[rollei_list] Re: LIst and Digital and Storage
- From: "Fox, Robert" <RFox@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:47:51 -0500
Amen to both Slobodan's and Peter's comments.
R.J.
-----Original Message-----
From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Slobodan Dimitrov
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 2:38 PM
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: LIst and Digital and Storage
While it may pay for itself over time, it won't pay for your time=20
unless you're really very careful with billing.
Try to process 2000 digital images, as opposed to 40 rolls of chromes.=20
The chromes can be done in a couple of hours, while your doing=20
something else. The digital, ball and chain to the computer, is a=20
different story.
It's a false saving when one's time is placed into the equation.
S. Dimitrov
On Feb 10, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Peter K. wrote:
> Yes John, sad to say but people are seeing the digital cameras as
> something that will pay for themselves over time. They like the
> instant "polaroid-like" images they can view on their PC and email to
> relatives. The only issue they are not seeing is storage, and long
> term storage is volatile unless you store CDs and DVDs correctly. What
> I mean by this is CD-Rs have a life expectancy of 7-10 years, less if
> stored improperly much more if stored properly in dark sleeves inside
> a light tight book. Much like Ektachrome slides.
> As for me, I still like that 6x6cm Rollei transparency or negative
> although I am contemplating an EOS 20D to replace my EOS-3 film SLR.
>
> Peter K
>
>
Other related posts:
