ndsight I would have sold my Polaroid stock a year ago!! :)
> Thanks for buying Polaroid in the first place!!
> Regards
> David
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lloyd O'Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 6:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&
- Original Message -
From: Lloyd O'Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I can give you my opinion on part of this comparison. I have a
SS4000,
> bought 2 years ago at $1425. A friend of mine recently purchased a
SS120. I
> scanned a couple of 35mm slides on his 120 that I had previously
scanned
S4000. I did think of doing
this.
> Poor performance ratings of the Nikon 14-bit scanner vis a vis
dynamic range
> dissuaded me from doing this.
>
> Lloyd
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "David Gordon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Were you working for L&H by any chance? My stock went from $40 US/share
to a few cents per share, if that. The employees aren't the only one's
who suffer in a business failure.
Art
Cybis wrote:
>> I would think they need the cash. I would say that they deserve
>> their current financial
> Point well taken. For what its worth, I too have suffered "downsizing" and
,
> you're right, it ain't fun. I apologize for the last sentence in that
> paragraph. I certainly don't believe the employees of Polaroid deserve
their
> current situation, least of all David. I was thinking more of the
iday, November 30, 2001 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 / 4000+ / 120 ???
> > I would think they need the cash. I would say that they deserve
> > their current financial situation in this regard.
>
> I have nothing to do with Polaroid except that I own a SS400
first place!!
Regards
David
-Original Message-
From: Lloyd O'Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 6:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 / 4000+ / 120 ???
I can give you my opinion on part of this comparison
> I would think they need the cash. I would say that they deserve
> their current financial situation in this regard.
I have nothing to do with Polaroid except that I own a SS4000. I'm shocked
to read this and I feel the need to respond. The financial situation you are
talking about, chapter 11
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Filmscanners" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 2:38 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 / 4000+ / 120 ???
> Hemingway, David J [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote on Thu, 29 Nov
> 2001 12:52:57 -0500
>
> >I would imagine one co
Hemingway, David J [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote on Thu, 29 Nov
2001 12:52:57 -0500
>I would imagine one could develop a test that showed the differences but I
>am not sure you would see that much difference on a practical basis.
This is between the 4000 and the 4000 + ? Would a reasonable person se
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners:
Polaroid SS4000 / 4000+ / 120 ???
Is it
the 4000 or the 4000+ that's currently available? I couldn't tell from a
quick look at the Polaroid website. I did notice that the rebates appear
to have been extended until January 31st -- a good
David J
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:52
PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid
SS4000 / 4000+ / 120 ???
David.Yes, it is better but depending on your use and
requirements is it worth theextra money? Silverfast has developed a
multi-s
David.
Yes, it is better but depending on your use and requirements is it worth the
extra money? Silverfast has developed a multi-scan function for the 4000+
that I am told works well. Have not seen it myself.
I would imagine one could develop a test that showed the differences but I
am not sure y
13 matches
Mail list logo
