photobox cropping... again....
photobox cropping... again....
Author
Discussion

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
What's the deal with the image dimensions with a D70 - I've uploaded a bunch of photos to photobox, and [i]all[/i] the standard image sizes - 6"x4", 6"x4.5" and 7"x5" - result in cropping to a lesser or greater degree.

Surely the images straight from the camera should meet some normal accepted standard for size? If I want 6x4 I have to either put up with loads of cropping, or horrible white borders. Annoying!!! :mad::mad::mad:

No real point to this topic, just venting rage at having to cut 130 prints down to remove borders.

MEMSDesign

1,100 posts

287 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
I thought the sensor in the d70 was 3:2 - should be able to print 6x4 without cropping. Res is 2000x3008 so it's only 8 pixels off perfect? Maybe there's an issue with the printers?

GetCarter

30,344 posts

296 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
It's annoying isn't it. This is why I sized all mine at A2 - so that A3 and A4 would turn out the same dimensions. 7 x 5 buyers will just have to suffer!

The good news is I sold 11 in my first month

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
I suppose it could only be a tiny bit of cropping going on - when viewing a 100px image in the shopping basket it's probably hard to tell.

simpo two

89,679 posts

282 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
Like nearly every other DSLR the D70 output is almost exactly 3:2 - a little more 'widescreen' than 35mm film. However, even in the days of 35mm film there was still cropping - the processors lopped it off and no-one seemed to notice or care much.

Clearly you can't fit a rectangle into a square, so you either lose the ends by cropping or get white edges top and bottom. I guess print proportions need to catch up a bit.

I see PhotoBox do a 7.5 x 5" print, which would fit exactly.

NB Odd that you get cropping with 6x4 though...

>> Edited by simpo two on Monday 15th August 10:06

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
GetCarter said:
It's annoying isn't it. This is why I sized all mine at A2 - so that A3 and A4 would turn out the same dimensions. 7 x 5 buyers will just have to suffer!

The good news is I sold 11 in my first month



Out of interest Steve, hijacking my own thread a bit... Were these sales all through people browsing photobox? Or was it a link from another of your sites?

Just being nosy, no-one's bought any of my pics! Not that I expected them to really but it must be nice for the old ego.

Come on wedge girl, I've got some new stuff there now!

www.photoboxgallery.com/dobbo/

GetCarter

30,344 posts

296 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
_dobbo_ said:

GetCarter said:
It's annoying isn't it. This is why I sized all mine at A2 - so that A3 and A4 would turn out the same dimensions. 7 x 5 buyers will just have to suffer!

The good news is I sold 11 in my first month




Out of interest Steve, hijacking my own thread a bit... Were these sales all through people browsing photobox? Or was it a link from another of your sites?

Just being nosy, no-one's bought any of my pics! Not that I expected them to really but it must be nice for the old ego.

Come on wedge girl, I've got some new stuff there now!

www.photoboxgallery.com/dobbo/


Actually, I have no idea who bought them (execpt two people with impecable taste from here)

My sites have a combined hit count of about 2500 per month - over 1200 to www.Torridon.org - I strongly suspect that it was links from here that they were sold. A lot of people visit the Highlands and it pi55es down all week (especially in August, the second wettest month) so they don't get any decent pics and buy mine instead. Only a theory mind.

I doubt that Photobox will ever pay for the next car, but it may well provide some money for fuel!

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
I've just posted up 130 odd photos of a christening I went to on Saturday. What I should have done is put them in my pro gallery with a 10% markup - might have made back some of the money lost on the exorbitant beer prices!

too late, I've made the gallery public with no markup... Looks like photobox wont be paying for anything anytime soon!

>> Edited by _dobbo_ on Monday 15th August 11:31

FunkyNige

9,579 posts

292 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
Not just dSLR annoyingly -

Scanned negative:



Scanned 5x7 print from Kodak:



It took me over 10 rolls of film before I realised it wasn't me missing bits off the edge of things

simpo two

89,679 posts

282 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
_dobbo_ said:
What I should have done is put them in my pro gallery with a 10% markup - might have made back some of the money lost on the exorbitant beer prices!

Nope, as PhotoBox take 10% commission!

HankScorpio

715 posts

254 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
Not quite, they only take 10% of the difference between standard prices and pro prices.

It's a tough call to make on the family events but if you were doing inkjet prints for everyone, it would be a hell of a lot more.
I used to do that and none of my lot expected me to fund it myself so they made a contribution, I keep it about the same and everybody's happy.

joust

14,622 posts

276 months

Monday 15th August 2005
quotequote all
www.pixaco.co.uk

Doesn't crop, ever, so regardless of format you get the 'correct' size.

Cheapest on the market too....

J

ehasler

8,574 posts

300 months

Tuesday 16th August 2005
quotequote all
You can't blame Photobox for the fact that different print sizes have different formats, and that not all of these fit the format of the D70 perfectly. It's the same for any printer - even if you did it yourself at home.

6x4 should be an almost exact fit (3:2), but 6x4.5, 7x5, A4 etc... are obviously different ratios, so you will either have to crop the image to fit, or have borders. There is no other way to get around this.

At least Photobox give you the option to chose what suits the image best.

joust

14,622 posts

276 months

Tuesday 16th August 2005
quotequote all
ehasler said:
6x4 should be an almost exact fit (3:2), but 6x4.5, 7x5, A4 etc... are obviously different ratios, so you will either have to crop the image to fit, or have borders. There is no other way to get around this.



Sorry, not true, as that's the beauty of pixaco.

You choose the "sort" side size, 3, 4, 5, 12" etc. and it just print the "long" side to be correct.

So, if you have a 3:4 image, then you would get a 6x8 print.

If you have a 2x3 image, then you would get a 6x9 print.

So, if you have a load of 2x3 images that you want to change into 3x4 images to print them out 6"x8" then you just crop them in photoshop exactly where you want.

So, regardless of what print size you want (A4, A5 etc.) you never need white borders with pixaco as it will just change the length of the paper to ensure that the whole image fills it.

The other nice thing with pixaco is that you get great landscape prints using the same principle.

If the image length gets too large for the paper (a 3" width print has a maximum length of 7" ) then it centres the whole image. This means that for the same 6p you get a 3" x 7" landscape image.

Here is a scan of two pixaco prints



I've added the borders to the prints myself so you can see where the paper is. Even though the bottom image is a 4:3 image from an old Olypus digital camera, there is absolutly no cropping on that.

The top image is a 3740x1182 image. You can see the original image at
www.lotus-elise.org.uk/IOW/Alum%20Bay.jpg
The bottom image is normal 1600x1200 image and is available at
www.lotus-elise.org.uk/IOW/P3180237.JPG

J

>> Edited by joust on Tuesday 16th August 11:45

ehasler

8,574 posts

300 months

Tuesday 16th August 2005
quotequote all
joust said:

ehasler said:
6x4 should be an almost exact fit (3:2), but 6x4.5, 7x5, A4 etc... are obviously different ratios, so you will either have to crop the image to fit, or have borders. There is no other way to get around this.




Sorry, not true, as that's the beauty of pixaco.

You choose the "sort" side size, 3, 4, 5, 12" etc. and it just print the "long" side to be correct.

So, if you have a 3:4 image, then you would get a 6x8 print.

If you have a 2x3 image, then you would get a 6x9 print.

So, if you have a load of 2x3 images that you want to change into 3x4 images to print them out 6"x8" then you just crop them in photoshop exactly where you want.

So, regardless of what print size you want (A4, A5 etc.) you never need white borders with pixaco as it will just change the length of the paper to ensure that the whole image fills it.
These aren't standard size prints though, so no different really to getting one with a border and chopping it to fit yourself (apart from Pixaco saving you a job with the scissors )

It's a fair point, but if the format of your file is different to that of the desired print, then you will obviously have to either crop or make do with borders.

The format of the D70 is virtually (by 8 pixels) the same as 35mm film and most if not all other DSLR sensors - 3:2. This format fits 6x4 exactly, but doesn't fit 6x4.5, 7x5 or A4 etc...

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Wednesday 17th August 2005
quotequote all
Having looked a bit more, as Ed rightly says it's 6x4 you need for a decent fit, with just 8 pixels cropped. (it looks like more on the photobox site, hence my original whinging.

If you want bigger, 7x5 results in lots of cropping, but 7.5x5 is perfect.

Problem is that extra .5 of an inch, or 7% of print area equates to 60% more expensive prints. OUCH!

joust

14,622 posts

276 months

Wednesday 17th August 2005
quotequote all
_dobbo_ said:
Problem is that extra .5 of an inch, or 7% of print area equates to 60% more expensive prints. OUCH!
Or use pixaco and it's the same price.....

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Wednesday 17th August 2005
quotequote all
joust said:

_dobbo_ said:
Problem is that extra .5 of an inch, or 7% of print area equates to 60% more expensive prints. OUCH!

Or use pixaco and it's the same price.....


Pixaco don't list 7.5x5?

pixaco site said:

Photo 5x3.5 £0.07
Photo 6x4 £0.09
Photo 6x4.5 £0.12
Photo 7x5 £0.15
Photo Poster 12x8 £0.98
Photo Poster 18x12 £2.19

joust

14,622 posts

276 months

Thursday 18th August 2005
quotequote all
Arrrggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. They don't need to!

Pixaco only go on the "short" side - you can modify the "long" side by just changing the pixel size of the image.

So, if you want 7.5" x 5" then choose the 7"x5" (i.e. choose the 5" short side one), and scale the image in 15 x 10 multiples (i.e. a 1500x1000, 3000x2000 pixel resolution).

From their FAQ

pixaco said:

The shorter side of the image is exactly 3.5", 4" or 5" in size, and the longer side of the image varies depending on the uploaded digital file.
None of your picture will be cropped.

Panoramic pictures can be produced with the following maximum widths: up to 6.3" by 3.5" high; up to 7" by 4" high; up to 7.5" by 5" high. If a panoramic picture cannot be processed to its maximum length, the image will be placed centred on the paper.

Also with the 12 to 30 inch posters, the longer side of the print is variable. However, the maximum width of the picture when printed landscape (maximum height when printed portrait) is equivalent to the format information (12x8", 18x12", 24x16" and 30x20".


J

_dobbo_

Original Poster:

14,618 posts

265 months

Thursday 18th August 2005
quotequote all
So by that logic I can stitch 130 images together horizontally, and pay 15p for all my prints.

Result!