Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/07/14

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

Subject: [Leica] Reality Check re: Digital vs Film vs Cost
From: dorysrus at (Don Dory)
Date: Wed Jul 14 04:36:51 2004

There is in fact a debate going on in the processing industry concerning
the pricing of a CD.  Cost of materials is a few cents, the real cost is
the added scan time, in a high volume lab the extra scan time is a

Kodak and now Fuji are giving away a free CD with their better SUC
cameras so I think inertia is keeping the CD's from every roll of film.

Interestingly enough, the new Frontier models have change to a diode
scanner with all the scanner features you associate with the upper end
Nikon's.  No grain, no scratches, no dust, great color balance.

For the average American who shoots about five rolls of film a year,
there is no reason to change to digital.  WTH, just buy a $6.99
disposable with the free CD and pretend you are in the digital age.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf
Of Brian Reid
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 4:33 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Reality Check re: Digital vs Film vs Cost

>  Kodak or Fuji
> could produce a top notch filmscanner, sell it cheap in order to sell
> films -

Both Kodak and Fuji already make top-of-the-line filmscanners. Kodak's
is arguably the best in the business. They are sold not to consumers but
to service bureaus.

If film companies want to stay in business they will ensure that every
film-processing place in the world delivers a top-quality digital scan
of every negative, along with the print. Photo CD's did this, but the
proprietary format has become ridiculous. Scanning is tedious work that
only dedicated people ever get around to doing. Bundling scanning with
film processing is the best hook.

Leica Users Group.
See for more information

In reply to: Message from reid at (Brian Reid) ([Leica] Reality Check re: Digital vs Film vs Cost)