We don' need no stiinkin' Kodachrome. We got jets, man, we got jets.

"Toni Nikkanen" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl writes:

That's why if there were any justice in the world, if there were a
god, then programmers would be forced to work on the *slowest*
computers with the *least* amount of memory and storage. The way
things are now, they get fancy, fast and humungous-storage machines,
then assume that the rest of the world has the same setup to run their
morbidly obese code ...

That was a good line 10 years ago, but nowadays most of my disc space
is gobbled up by photographs I've taken myself, and I have no
programmers to blame.

Nonetheless, if programmers followed Mr Nebenzahl's advice (which is
generally a good thing, based on his past posts!), you would have room to
store dozens, perhaps hundreds more photographs on your hard drive.

BTW, if you're storing all those images on your hard drive, I'm guessing you
never had a hard drive failure. It's not a day at the beach!

"Ken Hart" writes:

Nonetheless, if programmers followed Mr Nebenzahl's advice (which is
generally a good thing, based on his past posts!), you would have room to
store dozens, perhaps hundreds more photographs on your hard drive.

But then I wouldn't have all the software I have now, as the programmers
would still be making version 0.1's, year after another.

BTW, if you're storing all those images on your hard drive, I'm guessing you
never had a hard drive failure. It's not a day at the beach!

Who said I store them _only_ on my hard drive?

Ken Hart wrote:

BTW, if you're storing all those images on your hard drive, I'm guessing you
never had a hard drive failure. It's not a day at the beach!



Never had a simultaneous failure of the hard drive AND *both* backups.

Pudentame spake thus:

Ken Hart wrote:

BTW, if you're storing all those images on your hard drive, I'm
guessing you never had a hard drive failure. It's not a day at the beach!

Never had a simultaneous failure of the hard drive AND *both* backups.

You have *backups*? What a novel idea ...


--
Any system of knowledge that is capable of listing films in order
of use of the word "****" is incapable of writing a good summary
and analysis of the Philippine-American War. And vice-versa.
This is an inviolable rule.

- Matthew White, referring to Wikipedia on his WikiWatch site
(http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

David Nebenzahl wrote:
Pudentame spake thus:

Ken Hart wrote:

BTW, if you're storing all those images on your hard drive, I'm
guessing you never had a hard drive failure. It's not a day at the
beach!

Never had a simultaneous failure of the hard drive AND *both* backups.

You have *backups*? What a novel idea ...



Actually, I think it was a Novel idea ... William Gibson IIRC. ;-D

Graham Fountain wrote:
On a slightly similar note, in cases where I've got a digital B&W (scan
and photoshop fix from a neg, image shot digitally etc), I've often
pondered a way of getting a real B&W print. RA4 digital minilab prints
from frontiers etc just don't do it for me, and inkjet B&W prints look
just disgusting. The method i've considered is using an inkjet printer
to print a negative onto transparency paper at the final size (5x7,
8x10) and then contact print that onto true B&W paper. I suspect it
should go ok, because B&W inkjet prints look horrible because of the mix
of shades of colour. If it is then printed onto B&W paper that won't be
an issue.

First of all, just like conventional silver gelatin prints,
not all inkjet B&W prints are created equal. In particular, the choice
of inkset and media is critical; there are quite a few aftermarket
inksets available, mostly for Epson printers, which produce extremely
good results. These inksets use multiple black-pigmented inks at
varying density levels to produce monochrome prints.

In fact, Epson heard loud and clear and has introduced a number of
printers which feature an "Advanced B&W" (ABW) mode. ABW mode uses
primarily black-pigmented inks at three density levels (Ultrachrome K3)
with very small amounts of yellow and cyan for tone control. I have an
Epson Stylus Photo R2400 and the results are truly outstanding and,
if you believe the Wilhelm numbers, archival for well over 100 years.

Some folks also produce negatives using inkjet output, too.

An excellent mailing list on this topic - the production of high-quality
B&W prints from digital images - is the Yahoo Group:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/D...WhiteThePrint/

For the uninitiated, it's amazing eye-opener to what's happened
in the world of digital B&W printing.

Cheers,
Dana