I have tried several places to print. They have all been good. It kind of depends on whether you want to print right now or if you have an hour to wait. You can take you memory stick or card into Kinkos or any of the stores like Walmart and put your pictures into a kiosk. At Kinkos, the photos will print in the kiosk and they you just pay for them and leave. At Walmart or Albertsons, you can go shopping and you photos will be ready in about an hour. The one I liked best for high volume was Costco. I uploaded my pictures on their website and then went to the store and picked them up the next day. They are .17 per 4 X 6 print. Dave
How is the long-term stability of commercial prints, Dave? Are they unfaded after a couple of years? --- David Dunn <david.dunn@albertsons.com> wrote:
I have tried several places to print. They have all been good.
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Depending on what you're shooting, you want to see how the colors match what's on your monitor. In the perfect world they should match perfectly. In the real world they should still be pretty close. Photoshop will include information about your color setup in files it generates. These should be used by any printer to give the best color match that the inks can give. For snapshots, it probably doesn't matter that much. But for high quality images it really does. David's remark about colorfastness is a concern with older inkjets. The ink is much more water-resistant in newer printers. The Epson pigment printers don't really have a problem at all. As far as the general comments of inkjet printers not looking natural, that's dependent on the printer. One of mine is 6-color, the other is 8. The 4-color printers don't do such a hot job of generating all the colors in an image. But again, the single biggest factor is the paper. On Dec 18, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Chuck Hards wrote:
How is the long-term stability of commercial prints, Dave? Are they unfaded after a couple of years?
--- David Dunn <david.dunn@albertsons.com> wrote:
I have tried several places to print. They have all been good.
Shooting several or several hundred files depends upon the ability of the photographer to place the exposure in a zone that is acceptable for printing. If the exposure,contrast, color, etc are off and needs adjusting then you'll spend lots of time w/ Photoshop. I find what takes time in PS is making the image better, removing a branch or highlight that detracts, or softening lines in a womans face (DO NOT ERASE THEM!!) just to add more clarity to the image. The photographer has an idea of how the picture should look and it's w/ PS that the slight adjustments can be done to produce that vision, some photos are snapshots, some are defined images, it's what you 'see' and how you translate them. Is the photo a snapshot, document, art or just from part of your life ?? I find that if I see something interesting, I shoot it, then I decide if I want to work it. Once that moment is gone, it may not return again. Take pictures and have fun!! As for printing, I use a lab that specializes in prints. I use a photolab that will do digital files to photo paper and for enlargements I'll go to the lab (Xinia Productions, I'm part operator) and print via Epson printers on archival papers. It'll take a while to get home gear to look like lab quality work, I'd rather let the lab do it, it saves me time and money and they do a better job for me. Bottom line -- take pictures, make images. We are a visual species and best of all, we can share our experiences w/ others. And then there's astrophotography ......................................... aloha and Mele Kalikmaka Rob
Hey Rob, what do you look for in a lab? What file formats do you prefer to send? How do you guarantee color accuracy, paper/ink quality and all the rest of it? If you'd like to say something about the other side of it--what to avoid--I'd appreciate hearing about it. MC
As for printing, I use a lab that specializes in prints. I use a photolab that will do digital files to photo paper and for enlargements I'll go to the lab (Xinia Productions, I'm part operator) and print via Epson printers on archival papers. It'll take a while to get home gear to look like lab quality work, I'd rather let the lab do it, it saves me time and money and they do a better job for me.
What do I look for in a lab consistency meaning good exposure and color, no wrinkles in the print of areas of off color from dirty jets. If you find a good lab, use them, develop a relationship w/ the print tech, talk to them and let them know what you want and how. If you have something interesting and a challenge, most will go for it. Chuck get a digital camera. You are busy but a 5 minute session at work w/ an image will give you a break from the job. I am a true film lover and said I'd never want to spend so much time at a computer ,wellllllllllllllllllllllll, I love digital and don't mind doing the adjustments. Having to fix 400, 500, or 600 files is a drag but it would be the same thing w/ film and the results would not be as good. If anything, get a DSLR that uses the same group of lenses so if you move up to a better model, you have the lenses, do it in steps. My favorite all purpose general camera is the Nikon D80 w/ the 18-135mm zoom but it's about $1600 w/o cards or spare/2nd battery. Then you want the SB-400 flash and an electronic release cord and then ........... DO IT, YOU'LL LIKE IT!! and this is coming from a film guy. BTW I still shot lots of film though in 4X5 and 8X10 formats, maybe a roll of slide film a month. 'The times they're a 'changin'. aloha Rob
Oh, I'll probably get the camera. Still need to take family shots. It's not that I don't want to spend the time at the computer manipulating images, it's that I don't have the time. I'd have to give up email, meals, bathroom breaks! --- Rob Ratkowski Photography <ratkwski@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Chuck get a digital camera. You are busy but a 5 minute session at work w/ an image will give you a break from the job. I am a true film lover and said I'd never want to spend so much time at a computer ,wellllllllllllllllllllllll, I love digital and don't mind doing the adjustments.
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Chuck you, your wife and your daughter all can use the camera, it's very easy just put it on 'Program' and shoot away. And for better results READ THE BOOK. And I'll help answer your questions to the best of my ability, I've used Nikons and only Nikons (35mm format) my whole life as a photographer. I just bought my 1st non-Nikkor lens (Tokina 12-24mm F4 ATX zoom) in 37 years, it was a better lens for the $$$ aloha Rob
Hey Rob, what's the oldest Nikon you have? For many years I've used a Hasselblad and a NIKON F!!! Now I'm using a Nikon D70 and love it. -- Joe
Chuck
you, your wife and your daughter all can use the camera, it's very easy just put it on 'Program' and shoot away. And for better results READ THE BOOK. And I'll help answer your questions to the best of my ability, I've used Nikons and only Nikons (35mm format) my whole life as a photographer. I just bought my 1st non-Nikkor lens (Tokina 12-24mm F4 ATX zoom) in 37 years, it was a better lens for the $$$
aloha Rob
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Joe my oldest Nikon is the 1st one I bought It's a Nikon Ftn black body purchased in 1968, followed by 3 more 'F' bodies, then a pair of F2's, a Nikkormat and a FE. Then a pair of F3 w/ the MD4 drives, then a pair of F100's, a D100 and then a pair of D200's. There's also a Hasselblad w/ lens, a pair of Pentax 6X7's and my Sinar P DB. Also a pair on Nikonos cameras (III and V) lenses from 7.5mm to 600mm F4 AF. and a whole lot more .............................. it's a sickness Rob
Whomever dies with the most toys wins...Rob, looks like you're the front-runner... I've only ever had one Nikon, a used F1 (IIRC) that fell off my telescope and died one cold morning when shooting comet West in '76! Ever since then I contented myself with a mere Pentax K, to avoid another financial shock if I broke it, too. Of course, that old K still functions perfectly, despite the brassing and dings. Got a new one about 20 years ago and the two of them are very happy togehter. At least they are worth more today than what I paid for them, as collector's items. --- Rob Ratkowski Photography <ratkwski@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Joe my oldest Nikon is the 1st one I bought It's a Nikon Ftn black body purchased in 1968, followed by 3 more 'F' bodies, then a pair of F2's, a Nikkormat and a FE. Then a pair of F3 w/ the MD4 drives, then a pair of F100's, a D100 and then a pair of D200's. There's also a Hasselblad w/ lens, a pair of Pentax 6X7's and my Sinar P DB. Also a pair on Nikonos cameras (III and V) lenses from 7.5mm to 600mm F4 AF. and a whole lot more ..............................
it's a sickness Rob
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Whomever dies with the most toys wins...Rob, looks like you're the front-runner...
no Chuck I'm setting myself up as a camera shop.. ;^) Actually it's hard to let go of my gear, I used the 'F' bodies up until a few years ago when I had a need for several cameras doing different images at the same location. I still use film cameras when exposures are over 1/2 hr long involving motion, though if I could do it w/ a DSLR and not have large amounts of noise, I would. Tyler is right, not every shot has to be processed and not that much. Most are ready to go, but when you want the POP, you work it. I like my work to be clean, no items that detract from the image, so I do a little work on the ones that merit the time. Again Just Have Fun!! aloha Rob
I can't comment on the photography, but I was surprised that no one here suggested the continuous flow system for an Epson inkjet, in order to reduce printing costs. I went to this system for the ALCON 2002 printing, and have continued to use it. They have improved the models, and you can use archival inks or a range of inks specialized for other purposes. This s the link. http://www.inksupply.com/cobra.cfm When I bought it, they had an awkward software based method of resetting the chips on the ink cartridges, but they have come up with a much slicker method now, that I would buy if I were not so cheap. I bought the empty system and then chose the ink I wanted to use. The biggest problem I had was when I did not use the printer for extended periods of time, and then I had to waste a lot of ink clearing the heads. I see they have a program now that will automatically print a test pattern once a day, to prevent that problem. For those of you who do still print your own, this device will pay for itself quickly, and then save you huge amounts over time. Jo
That's quite interesting Jo. Hadn't heard of that approach before. A few printers back, I would refill cartridges by hand (it eventually washes out of your skin). I did try some 3rd-party cartridges for my 785EPX, but was never satisfied with the color. This system looks a bit more flexible. MC On Dec 18, 2006, at 5:54 PM, bsi@xmission.com wrote:
I can't comment on the photography, but I was surprised that no one here suggested the continuous flow system for an Epson inkjet, in order to reduce printing costs. I went to this system for the ALCON 2002 printing, and have continued to use it. They have improved the models, and you can use archival inks or a range of inks specialized for other purposes. This s the link. http:// www.inksupply.com/cobra.cfm When I bought it, they had an awkward software based method of resetting the chips on the ink cartridges, but they have come up with a much slicker method now, that I would buy if I were not so cheap. I bought the empty system and then chose the ink I wanted to use. The biggest problem I had was when I did not use the printer for extended periods of time, and then I had to waste a lot of ink clearing the heads. I see they have a program now that will automatically print a test pattern once a day, to prevent that problem. For those of you who do still print your own, this device will pay for itself quickly, and then save you huge amounts over time.
Jo
Loads of helpful posts- heartfelt thanks to all who responded. But it's obvious that the current state-of-the-art is extremely demanding of one's time. As it is now, I have perhaps a few hours a month for hobbies. Serious image processing just won't fit into my life right now, if it takes that kind of time. Having an art background assures me that I could never leave well-enough alone and adopt a purely 'snapshot' attitude- I'd have to work on most files. It would be an endless source of frustration to not have the time to tweak and adjust things to my satisfaction. I think I'll stay away from the digital conversion for a while longer, and let my wife and daughter take care of the family snapshots. One more egg in the retirement basket! --- Rob Ratkowski Photography <ratkwski@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Bottom line -- take pictures, make images. We are a visual species and best of all, we can share our experiences w/ others. And then there's astrophotography
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Last remark (I promise) on this topic. Chuck, I know your time is tight and we on this list have been happy to see your partial return to scopemaking. Don't want to stop that. I've had a recent opportunity to get re-acquainted with some old film shots. These were shots I'd remembered as favorite pictures. Some were done with an old Pentax 35mm SLR, but most were with film point-and-shoot, probably 120. I was surprised at how poor the shots were. Of course they still carry the feeling of the moment, but technically they're just not very good. Large format film may still have something to offer, but that was never a hobby format. Film's dead. So why don't you think about a nice digital point and shoot. You can get a Nikon, Canon or Olympus for $200-$300. They'll go in a shirt pocket and the 'film' is nearly free. These things take excellent shots--considerably better than simple film cameras. The onboard processors are good and you can just skip the post-processing part. Then you'll have pictures you can easily preserve and share. Later on you can get silly about it.
The money isn't the problem- I'd love a new computer, software upgrades, cool new camera- but not if it's just going to sit next on the shelf next to a bunch of other unused or underused equipment. And by the time I have more free time available, it will be obsolete. That has happened to me on at least three occassions, thanks to technological progress. I can wait. My antiques collection isn't going to get any bigger. --- Michael Carnes <MichaelCarnes@earthlink.net> wrote:
But Chuck! We were enjoying spending your money for you...
I think I'll stay away from the digital conversion for a while longer, and let my wife and daughter take care of the family snapshots.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Chuck check eBay for a D100 Nikon 6.1Mpixals and still a decent camera even though a few years old. It'll get you in the door and give you some time to learn, I also have a copy of PS7 you can have for PC's or PS CS for Mac. AND if you still have cold feet I'LL LEND you my D100 so you can further make up your mind AND include a spare/2nd battery and CF card. aloha Rob
Great advice, Rob. Also, for those who just want to share pics, PhotoShop has a neat feature that allows you to adjust levels with a single click. Then you can undo it and consider what it was recommending, while checking your own brightness and contrast changes, among other things. -- Joe
participants (6)
-
bsi＠xmission.com -
Chuck Hards -
David Dunn -
Joe Bauman -
Michael Carnes -
Rob Ratkowski Photography