this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
7 points (100.0% liked)
Retro Technology
461 readers
1 users here now
A place for discussion, videos, pictures, and other related content of retro and vintage technology of all kinds. Especially retro tech that is still in use today.
There are plenty of excellent communities for retro PCs so that content is better suited for those communities.
Rules:
- No NSFW
- Respectful discourse required
- No hate speech, bigotry, racism, homophobia, sexism, etc.
- No spam or advertising
- No AI generated content, posts, or comments
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's that definitely (though in theory it should at least be pretty close to/a little better than a 110), but also it mentions that Kodak made special processing equipment for the disc film but most labs opted not to use that in lieu of using their existing equipment.
I'm curious to see the difference between a developed/enlarged print from a regular lab and one that used Kodak's specialized equipment.
I'd like to see a comparison, too. I laughed when they described labs just using their own equipment. Unless it was a game changer they're not going to spend extra on specialized equipment just for that camera.
Exactly. Though it seems that Kodak thought it was going to be a game changer. At least, for consumer-level models. You'd think they'd have leased the equipment or something rather than expecting the labs to shell out for it, like you said, just for that camera.