are slides and I enjoy them on the projector. I don't suppose you will tell me that one can't see the Leica difference in projected slides? Nathan Alan Ball wrote: > I have been following the thread on the HP PhotoSmart with interest. > Like most (all ?) of us, I scan (CanoScan 2700F) and print (HP > whatever). It is fun. But is it "good" ? > > I find it a bit contradictory to spend mountains of fortunes of hard > earned (or not so hardly earned) money on the ultimate quality in 35mm > photography, and then show enthusiasm or even satisfaction towards the > results provided by consumer level scanning and printing.