Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 1:40pm

   
   

   If you compare the cost of a printer plus cartridge plus paper plus aggrevation, as oppossed to uploading them to wal-mart and picking them up the next day, wal-mart is easier and cheaper. unless yer some kind of perv and are only printing "private" pictures

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Wal-Mart is great!

   

   Anonymous Coward, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 2:25pm

   
   

   Well, except for the massive amount of weirdos. I often take my photos to them for printing. I save my edited images back to my CF card, pop it in their machine, and an hour later, I have prints. The quality is excellent and the price isn't bad.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   I'm with the photo labs on this one...

   

   Ollie Tabooger, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 2:42pm

   
   

   Costco does prints for $0.19 which is on real photo quality paper. To do it at home, I need the printer, the special paper and ink cartidges (which we all know what a scam they are). And once I start using the ink cartridge, I have to print enough photos before the cartridge dries out. And even if it all works perfectly, it probably won't look as good as from a photo processor. This is a classic economy of scale.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Some photo labs are good

   

   Anonymous Coward, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 2:56pm

   
   

   There is a sale at a local photo lab where I can get prints from digital files for $0.15 USD. Unfortunately, this is only a December sale. in January the price goes up to almost $0.40. As long as the price is reasonable I'm with the photo labs. But, when they charge me more for printing from a digitial file than from a negative I stop using their services. The highest price I've seen in Canada is almost $0.60 per print while I've seen reprints from negatives go for less than $0.30. WTF?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Develop Your Own

   

   Beck, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 5:45pm

   
   

   You can develop and print your own film photos at home, but no one does it. Why not?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Aspect Ratio Questions

   

   Beck, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 6:00pm

   
   

   Film photos are 4x6 inches. Digital photos have an aspect ratio of 4:3, which means that the print shop has to cut the top and bottom off of each photo.
   
   How long will it be until the photo processors can print digital photos in 4:3 ratio?
   
   How long until photo albums and frames can handle 4:3 photos?
   
   Since inkjet photo printers are specifically intended to print digital photos, why don't they print 4:3 photos, and why don't they sell 4:3 photo paper?
   
   (Maybe the question should be: why don't digital cameras take photos in the 2:3 ratio used by film cameras?)

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Re: Aspect Ratio Questions

   

   jburst, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 6:14pm

   
   

   Higher-end digital SLRs use 2:3 aspect ratio sensors.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Outsource, outsource, outsource

   

   jburst, Dec 18th, 2003 @ 6:18pm

   
   

   Unless you're so high-strung that you need to have your photos printed immediately, it's much easier and cheaper to bring a disc or card to a photo lab. Costco does 4x6 prints for $0.19 each, and they're real photo process, not some (unknown lifespan) inkjet or dye-sub "prints".

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   retail digital printing

   

   Thomas Brown, Dec 19th, 2003 @ 3:37am

   
   

   I take maybe 15-20 pictures a year; some of those related to work; why should I spend money on an expensive digital picture capable printer in my home when Walmart can do it for me? Wake up! Not everyone wants to be an Ansel Adams. I enjoy computers and electronics, got an expensive PC, an Ipaq PDA and Smartphone; I'm just not interested in photography as a hobby.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    No Subject Given

    

    Chris, Dec 19th, 2003 @ 5:19am

    
    

    I take hundreds of pictures of year. (we have kids...) It's easier and cheaper to upload the images to ofoto.com and buy prints at .29 each than print at home.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    Re: No Subject Given

    

    Beck, Dec 19th, 2003 @ 6:41am

    
    

    Until recently the only available means to print digital photos was to do it yourself. That doesn't mean it is the best way, and if a better way to do it comes along why shouldn't people take advantage?
    
    As we can see above, there are plenty of tech-savvy people who have the ability to print their own photos but would rather have the lab do it. This doesn't mean they are lazy, it just means that maybe there is a better way than doing it yourself.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    Why print at all?

    

    Rootman, Dec 19th, 2003 @ 9:01am

    
    

    ---

    
    Why I agree with the "better quality paper" and "cheaper than ink" arguments I ask

    Why Print At All?

    I've had a PC hooked to the TV for years, copies of my pics on my desktop, laptop and home server and pretty nifty web based interface to show them from any machine. I've never liked passing pictures around being 2 or 3 behind as the first slow-poke in line get's the explanation of the contents while I guess "now THIS is Uncle Marvin? Or Aunt Melba???". Showing pics on the TV is not only larger but more fun as everyone get's to veiw them at once. Not to mention using a movie maker to make an actual presentation of the pictures - sound, narration - the whole works.

    PC based multi-media centers for the home are getting cheaper and cheaper every day. Heck even a lot of PDA's will show the picture in a more "mobile" format.

    ---

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    Re: Why print at all?

    

    Chris, Dec 19th, 2003 @ 10:44am

    
    

    I do that too. I make a DVD retrospective of the year and putit in my wife's Christmas stocking each year. WE are multi-media in my family, electronic and print :)

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    Costco Digital Photo Print

    

    Andrew Ling, Dec 20th, 2003 @ 10:45pm

    
    

    Yes Costco photo print is low cost but they becomes very busy already. U have to wait to use the machine to place order because some customers (like me) take slightly longer to figure what they are doing. Sometimes machine also break down or needs service.
    Generally I am satisfied with quality and cost.
    

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    foto time is money

    

    Dr. Don Blake, Dec 22nd, 2003 @ 8:07am

    
    

    When that young tech savvy generation has a couple of kids, job, house, animals, soccer & music lessons to run kids to, elderly parents to diaper, etc. they'll find they don't have time to run a foto print shop at home. The best thing ever is e-mailing the fotos to the developer and getting them back snail mail. That's been great for our needs ...

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    Re: Aspect Ratio Questions

    

    Costco Photo Employee, Feb 3rd, 2004 @ 2:03am

    
    

    The aspect ratio of regular 35mm print film is 3:2
    
    Some digital cameras let you shoot with a 3:2 aspect ratio, some don't.
    
    If you shoot at a 4:3 ratio on your digital camera you can save it as a 4x6, 5x7, etc. and burn it to CD that way using a jpeg file format and it will print just fine at a lab like Costco, Wal-Mart, etc.
    
    There are quite a bit of pros that come into Costco to get some work printed. You can go to Drycreekphoto.com and calibrate your monitor to the specs of the location where you'll be going. Therefore, any editing you do with your photos at home using Adobe PhotoShop, etc. will come out exactly like they appear on your monitor (as long as you calibrate it at the afforemnetioned website).

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment