 |
|
|
|
Next: Moon Possum
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jul 07, 2006
Posts: 157
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 9:57 am
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:53:53 GMT
"Roy G" <roy.gibson1.DeleteThis@REMOVE.tesco.net> wrote:
>
> "Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:X_gzh.665$H77.594@trndny08...
> > Sent some pics in to Costco over the internet. Very convenient.
> > Ordered some 8x10's and 5x7's with images taken from a 10 megapixel
> > camera. The images were sent to them unedited and in full
> > resolution - 3648 x 2736 in original JPG with all the EXIF in tact.
> >
> > Got the prints back. The 5x7's look very sharp, very clear -
> > outstanding in all respects.
> >
> > But the 8x10's look to be somewhat "softer" and it appears to have
> > less detail and certainly is not as crisp as it should be, imo.
> I don't think you uploaded the full resolution and uncompressed file
> over the internet. That would have been a 30 Mb file. So compression
> will have been applied, and there is always a quality cost for
> compression.
He said he sent jpegs. If the softness was not apparent on-screen,
why should the prints be soft?
> They must have done something to the images, because 10x8 and 7x5 are
> not in the same format, so they had to do the cropping, and probably
> had to reduce the Ppi figure to 300. These activities will have an
> effect on the quality, especially on an already compressed Jpeg.
Of course they had to crop. That doesn't have to change image quality.
Saying they "reduced the ppi figure" suggests that you think images
have a meaningful ppi attribute before they are rendered on a medium
that can be measures in inches. It would be better to say they had to
resample to fit the print size at the output device's resolution of 300
pixels per inch. Why would this resampling be more destructive to the
8x10 print than to the 5x7? And why would it be especially destructive
to a jpeg?
> Your explanation re the Ppi figures for your image, are more than a
> little simple. You can not have different resolution figures in each
> direction without distorting the image.
Urm... He didn't say anything about ppi. He gave the resolution of his
images in pixels.
> You should have done the resizing and cropping yourself before
> sending in, and it would have been better if you had sent them on a
> Cd, rather than via the Internet.
Doing the cropping and resizing yourself is a good idea. Why is it
better to mail a CD than to send the file via the 'Net? (I mean, other
than the fact that the bandwidth of a truck hurtling down the Interstate
vastly exceeds many home network connections.)
Paul Allen |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Jan 04, 2007
Posts: 145
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:56 am
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
So if we walk 'em in on CD, will they leave it at the proper
size?
> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
> Paul D. Sullivan
> <dudeboyz DeleteThis @hotmail.com>], who wrote in article
> <X_gzh.665$H77.594@trndny08>:
>
> Google for the thread on uploading 25000000 pixel file. (Raw
> result: Costco's POSTER-SERVICE-via-email downscales to
> 100ppi.) But keep in
> mind that POSTER SERVICE uses different subcontractors than
> the normal service...
>
> Hope this helps,
> Ilya |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 198
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:56 am
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> So if we walk 'em in on CD, will they leave it at the proper
> size?
For Internet uploads to Costco.ca (via primdeia.ca, Costco's service
provider), the maximum accepted resolution per image is 7500 X 5000. The
maximum accepted file size per image is 8mb. It states this right on their
website. I know from personal experience that the in-store processing
limtis are slightly different. To the best of my recolection, the maximum
image dimenion is limited to 5000 pixels (it may be 6,000) but the maximum
file size for a single image is way larger than allowed over the Internet.
I think it's 60 MB (it may be 70 MB). I always turn off "AutoCorrect" when
submitting photos to them via the Internet and ask for "no Adjustments"
when taking them to the store. I then know what I'll be getting back,
since I have a colour-managed work flow. All that said, I have never had
any problem getting sharp enlargements from Costco. I would be extremely
surprised if they reduce the size of the submitted image before it goes to
the printer. >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 05, 2007
Posts: 95
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:37:06 +0100, "Cgiorgio" <me.RemoveThis@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
>"Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:X_gzh.665$H77.594@trndny08...
>> Sent some pics in to Costco over the internet. Very convenient. Ordered
>> some 8x10's and 5x7's with images taken from a 10 megapixel camera. The
>> images were sent to them unedited and in full resolution - 3648 x 2736 in
>> original JPG with all the EXIF in tact.
>>
>> Got the prints back. The 5x7's look very sharp, very clear - outstanding
>> in all respects.
>>
>> But the 8x10's look to be somewhat "softer" and it appears to have less
>> detail and certainly is not as crisp as it should be, imo.
>>
>> I'm wondering if places like Costco, Walmart, Fred Meyer, etc. reduce the
>> size of image files sent to them so that they do not take up more than a
>> specified amount of disk space on their systems.
>>
>> Anybody know if anything like that is happening at these places? Do they
>> reduce the image quality to save space? Or is there perhaps some other
>> reason why this may be happening?
>>
>> I'd appreciate any helpful responses.
>>
>> Thank you.
>The output unit of minilabs usually has a fixed pixels per inch requirement,
>most of them 300 ppi. If they do not state the required resolution in their
>web page, it is best to ask because most minilabs use 300 ppi, but not all.
>Your image has to be converted to that resolution before it can be output,
>and their machine might just use the algorithm which fits most pictures but
>not necessarily optimized for yours. Most image editors allow you to choose
>from several methods and you can try out which one best preserves your
>picture . As it is also a good idea to crop your own pictures instead of
>letting an automatic program do it, it is a good idea to resize them and
>crop them to the output format before you send the files off. Some minilabs
>are also set for automatic color correction, something you do not want if
>you have a calibrated monitor and corrected colors yourself. Some online
>developers (in Europe at least) allow you to choose on their order page,
>others don't. Use the lowest jpeg compression settings for the files you
>send them, and save them to another directory to preserve your original
>files.
>
For most Costcos, you can find profiles and complete instructions at
drycreekphoto.com. Even to the ppi settings for the specific printer
model. I use the profiles and then instruct Costco to make NO
corrections, adjustments or do any resizing. I always increase the
Photosopped size to a 2:3 picture by using a a Canvas Size of the
correct dimensions. E.g., 8x10 photo --> 8x12 canvas, 11x14 phot -->
12x18 canvas. I also makes a OK border for dry mounting. >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 05, 2007
Posts: 95
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:50 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 10 Feb 2007 03:00:06 -0800, "Scott W" <biphoto.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 10, 12:19 am, "Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeb....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Sent some pics in to Costco over the internet. Very convenient.
>> Ordered some 8x10's and 5x7's with images taken from a 10
>> megapixel camera. The images were sent to them unedited and in
>> full resolution - 3648 x 2736 in original JPG with all the EXIF
>> in tact.
>>
>> Got the prints back. The 5x7's look very sharp, very clear -
>> outstanding in all respects.
>>
>> But the 8x10's look to be somewhat "softer" and it appears to
>> have less detail and certainly is not as crisp as it should be,
>> imo.
>>
>> I'm wondering if places like Costco, Walmart, Fred Meyer, etc.
>> reduce the size of image files sent to them so that they do not
>> take up more than a specified amount of disk space on their
>> systems.
>>
>> Anybody know if anything like that is happening at these places?
>> Do they reduce the image quality to save space? Or is there
>> perhaps some other reason why this may be happening?
>>
>> I'd appreciate any helpful responses.
>>
>> Thank you.
>
>It is not completely clear what Costco does but the file size that
>gets up loaded can much smaller then the jpeg it is feed. There is an
>upload option for fast upload where the image is resized a lot and an
>option for a more normal upload but even the normal upload does bad
>things to a large file.
>
>You want to make sure you have the "Large Print Upload" selected at
>the bottom of the upload page, "Fast Upload" is selected by default.
>But even with "Large Print Upload" selected it would appear that is
>will down size somewhat when given a very large file. You can also
>email the images to Costco and this seems to keep them from being
>resized.
Or you can simply take them in on a flash card or CD and wait an hour.
Who got out of Costco is under an hour anyway? You can also go over
the complete instructions to them about color correction, etc.
>
>For print up to 8 x 12 inches this should not be an issue at all and
>you should be able to get pretty sharp looking 12 x 18 prints, but I
>do believe they could do better.
>
>Scott >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 01, 2005
Posts: 189
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:50 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
> So you are saying that an image that is crisp and sharp on screen
> and crisp and sharp on 5x7" prints would somehow show up as fuzzy
> and washed out on an 8x10" because the image is not really crisp
> and sharp at all?
Exactly!
Your monitor is a low resolution device, probably set to display images
at around 1 MP or less
Therefore, a good 1MP image will look tack sharp on your monitor but
will look pretty awful when printed at 8 x 10.
A nice sharp print requires at least 240 pixels/inch (300 is even
better) So for an 8x10 to look really sharp you need at least 5 MP
Even though you sent a 10 MP image, you did not sharpen it in a photo
editor. Many cameras apply only a minimum amount of in-camera sharpening.
I agree with Mark.
The original image, without editing, was probably not all that sharp.
So it looked great when displayed at 1MP(your monitor), very good at 2MP
(5x7 @ 240 ppi), but not so hot when displayed at 5 MP ( 8x10 @ 240 ppi)
Bob Williams >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 05, 2007
Posts: 95
|
(Msg. 22) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:53:53 GMT, "Roy G"
<roy.gibson1 RemoveThis @REMOVE.tesco.net> wrote:
>
>"Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:X_gzh.665$H77.594@trndny08...
>> Sent some pics in to Costco over the internet. Very convenient. Ordered
>> some 8x10's and 5x7's with images taken from a 10 megapixel camera. The
>> images were sent to them unedited and in full resolution - 3648 x 2736 in
>> original JPG with all the EXIF in tact.
>>
>> Got the prints back. The 5x7's look very sharp, very clear - outstanding
>> in all respects.
>>
>> But the 8x10's look to be somewhat "softer" and it appears to have less
>> detail and certainly is not as crisp as it should be, imo.
>>
>> I'm wondering if places like Costco, Walmart, Fred Meyer, etc. reduce the
>> size of image files sent to them so that they do not take up more than a
>> specified amount of disk space on their systems.
>>
>> Anybody know if anything like that is happening at these places? Do they
>> reduce the image quality to save space? Or is there perhaps some other
>> reason why this may be happening?
>>
>> I'd appreciate any helpful responses.
>>
>> Thank you.
>
>Hi.
>
>I don't think you uploaded the full resolution and uncompressed file over
>the internet. That would have been a 30 Mb file. So compression will have
>been applied, and there is always a quality cost for compression.
>
>They must have done something to the images, because 10x8 and 7x5 are not in
>the same format, so they had to do the cropping, and probably had to reduce
>the Ppi figure to 300. These activities will have an effect on the quality,
>especially on an already compressed Jpeg.
>
>Your explanation re the Ppi figures for your image, are more than a little
>simple. You can not have different resolution figures in each direction
>without distorting the image.
>
>You should have done the resizing and cropping yourself before sending in,
>and it would have been better if you had sent them on a Cd, rather than via
>the Internet.
>
>Roy G
>
I give Costco my files in tif format (8-bit), the output from the Dry
Creek profile converter. They whine because the files are larger, but
they do it. I also always increase the canvas size to one of theri
canvas sizes which tends to keep them from cropping. >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 05, 2007
Posts: 95
|
(Msg. 23) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:16:48 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
<dudeboyz.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>So if we walk 'em in on CD, will they leave it at the proper
>size?
Only if you get the smart operator, who isn't always there. At the
risk of being repetitive, I always crop or change canvas size to one
of their standard sizes.
>
>> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
>> Paul D. Sullivan
>> <dudeboyz.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>], who wrote in article
>> <X_gzh.665$H77.594@trndny08>:
>>
>> Google for the thread on uploading 25000000 pixel file. (Raw
>> result: Costco's POSTER-SERVICE-via-email downscales to
>> 100ppi.) But keep in
>> mind that POSTER SERVICE uses different subcontractors than
>> the normal service...
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>> Ilya
> >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 446
|
(Msg. 24) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Mardon wrote:
> "Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So if we walk 'em in on CD, will they leave it at the proper
>> size?
>
> For Internet uploads to Costco.ca (via primdeia.ca, Costco's service
> provider), the maximum accepted resolution per image is 7500 X 5000. The
> maximum accepted file size per image is 8mb. It states this right on their
> website. I know from personal experience that the in-store processing
> limtis are slightly different. To the best of my recolection, the maximum
> image dimenion is limited to 5000 pixels (it may be 6,000) but the maximum
> file size for a single image is way larger than allowed over the Internet.
> I think it's 60 MB (it may be 70 MB). I always turn off "AutoCorrect" when
> submitting photos to them via the Internet and ask for "no Adjustments"
> when taking them to the store. I then know what I'll be getting back,
> since I have a colour-managed work flow. All that said, I have never had
> any problem getting sharp enlargements from Costco. I would be extremely
> surprised if they reduce the size of the submitted image before it goes to
> the printer.
Mardon, of all the responses (most of them spurious) to a question that
I don't take very seriously in the first place, your's is the only one
making much sense. I was going to respond that if there were a
limitation, it's in the size of the file being uploaded, I've seen such
limits stated (which as I recall were less then 8mb). Same is true for
auto enhancement, which I don't recall being offered on the site I use
(York Photo).
Dave Cohen >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 19, 2007
Posts: 48
|
(Msg. 25) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 05, 2007
Posts: 95
|
(Msg. 26) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:14:33 GMT, "babaloo" <fac187 RemoveThis @hotmail.com>
wrote:
>You go to Walmart and Costco for cheap popcorn and massive food packages
>that you will never use before they spoil.
>If you go there for photo prints you get something comparable.
>Geesh.
>
Not so at Costco if you properly manage the process. If you leave it
up to their employees you take the risk of bad results. >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 686
|
(Msg. 27) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bvhzh.39$103.36@trndny05...
> So you are saying that an image that is crisp and sharp on screen and
> crisp and sharp on 5x7" prints would somehow show up as fuzzy and washed
> out on an 8x10" because the image is not really crisp and sharp at all?
A computer monitor is not very high definition, so isn't really the best
thing to judge photo sharpness by. For example, if you're using a typical
17" or 19" LCD monitor at 1280 x 1024 pixels, that's only 1.3 megapixels. It
may *look* sharp without anything to compare it with, but if you put a large
print from the same shot alongside it, the print should show significantly
more detail.
"Sharp" is always relative, and it is generally true that smaller prints may
appear sharp where a large print from the same shot may appear less sharp.
But something's wrong if you're not getting satisfactory sharpness in an 8 x
10 print from a 10-megapixel camera. When you say it's "fuzzy and washed
out" on the large print where it was "crisp and sharp" on the 5 x 7, that
sounds like something went very wrong in the printing of the 8 x 10. There
certainly shouldn't be *that* much difference.
Neil >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 686
|
(Msg. 28) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ezhzh.727$7s2.632@trndny07...
>
> In thinking it through, the 10mp image at 3648 x 2736 would have enough
> resolveable data (rounding down) for 364 dpi in the 10" direction and 342
> dpi in the 8" direction. For 7 x 5 it would have 521 x 547.
Well, not quite, because they're not using all the pixels when they make the
print -- unless they distort the photo.
You're using a camera with a 4:3 aspect ratio. But the 8 x 10 is 5:4, so
you're throwing away a bit of the long dimension. Your camera may make a
3648 x 2736 image, but the most you'll get on an 8 x 10 print will be 3420 x
2736 pixels. The pixels per inch will be the same in both dimensions unless
the long dimension is squeezed to make it fit -- which of course you
wouldn't want.
>
> That's plenty of data to work with. If it down-samples everything to 300
> dpi, would that effect the 10x8 more than the 7x5?
I think you mean ppi, not dpi (they are often confused with one another). On
an 8 x 10, assuming nothing is distorted to make it fit, in your case you'll
have 342 ppi to start with. That's more than enough, and there shouldn't be
any downsampling issues that would create the problems you've described.
Neil >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 14, 2006
Posts: 115
|
(Msg. 29) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 10:19:35 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
<dudeboyz.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Sent some pics in to Costco over the internet. Very convenient.
>Ordered some 8x10's and 5x7's with images taken from a 10
>megapixel camera. The images were sent to them unedited and in
>full resolution - 3648 x 2736 in original JPG with all the EXIF
>in tact.
>
>Got the prints back. The 5x7's look very sharp, very clear -
>outstanding in all respects.
>
>But the 8x10's look to be somewhat "softer" and it appears to
>have less detail and certainly is not as crisp as it should be,
>imo.
>
>I'm wondering if places like Costco, Walmart, Fred Meyer, etc.
>reduce the size of image files sent to them so that they do not
>take up more than a specified amount of disk space on their
>systems.
>
>Anybody know if anything like that is happening at these places?
>Do they reduce the image quality to save space? Or is there
>perhaps some other reason why this may be happening?
I had a problem once at Walmart where a print looked fuzzy, a bit out
of focus. The exact same file printed fine a couple days later. These
were 4x6 prints. So it had nothing to do with the file in this case.
KS >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 08, 2006
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 30) Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 5:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <37qdneNaYLcfpVPYnZ2dnUVZ_qarnZ2d.DeleteThis@comcast.com>,
"Neil Harrington" <not.DeleteThis@home.today> wrote:
> "Paul D. Sullivan" <dudeboyz.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bvhzh.39$103.36@trndny05...
> > So you are saying that an image that is crisp and sharp on screen and
> > crisp and sharp on 5x7" prints would somehow show up as fuzzy and washed
> > out on an 8x10" because the image is not really crisp and sharp at all?
>
> A computer monitor is not very high definition, so isn't really the best
> thing to judge photo sharpness by. For example, if you're using a typical
> 17" or 19" LCD monitor at 1280 x 1024 pixels, that's only 1.3 megapixels. It
> may *look* sharp without anything to compare it with
Actually it works pretty well if you zoom into say 2 or 300% thats where
you'll see how sharp your original is.
>, but if you put a large
> print from the same shot alongside it, the print should show significantly
> more detail.
--
George W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. >> Stay informed about: Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when pr.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | Resolution, dpi, & pixelation for printing. - Hi all. I just sent out a bunch of pictures to get processed. They were taken with my new Canon A640 (10MP). I re-sampled the pix using Corel Photopaint to 1024 x 768 to print 4" x 6" prints, because 10MP are too big to upload. I believe that i...
Optimum Resolution for Printing Photos - I'm going to get 150 of my photo files printed at Asda as I can get them done for 5p each at that quantity. Most of my files are at 7 mpx i.e. quite large. The prints are 6" x 4" therefore is it actually worth sinding these large files or shoul...
Optimum Resolution for Printing Photos - I'm going to get 150 of my photo files printed at Asda as I can get them done for 5p each at that quantity. Most of my files are at 7 mpx i.e. quite large. The prints are 6" x 4" therefore is it actually worth sinding these large files or shoul...
Optimum Resolution for Printing Photos - I'm going to get 150 of my photo files printed at Asda as I can get them done for 5p each at that quantity. Most of my files are at 7 mpx i.e. quite large. The prints are 6" x 4" therefore is it actually worth sinding these large files or shoul... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
