David, I've watched the lab try to do so. Most of the people they are trying to explain things to have no clue. They don't know what a file is or what file size means. All they know is when they used film, they could get any size prints they wanted. I think it is going to take quite some time before this sorts out. The camera manufacturers really should change their standards. Instead of picking the size of image by pixels in the camera settings, they should have you pick it by reasonable size of print. Use terms that people actually understand. Compression could be "poor quality, mediocre quality, pretty good quality and good quality" or something like that. Also, all cameras should use the same interface and terminology so people could understand better. Digital cameras should not just be for computer geeks.
Bruce Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 5:49:18 PM, you wrote: DCS> The mere fact that it is digital would suggest that there is no real DCS> "standards" to follow - that's the nature of the beast currently. DCS> Mind you, you could look at the scenario this way: DCS> Take 120 film into any local WalMart and they'll look at you funny. DCS> "What's this ??" they'll ask. DCS> "A different style of film" you'd say DCS> "I thought only 35mm was the standard, what's with this film stuff, seems DCS> like there is no real 'standard'." would be their reply. DCS> Having to support different memory cards is, unfortunately, part of dealing DCS> with digital - Compact Flash (types I and II), SD cards, maybe SmartMedia, DCS> and god forbid you have to deal with Memory Stick as well - but this is the DCS> way it is currently - just as it is with PC vs Mac - only within the last DCS> few years has Mac stuff been a bit more flexible and vice versa. DCS> With respect to maximum file sizes, you would think that if the lab has DCS> digital to photo paper printing that someone in that lab would be a "digital DCS> expert" (per se) and create a little sign explaining minimum file sizes for DCS> minimum sized prints. DCS> In the end, if the lab wants the business (and my guess would be that they DCS> do since they invested in the capability to do so) that they should be the DCS> ones to "set the standards" for the customers. Let the Lab tell the DCS> customers what they need in order to get the prints that the customers DCS> desire. Probably would make things a lot easier if a set of simple DCS> "guidelines" were laid out for the P&S digital neophyte. DCS> Cheers, DCS> Dave DCS> -----Original Message----- DCS> From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] DCS> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:32 PM DCS> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DCS> Subject: Behind the counter with digital DCS> I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to DCS> photo paper printing capability. DCS> What a gong show. DCS> First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we DCS> are being asked to support 3 different memory card styles, plus DCS> microdrives, plus floppies and CDs. DCS> The people don't seem to have a sniff that they have to have DCS> minimum file sizes to make prints or that it would be nice to DCS> have the work in a common format. DCS> One clever sot actually asked us to make prints from a bunch of DCS> GIF images today. I guess thats how photodeluxe saves them DCS> The there was the moron that buried the files he wanted printed DCS> about 6 levels down from the root directory of his full CD, and DCS> didn't know the exact filenames for a search. DCS> Anyway, the people who make this stuff need to do some more DCS> market research. Maybe try to make digital photography easy. DCS> Film users can literally aim and shoot, and expect reasonable DCS> results, with no knowledge base. DCS> Digital users seem to need a course in rocket science to get DCS> pictures. DCS> William Robb
