Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
David, Oh, she was well aware of the cost. She was more afraid of her husband for some reason. He wanted her to use the camera. My guess is that she tried to be very frugal in her shots. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 3:36:16 PM, you wrote: >snip< DCS> P.S. Bruce, one last question - did your lab owner ever explain to the lady DCS> how much coin she was wasting by throwing those puppies away ? :)
Re: Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital > William, > > The story is true. The couple is very well to do and her husband > wanted her to use the best P&S. How he determined that, I don't know. > The lab owner said that she was afraid to tell him how much per roll > they were spending. Even after explaining that she could reuse the > cards, she really had no clue how or what to do. I suspect that now > she is just erasing the card after getting the prints. Perhaps my lucidity is wearing off. I wasn't actually disputing the truth of what you say. It is a rather sad story though. William Robb
Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
I have to agree with Herb on this. I personally have no problem turning in a partially shot roll, but my wife would have fits. She doesn't want to waste a single shot on film. She'll hold that roll until the next occasion even if it will be awhile and there are only a couple of shots left. Penny wise and pound foolish. One of her biggest attractions to the digital camera is that she doesn't care how many shots she takes. When using the film camera she might as well be opening the cash register for each shutter release. On digital, she doesn't even think about it. Since I am there to weed out all the duds, she is very happy. She'll shoot 50-100 shots of an event on the digital where she would have shot only 5-10 on film. We may only get 5-10 keepers from the digital, but she has more fun taking them. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 3:09:05 PM, you wrote: HC> Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>There isn't that cost advantage in reality, because the cost per HC> print of digital (at least in my market) is enough higher that a HC> film can be half used, taken in and processed, and will likely HC> cost less than getting the digital equivalent printed. HC> William Robb< HC> people aren't thinking about cost. they are thinking it's not the end of HC> the roll. that's waste of film. HC> Herb
Re[4]: Behind the counter with digital
William, The story is true. The couple is very well to do and her husband wanted her to use the best P&S. How he determined that, I don't know. The lab owner said that she was afraid to tell him how much per roll they were spending. Even after explaining that she could reuse the cards, she really had no clue how or what to do. I suspect that now she is just erasing the card after getting the prints. Bruce Thursday, December 19, 2002, 3:14:40 PM, you wrote: WR> - Original Message - WR> From: Bruce Dayton WR> Subject: Re[2]: Behind the counter with digital >> William, >> >> You were far more plain and lucid in your description of what WR> I am >> seeing also. That has been my point to Cotty, that the crowds WR> and >> masses are not having good luck with digital and that labs are WR> taking >> part of the rap when they are really victims. WR> I just had the day from hell over this very issue. It's easy to WR> be lucid when the unpleasant memories are so fresh. >> >> My lab owner told me of a lady that faithfully brought in her WR> memory >> cards to get prints back. One time he asked her how she WR> backed up and >> saved the images. She replied that she threw the card away WR> because it >> was full and would buy another to replace it. He asked her WR> why she >> used the camera and she said that her husband had bought it WR> for her >> and wanted her to use it. So instead of about $10.00 per roll >> equivalent she was spending closer to $50.00 per roll. WR> Bruce, WR> If this story had come from anyone other than you, I would be WR> questioning the veracity of it. WR> All I can say is WR> BUUWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAA!!! WR> William Robb
