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