Subject: | [OM] Re: BW Paper revisited part II |
---|---|
From: | AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 6 Oct 2004 20:40:12 -0700 (PDT) |
> I used to use Panatomic X then it was > dropped. Then I went to using Agfa 25. Then it was Pan F. I > also used > Tech Pan for a while. All now gone... So it looks like I'll > be settling on Tmax100 and Tri-X. Yikes! I'm going to suggest that you convert to Kodak BW 400. I'd hate for your "black cloud" nature cause the discontinuance of Tmax100 or Tri-X. <smile> > I can forsee the day in > the future when making a silver print will be considered an > 'alternative' process. I hate to say it, but it's already there. I challenge you to find any commercial lab offering silver-gelatin prints. I may be one of only a handful in the entire state and the only one offering fiber prints. One of those labs is planning to completely shutdown all B&W processing at the end of this year. AG __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ============================================== List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx ============================================== |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [OM] Re: Breakfast in the hut., Moose |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [OM] OT: Kodak and IBM jointly develope CMOS imagers., Tim Hughes |
Previous by Thread: | [OM] Re: BW Paper revisited part II, Andrew McPhee |
Next by Thread: | [OM] Re: BW Paper revisited part II, Andrew McPhee |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |