Re: Imaging
Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Fri, 20 Sep 1996 23:37:22 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, Beakman wrote:
> > David, to compare custom lab negative with a digital negative in which you
> > do the scanning, tweaking, adjusting and outputting to disk yourself, is
> > what they taught us in grammar school to call a *false analogy.*
>
> Not really, for two reasons. First, when I was thinking about a custom
> lab making a 16x20 neg, I was thinking just a straight enlargement -- no
> tweaking. I still can't imagine them making one for $30. I could be
> wrong. Second, now that you bring it up, whether I do the tweaking or
> they do the tweaking, the tweaking must get done. If I just consider my
> out-of-pocket expense, which is what this really boils down to, a digital
> neg which I tweak at home will *definitely* cost less than a neg that I
> have a custom lab tweak.
David, let me confess that you lost me. Or let me repeat that you're
setting up a false equation. So let's put it this way: the average
alternative printer makes his or her own negatives, perhaps 5 in a day in
the darkroom. The cost is their time & the film. You can't make your own
linotronic negatives unless you have a linotronic, which so few of us do.
The cost in time may be comparable, if you count going to and from the
service bureau (usually 4 one-way trips, unless you want to hang around
for several hours). In addition the dollar cost for 5 linotronic
negatives would be 5 times $20 or $30.
Judy