Re: Imaging

Beakman (beakman@netcom.com)
Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:54:22 -0700 (PDT)

Judy questioned:

> On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, Beakman wrote:
> > 9. Getting a 16x20 enlarged digital neg is probably cheaper than getting
> > an analog one.
>
> OK, David -- let's hear it on that one......

Well, I *did* say probably... :) I was just trying to imagine getting
a custom photo lab to make me a 16x20 interneg for $30, and I just
couldn't see it happening.

I suppose if you did it yourself, it would be cheaper, but if you had an
imagesetter, making digital negs would be cheaper too. :)

David