Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]And the flip side of that is that I just delivered an album of 34 digital 81/2 by 11 piezography prints to a customer this afternoon and am now printing out the dupes she asked for of 18 of the 34 - and she, like 99.99999 percent of folks, wouldn't know "silver" if it snuck up and bit her on the butt.....But if you get your jollies making silver prints, or what we peasants used to call "prints," more power to you.... B. D. Curt Miller wrote: > I think you've got the order reversed: the state of the art in digital > imaging is currently at about the development of a '32 Ford V-8...in its > infancy. Qualitatively it's still years behind silver. I delivered a > 16x20 print to a customer this afternoon, made from and 8x10 negative. > None of these silly little desktops come even remotely close. there's the > equivalent of 2 gigabytes of information there. Go waste your money on > obsolete technology, if you will, but, for many of us, it's silver for a > long time to come :-). > > Curt > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, B. D. Colen wrote: > > > Right....And Arthur also won't say that a 2000 Mercedes is "bad," either, he > > just doesn't want you to confuse it with the real thing - a Ford Model T.....;-) > > > > B. D. > > > > > > > > ARTHURWG@aol.com wrote: > > > > > Paul, I'm not saying digital is "bad," exactly; but lets not confuse it with > > > the real thing. Arthur > > > >