Re Realist film-loading question

[P3D Dave Worrell <dworrell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Larry Berlin>Yeah, sure it is! (sarcasm) Buying and processing 
>film is anything but cheap in my estimation. That's part of why

>a roll of film stays in my camera at times for months. It's
only 
>cheap if you have significant amounts of disposable income.  ;
-)

I'm not rich, I had to work out lay-away plans w/ Dr. T to get
most of my stereo equipment. But, as I said in my original post,
$12 for film and processing is not excessive, compared to the
cost (emotional?) of a blank roll of film. Wasting a few frames
to insure that the camera is loaded costs what, a buck? It also
has nothing to do with how much film you shoot, I average a
couple months per roll myself. But when I do take a picture I
want to KNOW that there is film behind the lenses.

As an underpaid civil servant ;-) and grad student, I understand
12 dollars can be serious money, but the fraction of that
"wasted" on loading is not an issue. The real issue is getting
the 12 bucks. Now, where the heck is my check from Publisher's
Clearinghouse? :-\ ;-) :-\ ;-) :-\

Dave Worrell (dworrell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
PFPFT - Popular Front for the Preservation of Fifties Technology

Publications Technician
State of Alaska, Section of Epidemiology


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