>Hi Dave, and thanks for such a long and detailed post. I would have to
>somewhat disagree with the above, though. My experience has been that using
>my Minolta Dimage slide scanner for input and an Epson 700 for output,
>using 8x10s and the best glossy paper, that I am able, on most subjects, to
>get really really close to what you describe as a 'real photo process'.
>Certainly good enough in all cases to fool non-photographers.
...or the new ALPS continious tone printer for $499. I've NEVER seen
anything like it before. Other than an unusual shine caused by the layers
of ink, I would have been completely convinced that it was a chemical print.
Ken
Kenneth E. Norton
Image66 Photography
image66@xxxxxxx
(217) 224-5004
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|