Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Quoting Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> > ... I suppose if someone is dinking around over a weekend with > money to burn for film and processing, stick to film. ............................................................................................................................................ At least for B&W [personal pictures], the greater cost of using film seems a specious argument, unless a fairy godmother gives one all the digital equipment needed to shoot, process, print, and handle the archiving of the original files. I think the initial investment of digital is always glossed over, and touted as being so much cheaper than film. I'm "dinking around", doing my own processing and printing, partly because I don't have the "money to burn" to start from scratch with an all-digital workflow, not to mention the cost of continual upgrades, supplies, and storage headaches (I also just plain prefer the feel of my current cameras, like darkroom work, and get satisfaction from a physical image). I'm not against digital photography, since it has increased my client satisfaction at work, and is now essential professionally, but I get tired of hearing that it is less expensive in every case. Please don't take this as a rant. Ok, maybe a mini-rant ;~) Alan Alan Magayne-Roshak, Senior Photographer University Information Technology Services University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Office Phone: 414 229-6525 | E-mail: amr3@uwm.edu Department Phone: 414 229-4282 http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Alan+Magayne-Roshak/