If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
Helle All,
I usually print my own digital pictures on my HP 7960, using HP ink cartridges and HP Premium Plus paper, and the results are excellent. I recently took some newsworthy pictures, and not being near my home, went to a local shop to make quick 4x6" (10 x 15 cm.) color prints from my SD card on a Sony machine. Well, I could not believe how bad the prints were. Colors were desaturated, details were soft , and a fine haze permeated all the pictures. Later the same day, when I arrived home, I printed the same images from the same SD memory card, and the pictures were beautiful in every way. When I compared the store prints with my home prints, it was akin to comparing a disposable film camera with a Leica. Yes, the store prints cost me 29¢ each, while the home prints cost me about 40¢ each. So to me, the cheaper prints were no bargain. I might add that some months ago, I tried a Kodak machine in another shop, and those pictures were also very bad. I am wondering if any on-line printing services are any better. Morton Linder |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
I don't print too much at outside printers, but my experience is that
Kodak machines in stores are usually pretty good because they don't get as much use as the "1 hour" machines, which around here are generally Fuji. The only websites I've unloaded to are also Fuji. The one print place I use for good stuff uses Kodak and the print quality is great -- but you pay for it. All things being equal, I think Kodak has better skin tones and Fuji is just as good for outside shots (greens). But the Fuji machines get heavy use so all things aren't equal. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
I have had the same problem, however, your camera settings are probably not
set to the same settings as their printer. I had that same problem until I asked the specs of the printing machine. With professional printers their monitor and color settings may be different than your settings. Once your settings are changed to match theirs the prints will be similar. Best not to use those print machines as they are not individualised and mainly have one setting and do not change. "Pat" wrote in message oups.com... I don't print too much at outside printers, but my experience is that Kodak machines in stores are usually pretty good because they don't get as much use as the "1 hour" machines, which around here are generally Fuji. The only websites I've unloaded to are also Fuji. The one print place I use for good stuff uses Kodak and the print quality is great -- but you pay for it. All things being equal, I think Kodak has better skin tones and Fuji is just as good for outside shots (greens). But the Fuji machines get heavy use so all things aren't equal. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
"newfysnapshot" wrote in message ... I have had the same problem, however, your camera settings are probably not set to the same settings as their printer. I had that same problem until I asked the specs of the printing machine. With professional printers their monitor and color settings may be different than your settings. Once your settings are changed to match theirs the prints will be similar. Best not to use those print machines as they are not individualised and mainly have one setting and do not change. "Pat" wrote in message oups.com... I don't print too much at outside printers, but my experience is that Kodak machines in stores are usually pretty good because they don't get as much use as the "1 hour" machines, which around here are generally Fuji. The only websites I've unloaded to are also Fuji. The one print place I use for good stuff uses Kodak and the print quality is great -- but you pay for it. All things being equal, I think Kodak has better skin tones and Fuji is just as good for outside shots (greens). But the Fuji machines get heavy use so all things aren't equal. Try MPIX .com I have never been disappointed and there prices are great. 2-3 day turn around. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
Morton Linder wrote:
Yes, the store prints cost me 29¢ each, while the home prints cost me about 40¢ each. So to me, the cheaper prints were no bargain. You got taken! Exorbitant price and low quality (depleted chemicals?). Longs Drugs charges 21 cents a print, Costco Mall-Wart 12 cents IIRC. All use Fuji Frontiers that are virtually certain to do better. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
"Old Salt card carrying Curmudgeon" wrote in message ... On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 21:02:35 -0500 the fame writer, Morton Linder wrote not much to be useful on, "Machine Prints Versus Home Prints", I am wondering if any on-line printing services are any better. I like Shutterfly for anything over 8x11, or if I need more then a few 4x8. http://www.shutterfly.com/ -- DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from myself offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will demonstrate. I've used Shutterfly, WinkFlash, YorkPhoto, ClubPhoto, Walmart(on line) and maybe others. I can see very little difference between any of them, so use WinkFlash, good pricing and they print file number on back. Dave Cohen |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
Morton Linder wrote:
Helle All, I usually print my own digital pictures on my HP 7960, using HP ink cartridges and HP Premium Plus paper, and the results are excellent. I recently took some newsworthy pictures, and not being near my home, went to a local shop to make quick 4x6" (10 x 15 cm.) color prints from my SD card on a Sony machine. Look out for a decent shop with a Fuji Frontier machine. My local one is very good - but the kit is really only as good as the operator. I am sure it is quite possible to mistreat truly excellent kit to give appalling results if you try. It must be a really bad operation if they can't print 6x4 or 5x7 to a decent standard. Well, I could not believe how bad the prints were. Colors were desaturated, details were soft , and a fine haze permeated all the pictures. No reason why this should be so. Operator error seems likely. Later the same day, when I arrived home, I printed the same images from the same SD memory card, and the pictures were beautiful in every way. When I compared the store prints with my home prints, it was akin to comparing a disposable film camera with a Leica. Yes, the store prints cost me 29¢ each, while the home prints cost me about 40¢ each. So to me, the cheaper prints were no bargain. Store prints at a quality UK printers are around 17p each once you go above 50 per batch. You can get much cheaper but lose quality. You seem to have paid through the nose for poor quality. I might add that some months ago, I tried a Kodak machine in another shop, and those pictures were also very bad. I am wondering if any on-line printing services are any better. I suspect on-line printing services may be subject to filesize restrictions that make high quality images harder to acheive. I put all the smaller sizes through my local print shop in batches - half the price of printing at home and the surface finish on their glossy material is better than any inkjet media I have seen to date. Regards, Martin Brown |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:39:37 GMT, "Dave Cohen" wrote:
I've used Shutterfly, WinkFlash, YorkPhoto, ClubPhoto, Walmart(on line) and maybe others. I can see very little difference between any of them, so use WinkFlash, good pricing and they print file number on back. That's good news, Dave, since I just submitted my first order to Winkflash about an hour ago! I read about them, I think, in the dpreview.com Panasonic forum a few weeks ago. Someone mentioned that he'd had good results with a poster-sized print. The price seems right. 11 5x7's for about four bucks, shipped. I was noodling around the net, looking for a good source of cheap picture frames. I stumbled across an interesting outfit that offers a huge selection of either complete frames and framing kits, parts, or a turnkey service where you upload your digital image and they'll print, frame, and assemble it for you. I haven't done any comparison shopping but, right off the top of my head their prices seemed reasonable. The really neat part is that you can upload your image, then try out various frame and matting combinations. Your own image, framed and matted, is displayed in a preview pane. I had lots of fun trying to match frame styles and matting to the next large image that I'll be having printed. http://www.pictureframes.com Tom |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 18:00:01 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote: No reason why this should be so. Operator error seems likely. No kidding! The operators often know very little about their machines. Result? $60,000 printer gives crap. I had one operator actually try to convince me that I was holding a matt finish print, when it was quite obviously high gloss. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Machine Prints Versus Home Prints
Morton Linder wrote:
I am wondering if any on-line printing services are any better. The only time I've see outside printing look better was with B&W images, inkjets have a hard time doing them well. Otherwise, I print at home. My inkjet prints a wider gamut than most "pro" labs printers can deal with and the prints just look better. -- Stacey |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can Home Produced Prints Equal Lab Prints? | Denis Boisclair | Digital Photography | 13 | November 13th 04 03:20 PM |
Dry-mounting Epson prints? | ... | Digital Photography | 0 | November 1st 04 11:05 PM |
Ink Jet Prints Problems | Marshall Thurman | Digital Photography | 27 | August 16th 04 11:05 PM |
Digital darkroom | Paul Friday | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 84 | July 9th 04 05:26 AM |
Archival inksets for inkjet printers. | Steve House | In The Darkroom | 29 | February 10th 04 10:52 PM |