Received: by fanciful.org (Wildcat! SMTP Router v5.6.450.8)
          for photo{at}fanciful.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:04:53 -0800
Received: from saf.tzo.com ([216.55.16.67]) HELO=saf.tzo.com
          by fanciful.org (Wildcat! SMTP v5.6.450.8) with SMTP
          id 446605109; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:04:51 -0800
Received: from 206.46.170.135 by saf.tzo.com
 id 2004021114024552361 for photo{at}fanciful.org;
 Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:02:45 GMT
Received: from BobDial ([67.249.22.170]) by out011.verizon.net
          (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP
          id 
          for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:04:41 -0600
Message-ID: 
From: "Bob Dial" 
To: 
References: 
Subject: Re: Kodak processing machine
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:27:02 -0600
X-Orig-MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Orig-Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
X-Orig-Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out011.verizon.net from
[67.249.22.170] at Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:04:19 -0600


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stu Turk" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 6:21 PM
Subject: Kodak processing machine


>     In another list I follow there was a notice that CNN reported that
Kodak
> is bringing out a new $30,000 dry processing machine that is suppose to
> process film (film, not digital) in five minutes then make regular
> non-chemical prints at low prices.

Unless they are going to change the cassette on 35mm then the film will have
to travel through the light trap twice, doubling the exposure to scratches,
too.
Users of that system would be advised to stay away from keeping them in
their pockets outside the plastic container, etc..

> Processing and printing a roll is
> suppose to be about $4.00.  The machine dispenses a disk with the images
on
> it but not the film/negatives.   I assume it is for C-41 film only.

I'm curious as to what the prints will look like!

>      the discussion in the list seems to be between those who won't use
the
> new machine because they want the negatives I'd be in that group - and
those
> who figure what the heck, if it keeps Kodak making film then let the
> snapshooters have at it.

Some merit in each side of that discussion but I'm with you, Stu.  The negs
are
the future life of our work, unless the disk can be copied and shared
without any
special handling, and providing the files used for the pictures are not too
small.

BobD



--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5