I’ve just purchased the horribly sexy [ur=http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&dept=14&WLBS=fsweb11&sku_id=0665000FS10027578&catid=&newdeptid=14#]Canon Powershot A70 and after taking a few great pics, I was wondering if any dopers had input into getting these pictures printed professionally.
The camera is a 3.2mp model, and I was thinking of sending the pictures over to the photofinisher’s website to get them done. But can I expect a realistic photo-quality print or does 3.2mp fall just shy of what a 35mm print shows?
To those wondering, I’ve set it on max-resolution and on super-fine, so my files are topping out at 1.8mb each.
Well, I have a Canon G1, which is also 3.3MP and seems to have similar specs. From firsthand experience I can tell you that 4x6 prints are indistinguishable from film. I’d say 5x7 is probably just as sharp.
I’ve also blown up a few to 8x10, though they were a bit fuzzy, but that may have had more to do with long exposures resulting from my use of an infrared filter.
Decent printers; ie GOOD inks will let you print up to 8X10 with 3Mbs sized pics sharply
I use a canon elph (400) at 3Mbs. Very happy with my prints. Although most are 6X8
You made the right choice, my buddie’s A70 is fine.
A serious picture program like Photoshop is a must.
I got a Sony 3.3 MP (prints on a Canon Bubblejet… ironically). 8x10s look goddamned incredible, frankly, though on some (especially dark ones) you can start to see noise artifacts.
Have you looked into buying your own photo printer? Canon’s line is absolutely amazing. Even one like the i450 makes great prints, and isn’t pricey at all… especially compared to the camera.
You can take your memory card to Walgreens and print them out for like 29 cents a picture or there are services where you can do everything on-line and they mail the pictures to you. The prints look just as good as regular film and the best part is you can print what pictures you want.
Snapfish.com is something like $0.19 a shot. I’ve never used them, but my coworker likes them. I’ve printed good shots using a simple inkjet and the sample of 3"x5" photo paper it came with. One of the shots, which was a drawing, really, is starting to yellow, so I’d advise using a photo album or frame (the yellowing one is just hanging on a wall).
At work, I use an HPcamera (3.3MP) and print to HP7350 Photo printer. We’ve had really good luck with them, and with the HP software, it’s been easy to enhance the pics (no redeye, even out colors and lighting), and even print out full sheets of different sizes. This past fall, we set up a digital studio at our HarvestFest Dance and sold sets. I’ll not clim they were professional quality, but they were very good quality.
Has anyone tried the Canon CP-200 dye sublimation printer? How long do the prints last, and how’s the cost of ink & paper? I would get enlargements from a lab, but for 4x6 I’m considering this printer.
I bought Mr. Gazer a Canon CP-200 for Christmas. It’s really cool! I don’t know how long the prints last – I don’t know that anyone does yet, as the product is quite new – but the paper costs about $20 for 36 sheets. Each package of paper comes with an ink cartridge. You can also get a paper tray and paper for credit card-sized photos and labels, and little mini-labels.
The quality is really good, IMO – it prints actual photos, with coating and everything. It’s only been a couple of weeks since we got it, but so far we’re quite pleased.
I highly recommend http://www.snapfish.com for printing digital photos. We’ve used it a lot, and the photos look great. In addition, they automatically make photo albums of your pictures which you can choose to share with family and friends, who can then order their own prints if they want.
3.2 megapixels will look fine as long as you don’t try to enlarge too much. For 5x7 and smaller, you probably won’t be able to tell a difference from film.
I have a HP 618c digital camera. It does everthing I need it to. I take all my pictures at 800x600.
I have taken around 1500 pictures and printed out exactly 1. I post all my pictures onto my website. At 800x600 they are a nice manageable size, and are small enough so people with dial-up can still view them with little pain.
Unless you print out images larger than 4x6 or 5x7 I think 3 megapixels or larger cameras are a waste of money.
Another concern of mine was whether or not 8x10s at 3.2mp would be of film quality. Pretty much the reason I bought this thing was so that it would replace my 35mm, if it prints crappy 8x10s which I sometimes develop, then I will be deeply saddened and will likely have to commit seppuku with a rusty screwdriver.
Not unless you frame all your pictures perfectly right out of the camera. Extra megapixels give you more latitude to crop and post process your prints. That said, even with my 2.1 megapixel Olympus, I produced some very nice 8x10’s. You could see artifacts, but only if you stuck your nose a foot away from the photo.
Of course, this thread ties in with the “Are any printers not crap?” thread that was running recently. I had an Epson 740 photo printer that was slow, noisy, and had a tendency to clog, but which could be coaxed into producing great prints. I replaced it with an Epson C-80 which is fast, quiet, and hasn’t jammed yet, but which only has four colors and doesn’t produce the same quality of photo.
I’ve got a 3.2 megapixel as well; if you shoot on the highest picture quality, you should be able to get crystal-clear 8x10s.
And by the way, there’s a terrific image editing program called The GIMP that you can download at that site, totally free. It doesn’t have some of the high-end Photoshop features like CMYK editing (mostly used in publishing), but after some practice with it I’ve achieved some really good results.