So, who do we use? I have experienced problems using Opera and Photobox. Emailed them and they basically said "Sod off and use IE or Firefox". It used to work perfectly; they've probably bust it by adding lots of flashy graphics and pop-ups. Was just about to order some prints, so I might try another site.
Any recommendations? I'd like it to meet the following
- Good quality
- Competitive price
- Quick despatch
- Ease of upload (I like being able to use FTP with Photobox)
- Work with my browser
Toby
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Virtual camera club for grumpy gits who don't like the type of people who usually go to camera clubs.
Posts
Labels
- 16mm (2)
- 2009 (1)
- admin (6)
- advice (9)
- alamy (1)
- autumn (13)
- Best of (1)
- bigcats (1)
- black and white (3)
- camera news (4)
- canon_v_nikon_jihad (1)
- cardiff wales architecture (3)
- challenge01 (11)
- challenge02 (5)
- challenge03 (10)
- challenge04 (7)
- challenge05 (5)
- challenge06 (5)
- challenge07 (2)
- challenge08 (3)
- challenge09 (3)
- challenge10 (5)
- challenge11 (2)
- challenge12 (3)
- challenges (36)
- christmas (13)
- closeup (2)
- dance (1)
- Dicking about (1)
- difficult lighting (4)
- dpreview (1)
- equipment (10)
- equipment printing (1)
- etiquette (4)
- expensive toys (1)
- fireworks (1)
- flash (3)
- hdr (2)
- high dynamic range (2)
- high key (1)
- hosting (1)
- I am an idiot (1)
- insects (2)
- interval (1)
- kevin's flights of fancy (1)
- landscape (5)
- leaf (3)
- links (1)
- long exposure (5)
- lx5 (3)
- macro (1)
- mft (1)
- mini challenge 01 (2)
- mistakes idiotic photography (1)
- mobile phone camera (3)
- movement (2)
- movie (1)
- nerdery (8)
- night photography (8)
- nikon capture nx (1)
- olympus (1)
- online services (2)
- OT (1)
- panasonic (2)
- party (1)
- photo appreciation (1)
- photoshop (5)
- pitiful earning potential (4)
- portrait (12)
- post processing (7)
- printing (3)
- rain (3)
- reflection (1)
- retouching (8)
- rules (2)
- shallow DOF (2)
- silly (2)
- stock (4)
- sunset (1)
- time lapse (1)
- tom's challenges (1)
- tripod (9)
- weather (2)
- wedding (6)
- zoom (1)
10 comments:
Don't think you said who you were using now, so I might recommend them!
Used to recommend Photobox until they did their Web 2.0 relaunch, which basically "fixed" a lot of things which weren't broke and made it horrible to use. They do seem to be claiming they've ironed out the problems and apparently offer ftp uploading, but I gave them three chances to get it right (after a lot of long conversations with their head of technology) and they never seemed to get it right
Currently using Snapfish - which seems to have a pretty robust upload system and is simple and unflashy (in all senses of the word) when it comes to ordering. Print quality has been excellent so far (I can show you some examples this weekend).
Sorry - can't read. You did say Photobox, I read something entirely different!
Yes, PB do seem to default to the "use another browser" response and don't quite understand why users might have a problem with that.
New ordering system is overly complex as well...sorry, my mistake, they call in a "customer journey" which gives an indication why it might be the way it is.
When I want a load of photos printed then I use Photobox. (Usually) works reliably with FF. I think I wil struggle with Safari or Chrome.
If I want photos I know will turn out how I see them, then I print them myself, though I am limited to A4 for the time being.
Think we've discussed the home printing before. You've clearly invested in the equipment, but I think for the amount of 7x5 I do for Alice, online printing is still much better quality and value than anything I could achieve at home. We've got LCD monitors on both laptops and Alice's desktop has got a flatscreen as well - so difficult and expensive to colour calibrate without additional equipment...even if we did have a printer good enough to consistently produce what we told it to and what we saw on screen!
Even for the larger format, I don't think it would be cost effective once everything was factored in. As it happens Snapfish gave us a load of free 8x10s for screwing up a photobook a year or so back, so it's been even better value for money! (and everyone has been subjected to large Sammy shots ever since)
I don't have a particularly fancy printer - though I would like to invest in a good A3 printer when it's appropriate. The Canon iP6000 gives me decent results -- when I use it with the right paper and matched profile. For me, this means Ilford.
I did buy a ColorVision Spyder 2 a couple of years ago when I was doing my diploma so I could get prints that matched what I was seeing. I'd definitely recommend this or a Huey, especially if you are in the photo business like you.
I guess if I felt I really wasn't getting what I was seeing on screen, I might look into how much it would cost to calibrate at home - but I've yet to see a print from either Photobox or Snapfish which doesn't look as expected (Photobox used to also send out a "calibration print" to check your screen and I don't think it ever was alarmingly off).
I'm also slightly colour blind anyway, so unless you can find a way to calibrate my eyes as well, this is all a bit academic!
We've got all the calibration stuff set up at work so we can make sure all the photos we use in the mag and newspaper are profiled right for the printer - so if I ever had something I needed to do to a much tighter colour profile I could probably get it sorted there.
Out of interest, how much does it cost you per print?
Dunno what Kev reckons he pays, but I have a Canon ip5000. It can produce very nice prints, but I only use it for one-offs. I read an article in a PC mag a couple of years back that ran "real world" tests on a number of printers - as opposed to manufacturer's claims.
They estimated costs anywhere between 30p and 60p for a 6x4 print and something like £1 to over £2 for A4. No one manufacturer was pariticularly good or bad accross the range.
I can believe these figures - especially if you use the manufacturer's own ink. I get mine refilled at Cartridge World and have not had a problem.
Memory test: I just Googles the article I mentioned. It's available on-line at PC Pro but is over 3 years old. This calculator page would be useful if it actually listed a printer you're likely to have.
Think I'll try PB one more time (as the photos are uploaded) then I might give Snapfish a go next time.
And Photobox/Snapfish is about 10p a 6x4? I think until I start getting badly calibrated prints, I'll stick with the online printers! (especially with Alice asking for just about everything I take of Sam to be printed!)
It's also a major pain in the arse faffing about with loading the right paper, selecting the right setting in the software, etc, etc.
Couldn't see the full findings of the report Toby linked to. Would be interested to see the "fade test" as I've always been curious about how long digital prints will last vs photographic prints.
Also occurred to me that (in my experience at least) whenever I print photos at home, I always waste a few bits of paper and some ink getting the settings wrong once or twice - which is a cost you don't absorb with online printing. And online printers will replace prints you're not happy with - Alice recently sent back a batch she'd put the wrong border on/cropped wrongly. I think it was actually Alice at fault, to be honest, but Snapfish replaced without question...which is something you don't get with home printing if you screw something up.
Post a Comment