[pure-silver] Re: [lens] Re: Film vs Digital- was: Amusing Kodak commercial
- From: afterswift@xxxxxxx
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:20:36 -0500
Randy,
On a list we know folks arrive at different stages of knowledge. So it seems
good manners to accommodate their questions and state of mind. If they want to
talk about minor economics in photogragpy, I'd be tolerant.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 10:15 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: [lens] Re: Film vs Digital- was: Amusing Kodak
commercial
On 12/31/06 12:07 PM, "afterswift@xxxxxxx" <afterswift@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Randy,
The reason folks are making an issue out of the crossover between film and
digital and back again is to preserve OPTIONS. That is multiple approaches to
photography so it doesn't get locked into one technology. That means freedom
for us. If you can't fathom that, there's nothing I can do about it.
Bob R
Not quite sure who Randy is but I have a feeling you’re responding to me.
Discussing the elements of crossover between different technologies would be an
interesting read and I might be inclined to participate. Putting up with
endless debates over the cost of getting prints from Fuji machines at Wal-Mart
stores is hardly scintillating debate and it usually leads to the type of
response you just gave. I like Justin’s response far better.
Bob Randall
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free
AOL Mail and more.
Other related posts:
