Photo Prints

[#1]

I rarely print photos these days and when I need to I have done so at home. I now need some prints. Any "recommendations" or "avoid" as far as online photo printing services are concerned. There doesnt seem to be much in it for price etc?
Thanks

[#2]

I think it depends on what kind of quality you're after. Personally, I can't stand online photo printers. I don't print many photos, which makes printing them myself an expensive proposition - the more you print, the less expensive it is to do so, even with home printers - but I still do so, because every time I've investigated and even sampled online photo printers I've been underwhelmed. My advice, therefore, is to stick to printing photos at home if you can do so and if you're happy with the results doing so provides.
(I should qualify this post by saying that I'm quite 'in to' photography so I'm probably more fussy than your average person about print quality and so forth. Having said that, one of my friends who isn't interested in photography once bought some digitally-made prints from a shop and wasn't happy with an aspect of them either, so I'm certainly not the only one to dislike shop-made/online digital prints.)

[#3]

Quote from: Be3G

(I should quality this post by saying

Given you inclination to pull others up, I wonder if you may wish to review this Thomas!

[#4]

Quote from: the

I rarely print photos these days and when I need to I have done so at home. I now need some prints. Any "recommendations" or "avoid" as far as online photo printing services are concerned. There doesnt seem to be much in it for price etc?

I've tried bonusprint, snapfish and truprint, but have always been happy with Photobox.

[#5]

I too have also used truprint, uploaded all my wedding pictures to their storage picked all the ones I wanted and it took around 3 days and 180 6 x 4 pictures cost £16 (roughly) was very pleased with the results as I had them done in a matt finish.
hope this helps
Emma

[#6]

Thanks

[#7]

Quote from: jelv

Given you inclination to pull others up, I wonder if you may wish to review this Thomas!

I normally only pull others up on actual spelling/grammar errors. That, however, was a typo - it was meant to say 'qualify'. Having said that it does need correcting so I'll do that once I've finished writing this post. But not before getting my own back by pointing out that you meant 'your'.
With regards to the topic of this thread, I see Photobox has been recommended... which I feel I have to counter (no I'm not just being awkward!) because my experience of using them wasn't so good. Well, the actual service was fine - I think I received my print the day after I ordered it - and I admit the price was good, but the quality was not. My main complaint was the paper - it was ridiculously thin, and the gloss coating seemed to have a slight 'crease' in it which was rather distracting. It also seemed a tad 'rough around the edges' in the literal sense. Finally, the print was too glossy for my liking, although I admit that's a matter of personal preference - but it's something to consider especially when placing a print under a plastic cover in an album.

[#8]

Quote from: Be3G

With regards to the topic of this thread, I see Photobox has been recommended... which I feel I have to counter (no I'm not just being awkward!) because my experience of using them wasn't so good. Well, the actual service was fine - I think I received my print the day after I ordered it - and I admit the price was good, but the quality was not. My main complaint was the paper - it was ridiculously thin, and the gloss coating seemed to have a slight 'crease' in it which was rather distracting. It also seemed a tad 'rough around the edges' in the literal sense. Finally, the print was too glossy for my liking, although I admit that's a matter of personal preference - but it's something to consider especially when placing a print under a plastic cover in an album.

Individual experiences can always vary, though I can't say I've had any issues with "thin" paper or creases - perhaps you were just unlucky. As you say, the level of glossiness is a personal choice, though a decent album will reduce the reflections anyway.

[#9]

True, it might reduce reflections, but I found the gloss appeared to actually have a bit of a visible texture to it. I'm surprised you say you don't think the paper's thin - I wouldn't have thought they'd have used one type of paper for some people and another type for other people, aside from the fact that they have a separate printer for large prints which probably uses different stock to the normal printer.

[#10]

I use snapfish.co.uk  .  very good service overall.

[#11]

I am quite happy with photobox, they use fuji crystal archive paper which is the same as the local lab here uses although I dont use the gloss print option as I am not a fan of gloss.  As for printing at home its ok but costs a lot more than getting it done properly and you can't be sure of how long inkjet prints are going to last.

[#12]

I just ordered a photobook from truprint the mothing in law was moaning about not having any wedding pictures so I arranged one for her, got to plan where the pictures went, the background layout etc and it looked really good. The photos aren't as great quality as printing them individually but knowing they won't fall out won't need placing in an album it made sense.
big thumbs up!

[#13]

Whilst home printing does indeed cost a lot more for small 6x4 prints - it costs my printer approximately £0.33 to print a borderless semigloss 6x4 print - I disagree that getting them printed online is doing it 'properly': from my experience, a good home inkjet printer provides considerably better quality. The longevity issue is a good point though... you have to get quite an expensive printer to have the use of pigment inks, and then they only work their best on a limited selection of paper.

[#14]

Hi Thomas - whats your view on Dye-Sub printers?
I have an Olympus PS100 which I rarely use, however when I do use it, I'm always pretty impressed with the results.
The prints work out at around 40p each, and it will only print in A6 size (306dpi), but its a diminutive little fella, so I can easily stick it in a spare camera bag and take it out in the wild with me!
I don't expect you to have had experience of this particular model (although I won't be surprised if you have, as photograpically well travelled as you are but more some idea of how the technology compares to other printing methods.

[#15]

I don't have any personal experience of using dye subs I'm afraid, but I would advise you to keep it if you can afford to pay the consumable prices: dye sublimation printers are about as good as you can get when it comes to producing colour glossy photos (i.e. the vast majority of photos that people normally want to print). They're water-resistant, long-life and the print quality is excellent as you don't have to worry about being able to see banding/dithering. If you want to produce prints with different textures (such as matte, and possibly semigloss - not sure if that's possible or not with dye sub), then you'd need something different; monochrome photos also don't always come out too well, although there are models available which are more capable than others, just like with inkjet printers really. So, yeah - if you can live with the lack of flexibility and the consumable cost, dye sub's definitely a good way to go.