Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or diapositve) (by 2006) ?

In article <gWfbh.3019$Yy1.2716@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> "Greg \"_\"" <grey_egg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > 
> > There are small batch chemical kits from Tetenal, and room
temperature.
> > 
> > You can use a single tank for a single roll, and fill the bottles of 
> > stick with marbles to slow air exposure. Its all in what one wants....
> > where there's a will there's a way.
> 
> And an expense.  You can't tell me that form of development is going to
be
> anywhere near cheap.

Lets say the average for 120 film is 6.75 per roll at a lab without 
driving there, if your kit only processed 10 rolls at 40.00 per kit you 
are 2.75 ahead per roll that's 27.50 per ten rolls. 

More than likely you can process more than 10 rolls especially if 
batched.

<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=586&A=details&Q=&sku=1
09282&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation>

  How much does it cost to drive there or ****p the film, not to mention 
potential for loss. Once one has the technique down few will handle the 
film with as much care as one's self.
-- 
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, 
the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great 
and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire 
at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
 - H. L. Mencken, in the Baltimore Sun, July 26, 1920.


Reality-Is finding that perfect picture
and never looking back.

www.gregblankphoto.com