> Michael Stutz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Take 100 of your negatives to a photo shop who can turn it into a
> > Kodak PhotoCD. [..] This is a much better solution than scanning it
> > yourself, as you'll never be able to scan it as good as they can
> > (the PhotoCD process uses clean rooms, the images are very high
> > resolution, etc).
> This is in stark contrast to Kodak's other digital option.
Yeah, the scan quality on those JPEGs you've got online are quite lacking.
Looks like this "service" is a consumer option for folks who want to send
their pics to Aunt Sally in Florida via email and aren't concerned about
archival quality, let alone making reprints or enlargements from the scanned
image (which is another useful feature of PhotoCD -- import an image into
the GIMP or Photoshop or whatever it is you use, do some fiddling and send
the output to a service bureau for a reprint image that's been digitally
retouched on your PC).
As someone mentioned, Phil Greenspun's http://photo.net/photo/ site has some
good info on PhotoCD as well as another format I haven't played with,
FlashPix. (It stores 400 images on a disc and is newer than PhotoCD.)
Michael Stutz . http://dsl.org/m/ . copyright disclaimer etc
email@example.com : finger for pgp : http://dsl.org/copyleft/