Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]True enough - Saving "negatives" indeed requires a computer of some sort. But I wonder how many p&s shooters really save their negatives, and how many go back for reprints. (Keep in mind that most 'photo stores' now have the ability to scan prints and provide copy prints that are pretty good.) Of course digital saves money - if you buy film. And keep in mind that with these printers - which now cost $150 and will undoubtedly drop in prices - you can preview the image on the lcd, which means that many people will do their previewing, and then print out only those images they want to keep - which might mean, what, perhaps 18 of every 36 they shoot (to keep it in 35 mm terms). At $.29 @, that means $5.22 for 18 prints, with no film cost, no trip through the rain, snow, hail and heat to the photo store, etc. I'd sure call that saving money - and time, and grief. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Borden Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:28 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron B. D. Colen wrote: > The point of this new generation of printers is that you do not need > to own, or use, a computer to get prints. Aha, then how does one save "negatives"? I assume that those expensive CF cards tend to fill up. And terms of expense, there are many places willing to do 4x6 prints at much less than 30 cents per image, including cost of film, processing and printing (not that I'd necessarily want the el cheapo deal, just to point out that digital doesn't save _any_ money as long as you print most every shot you take. Jonathan _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information