digital print kiosks - how do they work?

Hi John,

I think the new PS 8 has bicubic sharp setting for interpolation.

I do most of my printing at Costco off of CD's. I PS my images and then let
Costco (Bend,Oregon) do the printing. Very good results and prices are right.
Gives my two inkjet and one dye sub home printers a rest.

My guess is that using a blind test -- you would have triouble differentiating
between your prints at normal and interpolated values (within reason).

I have a Fuji S7000 camera at 6 megapixels (with camera interpolation for 12
megapixels). hard to see any difference in blind testing.

I'm curious about the workings of the Noritsu printer and the Fuji Crystal
Archive papers used at Costco. This may be a chemical process printer similar
(samer?) as used with film processing. Results for my work are outstanding
(WYSIWYG).

Best,

Conrad

Conrad Weiler
Camp Sherman, Oregon

Hi John,

I think the new PS 8 has bicubic sharp setting for interpolation.

I do most of my printing at Costco off of CD's. I PS my images and then let
Costco (Bend,Oregon) do the printing. Very good results and prices are right.
Gives my two inkjet and one dye sub home printers a rest.

My guess is that using a blind test -- you would have triouble differentiating
between your prints at normal and interpolated values (within reason).

I have a Fuji S7000 camera at 6 megapixels (with camera interpolation for 12
megapixels). hard to see any difference in blind testing.

I'm curious about the workings of the Noritsu printer and the Fuji Crystal
Archive papers used at Costco. This may be a chemical process printer similar
(samer?) as used with film processing. Results for my work are outstanding
(WYSIWYG).

Best,

Conrad

Conrad Weiler
Camp Sherman, Oregon

I was actually working on (the software for) a digital photo printer kiosk
until recently.

Basically it's just a PC with a good photo-quality printer built-in. In the
kit I was working on, the printer was 6x4 only. I'm not really up on photo
printer hardware, I'm just a software man, but I have this vague
recollection that it had some sort of replacable belt in it which was
consumed as you did the prints. Maybe that will enable some one to tell us
what technology it was.

The actual printing software was all bought-in so I cannot comment on how it
interpolated or reduced the image as required, nor what the pixel resolution
of the printer was. The software worked much as one might expect. When a
card was inserted we sucked all the photos off onto a scratch area on the
hard disk. Our software then offered the user simple cropping, rotating
etc. facilities before throwing the finally selected prints at the printer
(and charging per print).

Keith

I was actually working on (the software for) a digital photo printer kiosk
until recently.

Basically it's just a PC with a good photo-quality printer built-in. In the
kit I was working on, the printer was 6x4 only. I'm not really up on photo
printer hardware, I'm just a software man, but I have this vague
recollection that it had some sort of replacable belt in it which was
consumed as you did the prints. Maybe that will enable some one to tell us
what technology it was.

The actual printing software was all bought-in so I cannot comment on how it
interpolated or reduced the image as required, nor what the pixel resolution
of the printer was. The software worked much as one might expect. When a
card was inserted we sucked all the photos off onto a scratch area on the
hard disk. Our software then offered the user simple cropping, rotating
etc. facilities before throwing the finally selected prints at the printer
(and charging per print).

Keith

I bought the Nikkor 70-300 D lens, shot a few dozen test shots and
returned it, as it was NOT a decent lens. It was noticeably softer than
my D70 kit lens. I then picked up the Sigma 70-300 Super II APO lens,
and it's a keeper, as long as you stop down a bit, It's definitely a
better lens than the cheap Nikkor zoom.

I bought the Nikkor 70-300 D lens, shot a few dozen test shots and
returned it, as it was NOT a decent lens. It was noticeably softer than
my D70 kit lens. I then picked up the Sigma 70-300 Super II APO lens,
and it's a keeper, as long as you stop down a bit, It's definitely a
better lens than the cheap Nikkor zoom.

"Keith Sheppard" writes:

I was actually working on (the software for) a digital photo printer kiosk
until recently.

Basically it's just a PC with a good photo-quality printer built-in. In the
kit I was working on, the printer was 6x4 only. I'm not really up on photo
printer hardware, I'm just a software man, but I have this vague
recollection that it had some sort of replacable belt in it which was
consumed as you did the prints. Maybe that will enable some one to tell us
what technology it was.

That's true of the machines with dye-sub printers (such as the Kodak machines).
It is not true of mini-labs that many stores have, which uses conventional
photographic processes to print the image. As I understand the process, a
digital image is projected onto photographic paper, which is then developed,
etc. The same machine takes in both film and digital (though digital bypasses
the first part of the process developing the negatives and then scanning them
into electronic format).

It depends on the machine what the resolution is, but common values are 300dpi
(most Fuji), or 320dpi (Noresuti, spelling). It is likely that the staff of
these machines at places like CostCo will have no clue what the resolution is,
and give you the blank stare. To them it presumably is just magic.

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org

"Keith Sheppard" writes:

I was actually working on (the software for) a digital photo printer kiosk
until recently.

Basically it's just a PC with a good photo-quality printer built-in. In the
kit I was working on, the printer was 6x4 only. I'm not really up on photo
printer hardware, I'm just a software man, but I have this vague
recollection that it had some sort of replacable belt in it which was
consumed as you did the prints. Maybe that will enable some one to tell us
what technology it was.

That's true of the machines with dye-sub printers (such as the Kodak machines).
It is not true of mini-labs that many stores have, which uses conventional
photographic processes to print the image. As I understand the process, a
digital image is projected onto photographic paper, which is then developed,
etc. The same machine takes in both film and digital (though digital bypasses
the first part of the process developing the negatives and then scanning them
into electronic format).

It depends on the machine what the resolution is, but common values are 300dpi
(most Fuji), or 320dpi (Noresuti, spelling). It is likely that the staff of
these machines at places like CostCo will have no clue what the resolution is,
and give you the blank stare. To them it presumably is just magic.

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org