Re: (erielack) Kodak Kills 2 of 3 Kodachromes

["Hank Sundermeyer" <sunderhj_@_email.msn.com>]

Sic transit gloria mundi.
Are we all happy now...bow down and kiss the arse of obscene profits,
balderdash on society.  We're all part and parcel with it, 401k's ,IRA's and
any of the other instruments to make money out of nothing.

How long do you think it's going to be before there's an affordable handheld
Hubble Telescope.  That's about the resolution  needed to get to just
mediocre photographic file performance.  The technology as it is available
now, even at significant cost, is just a notch above toy quality.  Perhaps
not even as good as a 1957 Kodak Brownie when it comes to enlargement.  Boy,
are we taken over by the flim-flam.

This doens't begin to handle the notion of whether or not the subject in a
digital image is real or has it been "edited" into pure fiction.

This is why the film is gone.

Just my opinion, apology in advance for off topic material and soapbox.
Hank Sundermeyer
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill K." <pontiac_@_dreamscape.com>
To: "Erie Lackawanna List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: (erielack) Kodak Kills 2 of 3 Kodachromes


> This leads me to wonder, even if we all hoard a pile of Kodachrome, how
long
> will they continue to process it?
>
> Bill K.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Schuyler G Larrabee" <sgl2_@_ix.netcom.com>
> To: "Erie Lackawanna List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 12:04 AM
> Subject: Fw: (erielack) Kodak Kills 2 of 3 Kodachromes
>
>
> > Here's a comment from a friend of mine who would know . . .
> >
> > SGL
> >
> > Subject: Re: (erielack) Kodak Kills 2 of 3 Kodachromes
> >
> >
> > > This will continue and Kodachrome 64 will become a thing of the past
> later
> > > this year.
> > >
> > > Keep in mind that over 50% of the photo sales are now digital.
> > >
> > > We film camera guys are dinosaurs.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

------------------------------