Walgreens Photo CD :-) on OSX
aRKay
they did a great job on the prints but the CD is useless. It
will not play under OSX 10.5.4 or Parallels. I put it in our
Sony HD DVD player and it played a cool slide show of 28
of the 350 pictures. Mac users should not use the Walgreens
photo system and it is not Mac compatible.
I finally gave up messing with the Walgreens CD and imported
the pictures to iPhoto.
Jolly Roger
<arkayREMOVE-AF34...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
> We just had our vacation pictures printed at Walgreens and
> they did a great job on the prints but the CD is useless. It
> will not play under OSX 10.5.4 or Parallels. I put it in our
> Sony HD DVD player and it played a cool slide show of 28
> of the 350 pictures. Mac users should not use the Walgreens
> photo system and it is not Mac compatible.
I'm not sure what you happened to get from Walgreens, but I know for a
fact if you go to Walgreens and request a "Photo CD", you'll get a
standard Kodak Photo CD (or Picture CD), which *will* play on most any
computer or recent model DVD player.
> I finally gave up messing with the Walgreens CD and imported
> the pictures to iPhoto.
For a digital camera, there is no better way to do it, IMO.
--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than to me, as
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
JR
Davoud
> We just had our vacation pictures printed at Walgreens and
> they did a great job on the prints
I'm happy for you. Have you considered getting one of those new-fangled
digital cameras and bypassing Walgreens?
> but the CD is useless. It will not play under OSX 10.5.4 or Parallels.
I'm sad for you.
> I put it in our Sony HD DVD player and it played a cool slide show of 28
> of the 350 pictures.
I'm happy for you.
> Mac users should not use the Walgreens photo system and it is not Mac compatible.
I'm -- whoa! You couldn't play your CD under Mac OS or Windoze, so _I_
should not use Walgreens? That's a bit of a stretch.
> I finally gave up messing with the Walgreens CD and imported
> the pictures to iPhoto.
You could have done that with a digital camera. And made a slide show
that would play on any Mac or PeeCee and on your DVD player. And
conserved the petrol it took to get to Walgreens.
Davoud
--
Don't re-elect the past. Vote for the future: Obama in 2008!
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
BreadW...@fractious.net
> will not play under OSX 10.5.4 or Parallels. I put it in our
> Sony HD DVD player and it played a cool slide show of 28
> of the 350 pictures. Mac users should not use the Walgreens
> photo system and it is not Mac compatible.
That's probably a good thing. "plays a cool slideshow"
means that there was *software* on that disc. I don't
know about you, but I don't want Walgreens' software.
I just want my photos.
> I finally gave up messing with the Walgreens CD and imported
> the pictures to iPhoto.
So you're saying that they provided both some photo
slideshow player *and* the photos themselves (presumably
as JPEGs)? That's great. Why would you want anything
from them but the JPEGs anyway?
--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting
Fred McKenzie
> We just had our vacation pictures printed at Walgreens and
> they did a great job on the prints but the CD is useless.
I think you should let Walgreens know they have a problem. Perhaps they
can read their "defective" CD and transfer the photos to a good one (or
to your thumb drive). If they can't read it, they may need to re-scan
your negatives.
Fred
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> That's probably a good thing. "plays a cool slideshow"
> means that there was *software* on that disc. I don't
> know about you, but I don't want Walgreens' software.
> I just want my photos.
DVD players have a programable menu system. That's why when you
leave some DVD's at the main menu things change. They just included
a programable menu that displays the first photo, waits a few seconds
displays the second and so on.
Try playing it on VLC using the play DVD with menus option.
Most DVD players will play a CD as if it were a DVD if it has the
files in the same format as a DVD. UDF file system, a directory
called "VIDEO_TS" (uppercase only) and so on.....
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel g...@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
gtr
I'll second that.
--
Thank you and have a nice day.
aRKay
Fred McKenzie <fm...@aol.com> wrote:
The Walgreens response was we do not support Macintosh and the reason
the CD will not play on your Sony DVD player must be something wrong
with the Sony player. They don't really care
I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
imported to iPhoto.
Jolly Roger
<arkayREMOVE-5413...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
> I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> imported to iPhoto.
I would have just done that to begin with. : )
aRKay
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article
> <arkayREMOVE-5413...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
> aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
>
> > I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> > imported to iPhoto.
>
> I would have just done that to begin with. : )
Walgreens did a great job on the 356 prints but their CD sucks big time.
Mike Rosenberg
> > > I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> > > imported to iPhoto.
> >
> > I would have just done that to begin with. : )
>
> Walgreens did a great job on the 356 prints but their CD sucks big tim
Since you have a digital camera, I'm wondering, and I imagine others
are, too, why you had Walgreens make a CD in the first place. Prints,
sure, that makes perfect sense, but a CD?
--
My latest ballroom dance performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W5Z5DGYIvM
I kill Google Groups posts. See http://improve-usenet.org for details.
Jolly Roger
<arkayREMOVE-5270...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
The CD *you* happened to get might suck, but, like I said, their "Photo
CD" works fine, because it follows a standard that was set ages ago:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotoCD>
Jolly Roger
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
>
> > > > I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> > > > imported to iPhoto.
> > >
> > > I would have just done that to begin with. : )
> >
> > Walgreens did a great job on the 356 prints but their CD sucks big tim
>
> Since you have a digital camera, I'm wondering, and I imagine others
> are, too, why you had Walgreens make a CD in the first place. Prints,
> sure, that makes perfect sense, but a CD?
Exactly. I've gotten a Photo CD made from *film* I've given Walgreens,
but never digital stuff. Their Photo CD works fine on Macs, BTW.
aRKay
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
>
> > > > I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> > > > imported to iPhoto.
> > >
> > > I would have just done that to begin with. : )
> >
> > Walgreens did a great job on the 356 prints but their CD sucks big tim
>
> Since you have a digital camera, I'm wondering, and I imagine others
> are, too, why you had Walgreens make a CD in the first place. Prints,
> sure, that makes perfect sense, but a CD?
Because it was only $2 to save my 356 photos to a CD. It was cheap but
OSX cannot read the CD.
Davoud
> > > > I have the pictures on my Canon 2 GB SD card and now have all 356 photos
> > > > imported to iPhoto.
> > >
> > > I would have just done that to begin with. : )
> >
> > Walgreens did a great job on the 356 prints but their CD sucks big tim
Mike Rosenberg replied:
> Since you have a digital camera, I'm wondering, and I imagine others
> are, too, why you had Walgreens make a CD in the first place. Prints,
> sure, that makes perfect sense, but a CD?
Nothing in the original post suggested to me that there was a digital
camera involved--but that's my mindset because, in the 21st century it
would never occur to me to take my digital photos to a store to get
them printed. Especially 356 of them. OP must be one hell of a good
photographer to take that many good photos on a vacation! Since I'm not
in the same league as OP, I select one or two photos (at most) from a
shoot and print them myself. More likely I print none. I post the
photos that I deem worthy at <http://www.primordial-light.com/>. My
wife likes to print one for the fridge door once in a while, but we
soon tire of looking at it and toss it in the trash.
What does one do with 356 vacation photos, anyway? Favor the neighbors
with a showing? Make Grandma or the siblings look at them? Go over them
with the kids like flash cards to teach then to quickly name every
location? I don't care how good the photographer, if he brings 356
photos to show me, the second time I see him coming I'll lock the doors
and draw the shades!
Mike Rosenberg
> Mike Rosenberg replied:
> > Since you have a digital camera, I'm wondering, and I imagine others
> > are, too, why you had Walgreens make a CD in the first place. Prints,
> > sure, that makes perfect sense, but a CD?
>
> Nothing in the original post suggested to me that there was a digital
> camera involved...
Oh, nothing in the OP suggested that to me, either. I got the distinct
impression he was talking about film. In a later post, though, he said
he imported the pictures from his Canon 2GB SD card into iPhoto.
> but that's my mindset because, in the 21st century it
> would never occur to me to take my digital photos to a store to get
> them printed. Especially 356 of them.
It's actually usually less expensive to have them printed for you than
to do it yourself, but I'd certainly pick and choose instead of having
them all printed.
Mike Rosenberg
> Because it was only $2 to save my 356 photos to a CD.
That's about $1.90 more than it would cost you to do the same thing.
> It was cheap but OSX cannot read the CD.
You keep saying that, but you've also said it's no good in Windows,
either, and it only displayed 28 of the photos in your DVD player, so it
sounds like you got a defective disc, period.
David Empson
Mac OS X has nothing to do with the problem - you said you couldn't read
it in Parallels either, which means Windows (or whatever you are running
in Parallels) is reading the CD directly.
It would be more accurate to say that your particular computer's optical
drive cannot read that particular CD. This might be due to a problem
with your optical drive, or a compatibility issue between your optical
drive and that particular brand of CD (or the method used to create it).
You already established that it works in your Sony DVD player, which
means the disc is readable in at least one other device, so the disc
isn't faulty.
I suggest trying it in other computers to establish a better idea of
what can read it. You could also try other CD-R media in your drive to
see whether it has a general problem reading CD-R media.
It should be a standard Kodak Photo CD (given the information from
others in this thread) and they are perfectly readable by a computer
(both Mac OS X and Windows), as long as they have been written to good
quality CD media and are read in a good quality drive.
I doubt this issue has anything to do with the fact that you are using a
Mac - the same problem might occur with any computer, depending on the
characteristics of the CD-R media and the optical drive.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Mike Rosenberg
> You already established that it works in your Sony DVD player, which
> means the disc is readable in at least one other device, so the disc
> isn't faulty.
Ah, but it only played 28 of the 300+ photos, and the folks at Walgreens
told him his Sony DVD player is defective.
Jolly Roger
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
>
> > Because it was only $2 to save my 356 photos to a CD.
>
> That's about $1.90 more than it would cost you to do the same thing.
>
> > It was cheap but OSX cannot read the CD.
>
> You keep saying that, but you've also said it's no good in Windows,
> either, and it only displayed 28 of the photos in your DVD player, so it
> sounds like you got a defective disc, period.
Which isn't much of a surprise, considering the price. I'm pretty sure
when I got a Photo CD from my local Walgreens they charged more than $2.
David Empson
> aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> writes:
>
> > will not play under OSX 10.5.4 or Parallels. I put it in our
> > Sony HD DVD player and it played a cool slide show of 28
> > of the 350 pictures. Mac users should not use the Walgreens
> > photo system and it is not Mac compatible.
>
> That's probably a good thing. "plays a cool slideshow"
> means that there was *software* on that disc.
Probably not. If it is a standard photo CD, many DVD players have
support for playing data CDs or DVDs which contain a simple folder of
music or photos. For photos, they present them as a slide show.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
BreadW...@fractious.net
True enough. I meant "plays a cool slideshow on a computer"
PhotoCDs (ie. Kodak's) have (or at least had - the only one I
have handy is over 10 yrs old) a few folders on them - one
contains a Windows slideshow program. The other folder,
aptly entitled IMAGES - contains - guess what - the image
files for the pictures.
The trick is that they are in Kodak's PhotoCD format - the
file names end in .PCD. You cannot just open them up
directly in the Finder. But if you have iPhoto running
and a PhotoCD in your drive, iPhoto will offer to import
the pictures off the disc - and in the process will convert
them to JPG for you. Like magic.
I'm pretty certain that GraphicConverter can also open up
those .PCD files directly, but I don't have it handy to
check.
But, no, OriginalPoster - the PhotoCD shouldn't "play" anything
on a decent computer. But it has quite useful and usable
copies of your photos on it. Import them into iPhoto and
have fun.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> The trick is that they are in Kodak's PhotoCD format - the
> file names end in .PCD. You cannot just open them up
> directly in the Finder. But if you have iPhoto running
> and a PhotoCD in your drive, iPhoto will offer to import
> the pictures off the disc - and in the process will convert
> them to JPG for you. Like magic.
It may not be.
Before the turn of the century, Kodak replaced the "Photo CD" with a
"Picture CD". The Photo CD had a format unlike no others and used
multisession disks. Each photo was actually there in three different
resolutions.
The multisession disks were thought of because a CD blank sold for $10
if you bought a box of 10, which in those days was a lot of money.
No one supported it at first, and Apple was the first by adding Photo CD
support to Quicktime. You still had to use a program to convert them
to a more common format.
People still had trouble with the strange format images, and the multisession
disks, so Kodak replaced it with the Picture CD, with the new image format
JPEG (and only one resolution), and a simple file structure.
The places here that offer CD's don't even bother, they just give you
a single session standard CD with JPEGS on it. That's readable by just
about everything.
The JPEG standard was announced in 1992 and approved in 1994.
The Photo CD came out in 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_CD
aRKay
dem...@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> I doubt this issue has anything to do with the fact that you are using a
> Mac - the same problem might occur with any computer, depending on the
> characteristics of the CD-R media and the optical drive.
The Walgreens CD works perfect on my wife's Dell D-600 using XP Pro but
will not run on the 2.4 GHz iMac OSX 10.5.4 and plays on a few of the
pictures on the Sony DVD player. Walgreens says their system is not Mac
compatible.
Chance Furlong
<arkayREMOVE-AD0F...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
aRKay <arkay...@qsl.net> wrote:
> Walgreens says their system is not Mac compatible.
Most likely because Walgreen's is taking it their ass from Steve Ballmer.
Mike Rosenberg
> > I doubt this issue has anything to do with the fact that you are using a
> > Mac - the same problem might occur with any computer, depending on the
> > characteristics of the CD-R media and the optical drive.
>
> The Walgreens CD works perfect on my wife's Dell D-600 using XP Pro...
You've been leaving that fact out all along?
> but will not run on the 2.4 GHz iMac OSX 10.5.4...
> and plays on a few of the
> pictures on the Sony DVD player. Walgreens says their system is not Mac
> compatible.
Did they try to explain what Mac compatibility has to do with the Sony
DVD player? And you told us that it wouldn't run under Parallels.
Aren't you running Windows via Parallels? That the disc won't play that
way has nothing to do with Mac compatibility.
--
I kill Google Groups posts. See http://improve-usenet.org for details.
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers
<http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude
Chance Furlong
Chance Furlong <t-b...@megakatcity.com> wrote:
That should be taking it up their ass from Ballmer.
aRKay
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> Did they try to explain what Mac compatibility has to do with the Sony
> DVD player?
I did not push the issue when I was told the Sony DVD player's software
is incompatible as the guy was just relaying what someone told him.
> And you told us that it wouldn't run under Parallels. Aren't you running
> Windows via Parallels? That the disc won't play that
> way has nothing to do with Mac compatibility.
Yes, I have XP Pro running under Parallels but it did not work like my
wife's Dell D-600 (XPP). I could see the CD but could not get it to
play under Parallels but it worded okay on the Dell laptop. This is
probably a cockpit problem because I really don't understand XP Pro
and do not want to spend the time to learn it.