Fellow Zuiks,
We have debated various areas of the following thread before. However some
recent frustrations of mine have caused me to begin to think about moving
into digital. I am not disparaging the quality of the Olympus image; that is
well documented. But time and the state of the art move on. Here are some
recent difficulties and some financial observations:
1. Beautiful photo of grand daughter compromised by idiot processor
2. Washed out florals due to "old" chemicals at a different processor
3. Ordered cropped 8 x 10 prints from Kodak; got back 8 X 12s with a
mimeographed explanation of the aspect ratio of 35mm film and why I
really wanted 8 x 12s.
4. It costs $12.50 to have a roll of 24 exp Portra ( or any other negative
film) developed and 4 X 6 printed at a local pro lab.
I could go on and on. In my little photography world involving children and
the San Diego scene we do alot of print scanning on a flat bed scanner. To
get better scans I need a slide/negative scanner and they cost $500 or more.
Really good ones cost $2000 or more. In all of the above cases I am using
the newer technology to convert and older technology so that it may be
manipulated by a third newer technology (computer).
I have about a 50 - 50 chance that either my films will be goofed up in
processing or that a third party will decide what I should have rather than
what I ordered. And it is damned expensive to boot.
If I were to acquire a quality digital camera I believe that I could
eliminate the involvement of the photo labs. Then I would have only myself
to blame for image quality.
Ok, guys, fire away! Let's discuss this 'cuz I am sure I am not alone.
Dave Dougherty
|