[filmscanners] Re: OT: Film processing costs (WAS: Re: Prints from scans ...are there reallydifferences any more?)

["Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>]

Brian writes:

> ... how much do we have to pay for medium format
> film, processing, and scanning before those
> high-end digital systems become practical?

I'm not sure what you mean by practical.  High-end digital is practical
right now, for certain applications.  However, I'm addicted to image
quality, and so unless and until digital meets and surpasses film for MF
images, I see no reason to look to digital.  Additionally, at least right
now, I'd have to go through quite a bit of 120 film to amortize the cost of
a $26,000 digital back (that provides only one fourth the image quality).

Speed is not an issue for me in either 35mm or MF, and I never burn through
film in MF and only occasionally in 35mm, so the advantages of digital are
of little significance to me, whereas the disadvantages (staggering initial
cost, immediate obsolescence, the need for an expensive infrastructure, and
lower image quality) are overwhelming.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body