Blurry prints from OK pictures ?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1121309126.504350.245360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Amamba" <egroy@mailexcite.com> wrote:

> I have recently had a couple dozen pictures printed at local Meijer out
> of 5 MP originals, uploaded through the internet using their software.
> The originals are OK (the camera produces images just a bit on a soft
> side), but it's practically unnoticeable on my computer screen (19"
> monitor at 1280x1024 resolution). However, the photos that were printed
> on the glossy 4x6 paper (the only option) look worse. I'm puzzled,
> since I always thought that making a relatively small sized print of a
> high-res image should help hide blur, not amplify it. I also don't
> understand why image that looks good on a large screen would not look
> as sharp on a small print.
>
> Can it be that images get out of focus when printed ?

It could be anything. Why would a supermarket know how to make good
prints?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks for replies !

I am not downsampling images - but I upload them using Meijer's
software, so maybe it does. I always save them from PhotoDeluxe as
non-compressed JPEGs.

I will try another online service & see if it's better.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Amamba wrote:
> I have recently had a couple dozen pictures printed at local Meijer out
> of 5 MP originals, uploaded through the internet using their software.
> The originals are OK (the camera produces images just a bit on a soft
> side), but it's practically unnoticeable on my computer screen (19"
> monitor at 1280x1024 resolution). However, the photos that were printed
> on the glossy 4x6 paper (the only option) look worse. I'm puzzled,
> since I always thought that making a relatively small sized print of a
> high-res image should help hide blur, not amplify it. I also don't
> understand why image that looks good on a large screen would not look
> as sharp on a small print.
>
> Can it be that images get out of focus when printed ?


Hi...

Your 5mp camera produces huge file sized pictures, even if
gently jpeg compressed, so I'm assuming you did something
with them before uploading them.

So - to get a reasonable answer as to what may have gone
wrong, you're going to have to give us more info about
what you did.

For instance - did you crop them? Resize them? Compress
them heavily?

Take care.

Ken

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Amamba" <egroy@mailexcite.com> wrote in message
news:1121309126.504350.245360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I have recently had a couple dozen pictures printed at local Meijer out
> of 5 MP originals, uploaded through the internet using their software.
> The originals are OK (the camera produces images just a bit on a soft
> side), but it's practically unnoticeable on my computer screen (19"
> monitor at 1280x1024 resolution). However, the photos that were printed
> on the glossy 4x6 paper (the only option) look worse. I'm puzzled,
> since I always thought that making a relatively small sized print of a
> high-res image should help hide blur, not amplify it. I also don't
> understand why image that looks good on a large screen would not look
> as sharp on a small print.
>
> Can it be that images get out of focus when printed ?
>

I never thought this would be an issue with digital as it was with film, but
apparently it is. I'd almost always get prints back from film that were not
sharp. I thought my camera had a focusing error, but the negatives were very
crisp. I'd take them somewhere else and get them reprinted sharp. Even the
other place was not consistent. With chemically developed prints, a image is
recorded on the paper then it is processed. There can still be a focus error
since lenses are involved. I was surprised how blurry some digital prints
had come out. I couldn't read some small text on a sign on one print that
was clear in the image. The photofinisher/camera store chain in my city seem
to be better, but still not perfect. The drug stores/department stores are
the worst offenders.

On a side note. The camera store chain got a Sony dye-sub system for nearly
instant prints. Kind of expensive $.39 per print, but there is no focusing
involved in the machine so the prints are always clear. I noticed a very
slight vertical smear on some prints but you need a magnifying glass to see
it.
-S

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Amamba wrote:

> I have recently had a couple dozen pictures printed at local Meijer out
> of 5 MP originals, uploaded through the internet using their software.
> The originals are OK (the camera produces images just a bit on a soft
> side), but it's practically unnoticeable on my computer screen (19"
> monitor at 1280x1024 resolution). However, the photos that were printed
> on the glossy 4x6 paper (the only option) look worse. I'm puzzled,
> since I always thought that making a relatively small sized print of a
> high-res image should help hide blur, not amplify it.

I'd try another processor.

I've never had real bad prints, but I have noticed subtle differences
in quality from different outfits. I currently use a local drug store.
that uses the Fuji Frontier system.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks all for replies.

I looked up some info online, and saw that a few people were happy with
WalMart. I printed the same pics there.. what a difference !!! The
pictures are vibrant, sharp and beautiful. Bye bye Meijer.

I also started applying Unsharpen Mask filter to the pictures that look
blurryish and this made some difference, too. However, these pictures
now look too sharp on the screen; I probably will end up not doing it,
since I'm convinced that eventually the paper photo albums are going to
go the way of the tape cassette players (and this is not in a distant
future).