FotoDave@aol.com
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:51:26 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 1/13/99 1:27:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, jseigel@panix.com
writes:
> Anyway, and besides, many of us of all ages are going to be going digital,
> partly if not entirely. The differences are VERY relevant in gum printing,
> probably in other media. Even if we can't follow the discussion, some of
> it is bound to trickle down & possibly help us, indirectly if not
> directly.
Thanks Judy. :)
Basically I just wanted to say that I wasn't (and am not) going to insist on
talking or not talking about digital vs. contone. As I said, if the interest
is not there, the thread will die naturally. If the interest is there, the
questions will re-surface sooner or later.
I did say I wanted to take my questions back, but that's just a saying. One
can't truly take something that was said back. If others want to continue to
discussion, I am sure they will. They won't stop because I have taken my
questions back. :-)
Now that I have explained that I won't insist on continuing the thread, I do
want to say to people on the list, it is not right that when you are not
interested in a particular subject, you tell others that they can't /
shouldn't talk about it.
The discussion on continous-tone versus binary negatives is not an argument
just for argument sake. It is not a fight among me, Sil, Wayde, and/or Bob. We
discussed things and came to a good model and was just about to apply our
discussion to the control in carbon printing, for example.
Now it seems like no one wants to continue anymore. <sigh>
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41