|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
I am pretty regularly making 18x and 24x enlargements on my big printer...that's mainly what I expect to be doing from now on...so whether it's upstream, downstream, or underwater, film seems to be better for me, too. The "vast majority of photographic images" doesn't have any bearing on my work. on 06/07/2002 01:04 AM, dickbo at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > Methinks you are attempting to swim upstream when the water is all going > downstream my man. > > As a sum total of all images produced by all professional photographers in > any given period of time, the number required to be used for giant > enlargements is minimal. > > I believe it would be fair to claim that the vast majority of photographic > images eventually end up on the printed page and are no more than a few > inches (r Cm if you will) in size. > > The need for 'big ones' may indeed exist but that need is nowhere as great > as that required to produce small and fast and cheap. - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.