A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Europe
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Digital photography, changing the world



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 20th, 2004, 07:42 PM
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Frank F. Matthews writes:

There are several reasons for printing your photos at home. One is
that, after I've eliminated the obvious poor shots, I like to look at a
physical reproduction to pick the small number that deserve a high price
print.


The test print you make at home will cost more than the "high-priced
print." Additionally, it provides no indication at all of how the
high-priced print will look, since the printing processes are completely
different. You're better off picking what you want to print by viewing
photos on the screen.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
  #12  
Old November 20th, 2004, 09:50 PM
Miguel Cruz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
I've had a look at the results on different printers in shops,
especially ones that gear themselves specifically towards printing
direct from camera, and the quality doesn't seem much better.


Many of the shops just have inkjet printers like you might have at home. For
really good results you have to use the online places that send you the
prints by post - the stuff they do is indistinguishable from film prints if
your image resolution is sufficient.

There are a few large shops that have this equipment, but it's expensive so
not every little corner pharmacy will bother.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
  #13  
Old November 20th, 2004, 09:50 PM
Miguel Cruz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
I've had a look at the results on different printers in shops,
especially ones that gear themselves specifically towards printing
direct from camera, and the quality doesn't seem much better.


Many of the shops just have inkjet printers like you might have at home. For
really good results you have to use the online places that send you the
prints by post - the stuff they do is indistinguishable from film prints if
your image resolution is sufficient.

There are a few large shops that have this equipment, but it's expensive so
not every little corner pharmacy will bother.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
  #14  
Old November 20th, 2004, 09:55 PM
chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Miguel Cruz wrote:

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn

wrote:
I've had a look at the results on different printers in shops,
especially ones that gear themselves specifically towards printing
direct from camera, and the quality doesn't seem much better.


Many of the shops just have inkjet printers like you might have at home. For
really good results you have to use the online places that send you the
prints by post - the stuff they do is indistinguishable from film prints if
your image resolution is sufficient.


That's definitely what I've seen. It's just that the marketing often
makes it seem as though it's 'the same' as having professional prints.
Waste of money for many people, probably.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
  #15  
Old November 20th, 2004, 09:55 PM
chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Miguel Cruz wrote:

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn

wrote:
I've had a look at the results on different printers in shops,
especially ones that gear themselves specifically towards printing
direct from camera, and the quality doesn't seem much better.


Many of the shops just have inkjet printers like you might have at home. For
really good results you have to use the online places that send you the
prints by post - the stuff they do is indistinguishable from film prints if
your image resolution is sufficient.


That's definitely what I've seen. It's just that the marketing often
makes it seem as though it's 'the same' as having professional prints.
Waste of money for many people, probably.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
  #16  
Old November 20th, 2004, 10:17 PM
Go Fig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Miguel Cruz
wrote:

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn
wrote:
I've had a look at the results on different printers in shops,
especially ones that gear themselves specifically towards printing
direct from camera, and the quality doesn't seem much better.


Many of the shops just have inkjet printers like you might have at home. For
really good results you have to use the online places that send you the
prints by post - the stuff they do is indistinguishable from film prints if
your image resolution is sufficient.



I'm VERY satisfied with the service I get from Kodak via Mac's iPhoto
(the most elegant digital library I've seen). I always get it via the
mail in 2 days... cost about $3 on most shipments.

I wonder what the results will be with my new Sony that I will be
getting shortly, it that has: RAW (no compression), whatever that turns
out to be... I kinda think I'm still going to need to convert it to a
jpeg for processing...

jay
Sat Nov 20, 2004




There are a few large shops that have this equipment, but it's expensive so
not every little corner pharmacy will bother.

miguel

  #17  
Old November 20th, 2004, 10:37 PM
Jeremy Henderson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 2004-11-20 22:17:58 +0100, Go Fig said:

I'm VERY satisfied with the service I get from Kodak via Mac's iPhoto
(the most elegant digital library I've seen). I always get it via the
mail in 2 days... cost about $3 on most shipments.

I wonder what the results will be with my new Sony that I will be
getting shortly, it that has: RAW (no compression), whatever that turns
out to be... I kinda think I'm still going to need to convert it to a
jpeg for processing...


You will indeed. Plus, iPhoto won't handle RAW files, so you'll need to
rethink your cataloguing strategy.

J;
--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG

  #18  
Old November 20th, 2004, 10:50 PM
Go Fig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Jeremy Henderson
wrote:

On 2004-11-20 22:17:58 +0100, Go Fig said:

I'm VERY satisfied with the service I get from Kodak via Mac's iPhoto
(the most elegant digital library I've seen). I always get it via the
mail in 2 days... cost about $3 on most shipments.

I wonder what the results will be with my new Sony that I will be
getting shortly, it that has: RAW (no compression), whatever that turns
out to be... I kinda think I'm still going to need to convert it to a
jpeg for processing...


You will indeed. Plus, iPhoto won't handle RAW files, so you'll need to
rethink your cataloguing strategy.



If the format has a market, iPhoto could incorporate the format. My
new camera will have 7.1 (replacing a 5.0, but w/ a fried LCD) which
seems very good for the size prints I need.

jay
Sat Nov 20, 2004



J;

  #19  
Old November 20th, 2004, 10:51 PM
Susan Wachob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hi-

I just went through your photographs on your website. Your photography
is beautiful, the locales even more beautiful. Once I figured out how
your site was layed out, it was easy to use. I especially appreciated
that you showed all sorts of general views and lots of the details of
any locale you photographed.

I've been in much of France, but not the specific areas you highlighted.
It was absolutely breathtaking! Whether I go to that specific area- or
somewhere like it- I'm now deeply longing to return.

I live in San Francisco, an area many people, including myself, find
exquisite. Aren't we lucky to have so much breathtaking beauty- of very
different sorts- to steep ourselves in!

Thank you so much!!!

Susan
  #20  
Old November 20th, 2004, 11:29 PM
Jeremy Henderson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 2004-11-20 22:50:37 +0100, Go Fig said:

In article , Jeremy Henderson
wrote:

On 2004-11-20 22:17:58 +0100, Go Fig said:

I wonder what the results will be with my new Sony that I will be
getting shortly, it that has: RAW (no compression), whatever that turns
out to be... I kinda think I'm still going to need to convert it to a
jpeg for processing...


You will indeed. Plus, iPhoto won't handle RAW files, so you'll need to
rethink your cataloguing strategy.



If the format has a market, iPhoto could incorporate the format.


Maybe, but it's quite complicated. Consider that the JPGs that you get
out of a digital camera are the result of a bunch of processes
including physical and digital filters. The RAW files are just what is
recorded by the sensor, before any subsequent processing takes place,
so what state it is in depends on the camera, and the format will be
dependent on the whims of the manufacturer. Since iPhoto is a sort of
mass-market product, the value of trying to keep track of individual
camera formats may not be worth it, and the results obtained by the
casual photographer using such formats may be disappointing.

J;
--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
holland america cruise holland america cruise line alaska cruise holland america holland america cruise ship Islam Promote Peace Cruises 3 July 31st, 2004 10:31 PM
Seven Seas Voyager's 107-night first world cruise Jan. - April 2005. Anchors Away Cruise Center Cruises 1 April 2nd, 2004 12:39 AM
High resolution digital world map for travel (1km resolution) Michal Tina Africa 1 February 29th, 2004 02:57 AM
Digital world map for travel c186282 Africa 0 September 10th, 2003 01:38 AM
Digital world map for travel Colin Africa 0 September 9th, 2003 08:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.