High quality masked dups of slides have always been available. However many a publication has used reference dups just fine. Reference dups also have usually been used for slide shows as they did not last long ad they were cheaper.
For those who do not know the difference a masked duplicate is one where they made a mask to control contrast, and usually is a slide to negative to masked slide process. Typically it cost around $10 for one dup, additional at the same time were a lot cheaper. Reference dups where what you got at the non-pro labs just a slide to slide copy with no serious controls for color and contrast. Used to be about 69 cents each. -graywolf Mark Roberts wrote: > Mark Cassino wrote: > >> Mark Roberts wrote: >>>>> The thought of that makes me shudder... >>>> But... digital makes thing so easy! Everyone says so! It must be > true. >>> Hey just think about me "backing up" the hundreds of slides and >>> negatives in my archives! >> Just send them to the lab to be dupped :-) > > Ah yes, but then you have the loss of image quality in a dupe slide and > the expense as well! Oh joy! > > Seriously, one of the big advantages of digital is neither speed nor > convenience, but "duplicability". The ability to make many identical > copies of the original and store them in separate locations. There was > an archive of negatives from the Kennedy presidency that was lost with > the World Trade Center. Had they been digital files rather than > negatives there would almost certainly been copies at other locations > that would have survived. > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
