Re: [OM] An old comparison of scanned film vs microphotograph of film

[John Hudson]

Does Ken's mass production "working pro" scenario suggest that the "serious 
production" output of the "high end serious producer" would still prefer the 
5"x7" or 8"x10" film profile ?

I suggest, without doubt whatsover, that it will for a long time until 
perhaps +++ 50mb becomes the norm from whatever succeed the E3 and its lowly 
cousins.

Does anyone care to comment?

jh



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] An old comparison of scanned film vs microphotograph of 
film


> >
>> And $12 for a roll of processed film compared to $3,000 for a DSLR was
>> not a bogus argument?  :-)
>>
>
> When you consider that the average enthusiest rarely shot more than 20 
> rolls
> per year I do believe it is a bogus argument.
>
> Working pros are another story and I acknowledge the superiority of 
> digital
> in "mass production" mode where it's all a numbers game.
>
> AG
> -- 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus 
> signature database 4540 (20091025) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> 


__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature 
database 4541 (20091025) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com



-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/