Why dontcha print?

Bill Tuthill wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04...rendsprint.asp


Interesting!

But I think it misses the point that digicam owners just don't know that
they can download images, or make a CDR and take it to a Fuji Frontier
minilab for printing. Most digicam owners don't even know which stores
have a Frontier and which don't.

Not sure I agree. The marketing of printing services available
from cameras is pretty strong. Every photo store around here,
large or small, has a kiosk for printing. Every camera comes
with suggestions on how and where to get printing done if not
with ones own printer.



Inkjet printers now have card readers and such, but I think card readers
are part of the problem. There are too many varieties of memory cards,
cards are delicate, and direct USB download is much easier.

Yeah, but some people can't deal with setting up USB (it's that
simple, but some people just can't connect the dots). For them,
slipping the card into the slot on the printer is perfect (my
printer has the slot and adapters for various formats are
available... I haven't used it... I can also use the same slot as
a "drive" for cards carrying other info (files, video, etc.).

Cheers,
Alan



--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Dominic Richens wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04...rendsprint.asp


I knew it!

I always thought colour print film was "wasteful". As the cost of grocery
store ISO400 processing included (7.99 Canadian) dropped below EK400 we
stopped taking slides and started shooting print film. As we had kids, we
started with the "2nd set for 2$" just to send to family and friends.
Fortunately my wife is ruthless with tossing the sub-standard prints - but
what a waste!! Every roll got us 50 4x6 pictures, of which _maybe_ 20 were
worth it. The other 30 bits of chemical laden dead trees just went into the
landfill.

Now the only time stuff gets printed is to a) go up on the wall or b) for
some computer-impaired family member - and it's great that I can drop the
JPEG into a web site, type in their snail-mail address - and a week later
they get a surprise!


try slide film.

While few people get 100% 'keepers' off of a roll of film, OTOH,
occasionally a 'throwaway' might contain some information that is
later wanted ... once thrown away and the negative is misplaces
regret sets in.... (I also throw away a lot, slides too).

Cheers,
Alan


--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Ken Nadvornick wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote:


http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04...rendsprint.asp


Ahh... but I do... and at home... and I've never owned or used or wanted a
digitial camera in my life... and those prints from 4x5 sure do look nice...


....I think it was obvious enough what kind of cameras were being
used...


--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

"Yeah, but some people can't deal with setting up USB"

Both my Nikon and Olympus only require to plug in the USB cable. is that too
hard?.... no drivers to load, no software to run. Just double click 'my
computer' and a new removable drive has appeared. Drag and drop pics to a
new folder on the computer and done. 50 pics down load in less than 2
minutes so battery charge shouldn't be much of and issue.

I don't have a new computer. Its over 3 years old using Windows ME and USB
1.0 ports. So its not a speedy compter and doesn't have the better plug 'n
play of XP.

I used to use a card reader (exttra $$ I wish I didn't spend). My Dad uses
the card slot on his printer. His download time is at least 5x longer than
mine. Why? I don't know.


"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Bill Tuthill wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04...rendsprint.asp


Interesting!

But I think it misses the point that digicam owners just don't know that
they can download images, or make a CDR and take it to a Fuji Frontier
minilab for printing. Most digicam owners don't even know which stores
have a Frontier and which don't.

Not sure I agree. The marketing of printing services available
from cameras is pretty strong. Every photo store around here,
large or small, has a kiosk for printing. Every camera comes
with suggestions on how and where to get printing done if not
with ones own printer.



Inkjet printers now have card readers and such, but I think card readers
are part of the problem. There are too many varieties of memory cards,
cards are delicate, and direct USB download is much easier.

Yeah, but some people can't deal with setting up USB (it's that
simple, but some people just can't connect the dots). For them,
slipping the card into the slot on the printer is perfect (my
printer has the slot and adapters for various formats are
available... I haven't used it... I can also use the same slot as
a "drive" for cards carrying other info (files, video, etc.).

Cheers,
Alan



--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

"Alan Browne" wrote:

...I think it was obvious enough what kind of cameras were being
used...

Heh, heh... ya' think??

jay wrote:

"Yeah, but some people can't deal with setting up USB"

Both my Nikon and Olympus only require to plug in the USB cable. is that too
hard?.... no drivers to load, no software to run. Just double click 'my

I didn't say everyone. Just "some people".


Don't top post.



--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

In article ,
said...
"Yeah, but some people can't deal with setting up USB"

Both my Nikon and Olympus only require to plug in the USB cable. is that too
hard?.... no drivers to load, no software to run. Just double click 'my
computer' and a new removable drive has appeared. Drag and drop pics to a
new folder on the computer and done. 50 pics down load in less than 2
minutes so battery charge shouldn't be much of and issue.

That is still way too much work for some people.

As to the top posting, sorry guess I'm not news group savy....I prefer it to
having to scroll down looking for the reply.

Anyway I was just thinking of the guy that posted over on
alt.comp.periphs.dcameras that is having trouble removing the memory card
from his camera and has to use a needle nose plyers.

I guess either way it too difficult for some.

jay wrote:
As to the top posting, sorry guess I'm not news group savy....I prefer it to
having to scroll down looking for the reply.

No sweat, I'm just 'sensitive' to it.

A: No.
Q: Should I top post?
A: Because it is confusing
Q: Why?

Among the reasons to post in sequence is it makes it easier for
passive reading by people who are following, but not neccesarilly
participating in a thread.

Some people top post occasionally (me too), but usually avoid it
as much as possible. Some people always top post. I don't
understand it, but suspect ego is involved 90% of the time, esp.
among those who do so in the face of all requests, convention and
logic against it. We have one vehement top poster here whose
possible motive is to draw more traffic to his websites by always
having his message at the top of the post.


Anyway I was just thinking of the guy that posted over on
alt.comp.periphs.dcameras that is having trouble removing the memory card
from his camera and has to use a needle nose plyers.

I guess either way it too difficult for some.

I'm amazed at people who purchase widgets without understanding
how they fit (or don't) into the rest of a system or for that
matter their day to day lives... A friend recently bought a
Power Shot 75 (neat little camera) and came back from Corsica
about 600 photos richer ... now she is facing the management of
them all. (Some nice shots too).

Cheers,
Alan.


--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

In article ,
said...
jay wrote:
As to the top posting, sorry guess I'm not news group savy....I prefer it to
having to scroll down looking for the reply.

No sweat, I'm just 'sensitive' to it.

A: No.
Q: Should I top post?
A: Because it is confusing
Q: Why?

That should be:

A: Because it is confusing
Q: Why?
A: No.
Q: Should I top post?