Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site harvard.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!sasaki
From: sasaki@harvard.ARPA (Marty Sasaki)
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Slide film vs Color Neg. film
Message-ID: <489@harvard.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 8-Nov-85 14:51:26 EST
Article-I.D.: harvard.489
Posted: Fri Nov  8 14:51:26 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Nov-85 15:22:47 EST
References: <298@tekig4.UUCP> <349@vaxwaller.UUCP>
Reply-To: sasaki@harvard.UUCP (Marty sasaki)
Organization: Harvard Science Center
Lines: 26
Summary: 

Which is cheaper, slide film or negative film? Why negative film, of
course. For which type of film is processing cheaper? Again, negative
film.

I always send my color film to Kodak for processing. When I send
negative film, I almost never have prints made. Making a color contact
sheet is very easy to do. Not counting my time to make the contact
sheet, I save about 50 cents processing negative film.

I want to emphasize that this debate is silly. As other posters have
mentioned, all that matters is how you use the film. One type isn't
better than another. One type may be better than another for certain
things, but isn't universally better for everything.

By the way, dye transfers are usually made from slide film. From the
positive image, a set of separation negatives are made. These
negatives are used to produce the positives that are used to actually
make the prints. It is too bad that this process is so difficult and
expensive, imagine the possibilities for controlling things when you
can separately control the contrast of each of the colors.
-- 
----------------
  Marty Sasaki				net:   sasaki@harvard.{arpa,uucp}
  Havard University Science Center	phone: 617-495-1270
  One Oxford Street
  Cambridge, MA 02138