🚀 go-pugleaf

Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>>John Rappe <jrappe@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>>Geoff Gass wrote:

>>>>>>>Here's a good one; remember those cameras that used film on a
>>>>>>>round kinda cartridge thingy?  Looked like a ViewMaster thing?
>>>>>>>Who can create prints from that?

>>>>>>you mean 110 or 126?  catridge with 2 spools, film started on one,
>>>>>>got the other (ie no rewind like 135)

>>>>>You don't know what a viewmaster is? Your childhood was deprived.

>>>>oh, duh, yes.  I guess I've never seen film that looked like that.

>>>kodak disc. it was a failure.

>>More like a ripoff. Tiny image, stupid format. What's the point?

>no handling of the film, easy reprints, you always get a contact sheet.

Is dealing with leader from spooled film or a 35 mm cartridge that big a
deal that Kodak lost business? As far as a contact sheet, any processor
would supply that if asked and many simply included one as a service.
Didn't the processors have to buy extra equipment from Kodak to deal
with the format?

>They blow up big enough for most anything.

C'mon. Kodak simply figured out a way to sell you a lot less film.

>An APS-ish version of 120 would be awesome.

?