Walmart portrait studios digital pictures suck!
bob
taken. She ended up selecting her prints which will be ready in a few weeks,
but she also bought what's called the "Digital Package". For an extra $10
you get your images on a cd along with some utter shit 3rd party application
to print stickers, etc. What they don't tell you is that the digital
pictures you purchased are 312x390 pixels, which is fine for printing fucking
postage stamps, let alone a 5x7 or something. My God, what a waste of money.
Devils Advocate
"bob" <bo...@paintbrush.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98CBB42...@198.164.200.20...
I agree.
Walmart sucks for digital prints.
Todd
I find WalMart great for getting prints done. Don't kow what the
studio stuff is like but what ever I shoot and get printed is great.
--
Cheers
Todd
www.flickr.com/photos/todd_baker
hershey
files were large enough for you to print a 5x7, you and most people would
probably print them on your own. The reason behind not allowing people to
print their photos is to prevent people from printing them on home printers
and saying walmart or other company did them when the paper and quality of
the print would be of lesser quality and wouldn't show the true quality of
the company. Poor quality prints could cause loss of sale for a company even
though they didn't print them.
"bob" <bo...@paintbrush.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98CBB42...@198.164.200.20...
Jen
> The reason for the small size of the prints is for just that reason. If the
> files were large enough for you to print a 5x7, you and most people would
> probably print them on your own. The reason behind not allowing people to
> print their photos is to prevent people from printing them on home printers
> and saying walmart or other company did them when the paper and quality of
> the print would be of lesser quality and wouldn't show the true quality of
> the company. Poor quality prints could cause loss of sale for a company even
> though they didn't print them.
I think its more to do with people buying more sheets off them and not
so much about worrying about poor print quality. They make more money
when people purchase extra picture sheets than what comes in the main
package -- by selling the cd with images large to print on large scale
then people wouldn't buy anything other than the normal package, they
wouldn't need to. That being said though, they should tell people the
size of the images on the cd.
-Jen
newfiegal©
one hour lab ones are way too dark. I find Dominion the best--for
both print and portrait pics.
bob
you the originals on CD instead of some resized junk.
"newfiegalŠ" <loveho...@yahoo.ca> wrote in
news:1170468022.2...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
newfiegal©
On Feb 2, 11:09 pm, bob <b...@paintbrush.com> wrote:
> At least when you buy your digital pictures from Dominion, they give
> you the originals on CD instead of some resized junk.
>
hershey
themselves then people who saw these prints would not get as much developed
at that location. Those people would think the quality was shabby and get
developing elsewhere. The studio does however make most of their profit from
the extra photos printed, hence the reason for the lower priced sitting fee.
"Jen" <wals...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1170467199....@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
pet...@hotmail.com
Mart and I've been generally happy with both, although I would say
about the family portrait thing that the woman doing it didn't do it
as efficiently as she could have done and a professional would have
done it much better and faster. The problem was, we have 3 small kids
(twins age 3 and an older child age 5) and it is virtually impossible
to get them all looking in the same direction / not fighting / not
crying simultaneously for more than about 0.5 seconds. So when taking
photos of kids this age, what you have to do is wait for the right
moment to arrive then take about a dozen shots in rapid fire
succession and discard all but the best one (or discard all of them
and start again if they're all crap). A pro would have recognised
this. However, the Wal-Person insisted on taking one shot at a time
and they saying "do you like this one?" "shall I keep this one?"
"would you like to try again" and we were in there for about half an
hour trying to get the elusive perfect shot until the kids were bored
and mutinous and ready to kill us and each other.
Charles
she has been trained for and required to use. I am surprised that anyone can
get a decent family photo done in the 10 or 15 minutes allowed in the
session, especially with small children. I have taken up to an hour to get
the right shot.
Here's one tip for home photographers, if you are trying to get a good
family portrait at home which includes little kids. ( And family portraits
at home are much better than in an artificial studio environment IMO. The
surroundings are more familiar to small children and they will be more
relaxed plus your home is always a better backdrop than an artificial one,
except for outdoors maybe.)
Back to my tip : Use the self timer on your camera, even if the photographer
is not in the picture. Make a game of it and have your photographer do the
countdown, going a bit crazy behind the camera and building the suspense for
when the timer goes off. This is particularly effective with small active
boys (and boy do I know about them) who are the most difficult to shoot. My
camera and my flash have blinking lights for the last 10 seconds of the
timer which amplifies the excitement in the kids and they all look directly
at the camera in anticipation. Even small babies will look directly at a
blinking light. Works like a charm for me every time.
<pet...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1170500307....@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
hershey
would tend to be useless. 1-hour to get a family portrait, that's way too
much time. Everyone would be ready to kill the photographer.
I can see 1-hour for a full session, but not just the family photograph even
with children. You need more then one trick up your sleve to keep children
interested.
"Charles" <charles1998NOSPAM@@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eq1tgt$skg$1...@news.datemas.de...
Jammers
> files were large enough for you to print a 5x7, you and most people would
> probably print them on your own. The reason behind not allowing people to
> print their photos is to prevent people from printing them on home printers
> and saying walmart or other company did them when the paper and quality of
> the print would be of lesser quality and wouldn't show the true quality of
> the company. Poor quality prints could cause loss of sale for a company even
> though they didn't print them.
So why the heck are they even offering the service? It is an utter rip
off to pay that kind of money they charge for the CD only to find when
you get home the resolution is smaller than a pimple in a spiders
kneecap! I don't think by selling this junk they are doing their so-
called reputation any good either!
Jammers
Charles
You are too quick to dismiss, my dear. I offered a single tip. I never said
it was the only trick up an experienced sleeve.
Very often with this approach very few shots are needed. It's all in the
positive approach. Try it before you condemn it.
A one hour session is not necessarily spent in front of the camera. Never
wanting to force anything, very young or fussy children often need several
play/rest breaks.
In these situations the photographer is the least likely to lose his life.
LOL! It is usually the overwhelmed and "unhelpful" Dad in the sights of the
exasperated Mother who is unendingly apologetic for the lack of cooperation
of her clan. A good photographer is a people reader and the best can make
almost anyone relax enough to get the shot.
"hershey" <newfys...@hotmail.com &*&> wrote in message
news:fT3xh.1936$R71....@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
bob
news:1170526271....@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com:
I've sent an email to their customer service dept. I don't expect much
sympathy...after all, it's a buyer beware world.
hershey
>
>
> You are too quick to dismiss, my dear. I offered a single tip. I never
> said it was the only trick up an experienced sleeve.
I didn't dismiss it as not a working idea. But when you stated it saometimes
takes you an hour to get the perfect shot would be too long using the same
trick.
>
> Very often with this approach very few shots are needed. It's all in the
> positive approach. Try it before you condemn it.
>
Was not stated. as per the above answer you made it sound like you needed
approximately an hour to get that shot.
> A one hour session is not necessarily spent in front of the camera. Never
> wanting to force anything, very young or fussy children often need several
> play/rest breaks.
This is true. Hence the reason a professional photographer would photograph
others in the session to allow the child to play and relax.
> In these situations the photographer is the least likely to lose his life.
> LOL! It is usually the overwhelmed and "unhelpful" Dad in the sights of
> the exasperated Mother who is unendingly apologetic for the lack of
> cooperation of her clan.
The way you had it stated the photographer would be the one to blame. In the
case you have described in the second post changes that. And yes I agree the
dad gets the brunt of it most often.
A good photographer is a people reader and the best can make
> almost anyone relax enough to get the shot.
I agree. It's called experience with being social, and using positive
reinforcement to secure a pleasant environment.
hershey
send the photos via email so the family can see them even though they are
hundreds or thousands of KM's away.
Most people don't know the difference, and therefore nothing is asked or
changed.
It's all about the almighty dollar
From the photo CD's I have seen from them the pics are not that small as
what is being portrayed here. you would get a 3x5 print from them but
nothing more.Unless something has changed or they picked the OP out to
annoy, something is off. If you wanted a full quality print file you would
be paying a lot more then what you would be for what they offer now.
"Jammers" <jcra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1170526271....@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
Charles
bob
Filesizes ranged from 80 to 95 kb. You might get a 3x5 print,
but it certainly wouldn't be acceptable by anyone's standards
when it comes to photograhpic prints.
So, I'm not "portaying" anything other than the facts.
"hershey" <newfys...@hotmail.com &*&> wrote in news:Ft7xh.2043
$R71....@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:
Todd
It's no different if you went to a studio that used film. They
wouldn't give you the negs and the sample prints you would get would be
small with a copyright stamp on it somewhere.
--
Cheers
Todd
www.flickr.com/photos/todd_baker
hershey
"Todd" <toddg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mn.1c9b7d724...@gmail.com...
bob
news:mn.1c9b7d724...@gmail.com:
The last time I had portraits done was at Dominion. I purchased a CD
which included all the photos from the shoot in their original format.
I was expecting the same from Wallyworld. Dominion even gives you a
release form which allows you to do whatever you wish with those digital
photos. I hope this clears up any confusion.