[pure-silver] Re: [lens] Re: Film vs Digital- was: Amusing Kodak commercial
- From: "tOM Trottier" <tOM@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 20:03:45 -0400
Well, pigment ink jet prints are already far more permanent than our chemical
colour photos, and
perhaps even more long-lived than our silver prints and negatives. Besides,
it's such a hassle
doing separations....
Happy New Year, tOM
On Sunday, December 31, 2006 at 12:48,
afterswift@xxxxxxx <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrot
> Long before I bought a digital camera, I was scanning film prints
> and distributing those image files on the Net. And had a solid
> negative record to boot. There is no excuse for not using film
> cameras digitally and B&W processing for permanence.
>
> Bob
-- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur --
,__@ tOM Trottier
_-\_<, 758 Albert St., Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
(*)/'(*) N45.41235 W75.71345 +1 613 860-6633
<a href="http://Abacurial.com";>Abacurial Information Architecture</a>
Q, Q,
</ </ This world, after all our science and sciences, is still
(`-/---/-') a miracle; wonderful, inscrutable, magical and more,
~~@~~~~@~~~~~~ to whosoever will think of it. --Thomas Carlyle
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
