Correcting poor picture quality when burning pictures to CD

[mesolo]

Recently bought a Casio QVR-40, 4.0 mega pixels, 3x optical zoom, 3.2
digital zoom. It also has a 10MB built-in flash memory.

I took some pictures outside today, uploaded them, burned them onto a
blank CD-R and brought them to Walgreen's to get developed. On my
computer,(Windows XP) they look fine, but when I transferred them to
the CD they came out unclear, blurry and digital-like. Is this
common??

Q. How do I correct this? I want the pictures to look more like
"regular pictures." If I bought a separate memory card and then had
them developed from that instead of burning them to a CD-R would the
picture quality be better??

BTW, I'm an amateur photographer and plan on using the camera
primarily for taking pics on vacation, holidays, etc.

Thanks in advance for your advice!

 

[John Inzer]

Recently bought a Casio QVR-40, 4.0 mega pixels, 3x
optical zoom, 3.2 digital zoom. It also has a 10MB
built-in flash memory.

I took some pictures outside today, uploaded them, burned
them onto a blank CD-R and brought them to Walgreen's to
get developed. On my computer,(Windows XP) they look
fine, but when I transferred them to the CD they came out
unclear, blurry and digital-like. Is this common??

Q. How do I correct this? I want the pictures to look
more like "regular pictures." If I bought a separate
memory card and then had them developed from that instead
of burning them to a CD-R would the picture quality be
better??

BTW, I'm an amateur photographer and plan on using the
camera primarily for taking pics on vacation, holidays,
etc.

Thanks in advance for your advice!

============================

Are you using the best quality settings in
the camera?

A best quality image from any 4MP camera
should print nicely...even as an 8x10.

There are some full sized images from a
Casio QVR-40 at the following link...
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/qvr40_samples.html
They average 1.8MP + - each which would
allow 5 or maybe 6 pictures in your camera's
memory.

If you selected a setting that allows you
to save lots of pictures in your camera's
memory...that's probably the problem.

Your full sized images should be 2304 x
1712 pixels...lower resolution images
would not print as well.

Did you resize / edit the images before
burning them on your CD?

Yes, you definitely need a memory card.
Not so much for printing but just so you
can take more pictures.

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[mesolo]

============================

Are you using the best quality settings in
the camera?

Your full sized images should be 2304 x
1712 pixels...lower resolution images
would not print as well.

That turned out to be the problem. I inadvertently changed the
setting to 1280 x 960, which is equal to 2 megapixels, which in turn
caused the picture to be blurry. I went to Best Buy and a salesman
spotted the problem right away and readjusted the setting to 2304 x
1712.

Did you resize / edit the images before
burning them on your CD?

Yes, you definitely need a memory card.
Not so much for printing but just so you
can take more pictures.

And yes I did buy a memory card at Best Buy on Monday. It just so
happens this week BB is offering a $10.00 rebate on a certain brand of
mc and it was the same price as what is offered on these "discount"
internet sites.

Thanks again for your advice!!

 

[John Inzer]

Your full sized images should be 2304 x

====================================
That turned out to be the problem. I inadvertently
changed the setting to 1280 x 960, which is equal to 2
megapixels, which in turn caused the picture to be
blurry. I went to Best Buy and a salesman spotted the
problem right away and readjusted the setting to 2304 x
1712.

====================================
You learned an important lesson...

Another important fact is that Digital Zoom is
nothing more than electronic cropping and it's
a good idea to disable it and only rely on the
Optical Zoom.
====================================

====================================
And yes I did buy a memory card at Best Buy on Monday. It
just so happens this week BB is offering a $10.00 rebate
on a certain brand of mc and it was the same price as
what is offered on these "discount" internet sites.

====================================
Watch your sale papers on the weekends...
sometimes you can find real bargains on
memory cards. Having several....is not a
bad idea...especially if you are going on
vacation.
====================================

Thanks again for your advice!!

====================================
You're welcome.

Maybe the info at these links will be useful to you:

Tips For Taking Your First
Digital Photos
http://tinyurl.com/6g6mm

Digital Image Editing 101
http://tinyurl.com/672pw

Image Rescue For
Everyday Photo Problems
http://tinyurl.com/4pm3z

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[mesolo]

When having the pictures developed does it make any difference if
they're processed in an hour or the next day? With my original
pictures they were processed within an hour and didn't turn out so
well, but then again, it was on the wrong setting.

I'll probably eventually end up getting a new printer in order to
process these photos, but in the mean time I'm confined to having them
processed at the local Walgreen's. The cost right now is 29 cents a
picture. I'm now looking at different printers. Do you have any
suggestions on which printers work best? I was looking at a HP that
sells for approx. $179, it's one where you can insert the memory card
in the front and not have to turn on your computer. The nice thing
about it is it prints different size pics, not just 4 X 10's, plus it
also works as a regular printer. I've seen ones that print just
pictures but you're confined to just one size and they don't act as a
regular printer. Another thing, I was wondering about the added
expense of developing my pictures, I already know I'd have to buy
special paper. Plus it seems that I'd be using a lot of ink to print
the pics. I know if I printed my own pics it would be cheaper in one
respect but on the other hand would the cost of the printer cartridge
and the special paper off-set my savings??

Please advise??

 

[John Inzer]

When having the pictures developed does it make any
difference if they're processed in an hour or the next
day? With my original pictures they were processed
within an hour and didn't turn out so well, but then
again, it was on the wrong setting.

I'll probably eventually end up getting a new printer in
order to process these photos, but in the mean time I'm
confined to having them processed at the local
Walgreen's. The cost right now is 29 cents a picture.
I'm now looking at different printers. Do you have any
suggestions on which printers work best? I was looking
at a HP that sells for approx. $179, it's one where you
can insert the memory card in the front and not have to
turn on your computer. The nice thing about it is it
prints different size pics, not just 4 X 10's, plus it
also works as a regular printer. I've seen ones that
print just pictures but you're confined to just one size
and they don't act as a regular printer. Another thing,
I was wondering about the added expense of developing my
pictures, I already know I'd have to buy special paper.
Plus it seems that I'd be using a lot of ink to print the
pics. I know if I printed my own pics it would be
cheaper in one respect but on the other hand would the
cost of the printer cartridge and the special paper
off-set my savings??

Please advise??

==================================
You may see some difference in the print
quality of the various photo labs. Personally,
I've been happy with Walmart...I get my prints
in less than an hour.

Also...there are many online sites where you
can upload your images and order prints.
Some have free offers to get you started.
Have a look at the following link:

Guide to online photo albums:
http://tinyurl.com/3x3a
(bypass all the questions by clicking
the "Show Me The Sites" button)

One thing to consider is the professional
labs process your digital images on real
photo paper the same way they print
from film negatives. If you print them at
home on an inkjet all you have is ink on
paper...not an actual photographic print.

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[Herb Fritatta]

==================================
You may see some difference in the print
quality of the various photo labs. Personally,
I've been happy with Walmart...I get my prints
in less than an hour.

Also...there are many online sites where you
can upload your images and order prints.
Some have free offers to get you started.
Have a look at the following link:

Guide to online photo albums:
http://tinyurl.com/3x3a
(bypass all the questions by clicking
the "Show Me The Sites" button)

One thing to consider is the professional
labs process your digital images on real
photo paper the same way they print
from film negatives. If you print them at
home on an inkjet all you have is ink on
paper...not an actual photographic print.

What? Do you mean at a professional lab, they print your images, take a
phot of them, make a negative and then make silver halide prints? They
*do not* use the same process or paper as is used in making prints from
photographic negatives, John.

 

[John Inzer]

What? Do you mean at a professional lab, they print your
images, take a phot of them, make a negative and then
make silver halide prints? They *do not* use the same
process or paper as is used in making prints from
photographic negatives, John.

====================================

The following excerpt from dotPhoto's
FAQ seems to have a different view:

======================
======================
dotPhoto uses state-of-the-art silver halide
chemical process digital printers designed for
professional photo finishers. We do not use a
laser printer or dye sublimation. This is a true
photographic process. Real photographic paper
(just like that used in your local 1-hour) is exposed
in a state of the art digital printer. The paper is
then developed using regular photographic
chemicals. The result is you receive real
photographic prints on Kodak paper, unlike
dye sub or Laser prints that will fade much,
much sooner. These printers combined with
dotPhoto's proprietary imaging technology
result in the best possible prints from your
digital camera.
======================
======================

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[mesolo]

I took more pictures on Sunday and had them developed on Monday.
Again I went to Walgreen's and the clerk informed me they process
digital prints within an hour, they don't send them out to a pro'l
photo lab. They only send out film to be developed for "regular
pictures", not digital. Suffice to say, this time the pics turned out
perfect. It made me glad I bought my digital camera!

Originally I had been getting a lot of different opinions about why my
pics didn't turn out so well. A friend of mine said it was the copier
at Walgreen's. The clerk at Walgreen's said it was the way I took the
pictures, she said they looked blurry on the CD. I didn't think so,
but I asked other people, including going to this message board. The
clerk at Radio Shack said it was because I had the pictures developed
in under an hour and because I had transferred the pics to a music
CD-R instead of a picture CD-R?? She tried to sell me a picture CD-R.
The funny thing was, she had the same exact camera I did and if I
followed her suggestions I would've spent more then I should have and
the problem still wouldn't have been corrected. If I've learned one
thing from this experience it's that they're always trying to sell you
'something' at Radio Shack!

Also, I went looking at printers yesterday and found out a few things.
If I print them off of a regular printer I have to purchase special
"photo" paper so it will look like regular pictures. Plus I found out
it uses a lot of color ink and I would have to set it in my microwave.
If I overdo it in the microwave the colors will run off. If I buy an
Epson printer the ink cartridges have separate colors that are sold
separately, so if I run out of one color I don't have to buy a whole
new cartridge and they only cost $10-12 per color. The only drawback
is Epson printers are 'hand feed' and HP's are 'tray feed.' I prefer
the tray feed and HP only sells entire cartridges. So that's out!

I've finally decided the time and expense isn't worth it to print my
own pictures unless I need them right away so I've decided to stick to
one of these online sites instead. John how much does Walmart charge
per pic??

Once again, thanks John for your advice, this message board has proved
to be a valuable tool in learning about digital cameras!

 

[John Inzer]

I took more pictures on Sunday and had them developed on
Monday.
Again I went to Walgreen's and the clerk informed me they
process digital prints within an hour, they don't send
them out to a pro'l photo lab. They only send out film
to be developed for "regular pictures", not digital.
Suffice to say, this time the pics turned out perfect.
It made me glad I bought my digital camera!

Originally I had been getting a lot of different opinions
about why my pics didn't turn out so well. A friend of
mine said it was the copier at Walgreen's. The clerk at
Walgreen's said it was the way I took the pictures, she
said they looked blurry on the CD. I didn't think so,
but I asked other people, including going to this message
board. The clerk at Radio Shack said it was because I
had the pictures developed in under an hour and because I
had transferred the pics to a music CD-R instead of a
picture CD-R?? She tried to sell me a picture CD-R. The
funny thing was, she had the same exact camera I did and
if I followed her suggestions I would've spent more then
I should have and the problem still wouldn't have been
corrected. If I've learned one thing from this
experience it's that they're always trying to sell you
'something' at Radio Shack!

Also, I went looking at printers yesterday and found out
a few things. If I print them off of a regular printer I
have to purchase special "photo" paper so it will look
like regular pictures. Plus I found out it uses a lot of
color ink and I would have to set it in my microwave. If
I overdo it in the microwave the colors will run off. If
I buy an Epson printer the ink cartridges have separate
colors that are sold separately, so if I run out of one
color I don't have to buy a whole new cartridge and they
only cost $10-12 per color. The only drawback is Epson
printers are 'hand feed' and HP's are 'tray feed.' I
prefer the tray feed and HP only sells entire cartridges.
So that's out!

I've finally decided the time and expense isn't worth it
to print my own pictures unless I need them right away so
I've decided to stick to one of these online sites
instead. John how much does Walmart charge per pic??

Once again, thanks John for your advice, this message
board has proved to be a valuable tool in learning about
digital cameras!

=========================================
Hi,

As you have discovered the hard way...everyone
tells you something different. You will have to
experiment and decide for yourself. Most any
of the pros like Walgreens or Walmart will produce
a decent print if you have good sharp images
to work with.

No you don't have to dry your printed pictures
in the microwave. If ink is not drying correctly
it's because you are using the wrong type of
photo paper.

The best deal I've seen on photo paper was
at Costco....125 sheets for $20.00. They also
print digital pictures.
http://tinyurl.com/54x6t

This link should give you an idea of Walmart's
prices. The in store prices may be somewhat
different.
http://tinyurl.com/5mtg8

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[Herb Fritatta]

-----Original Message-----

====================================

The following excerpt from dotPhoto's
FAQ seems to have a different view:

======================
======================
dotPhoto uses state-of-the-art silver halide
chemical process digital printers designed for
professional photo finishers. We do not use a
laser printer or dye sublimation. This is a true
photographic process. Real photographic paper
(just like that used in your local 1-hour) is exposed
in a state of the art digital printer. The paper is
then developed using regular photographic
chemicals. The result is you receive real
photographic prints on Kodak paper, unlike
dye sub or Laser prints that will fade much,
much sooner. These printers combined with
dotPhoto's proprietary imaging technology
result in the best possible prints from your
digital camera.
======================
======================

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

I stand corrected, at least in this instance. This process
is not in widespread use though. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Herb Fritatta]

-----Original Message-----

====================================

The following excerpt from dotPhoto's
FAQ seems to have a different view:

======================
======================
dotPhoto uses state-of-the-art silver halide
chemical process digital printers designed for
professional photo finishers. We do not use a
laser printer or dye sublimation. This is a true
photographic process. Real photographic paper
(just like that used in your local 1-hour) is exposed
in a state of the art digital printer. The paper is
then developed using regular photographic
chemicals. The result is you receive real
photographic prints on Kodak paper, unlike
dye sub or Laser prints that will fade much,
much sooner. These printers combined with
dotPhoto's proprietary imaging technology
result in the best possible prints from your
digital camera.
======================
======================

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

In thinking about this process, it occurs to me that in
order for it to happen, a negative image must be made,
otherwise the printed image would be negative. I wonder
if this is a lossless process. I'll have to study further
and see how it works. I know that Canon, for one, claims
25 years with no fading if their inks and papers are used,
and if the prints are properly stored. I have silver-
halide prints from less than 25 years ago that have faded
noticeably, so I'm not sure that silver-halide is
necessarily a superior method for digital prints. I'll
post back in 25 years and let you know!

 

[John Inzer]

I stand corrected, at least in this
instance. This process is not in
widespread use though. Thanks
for the correction.

==========================
Technology moves fast...it's hard to
keep up with all the new advancements.

Thanks for the update.

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[John Inzer]

In thinking about this process, it occurs to
me that in order for it to happen, a negative
image must be made, otherwise the printed
image would be negative. I wonder if this is
a lossless process.

================================
I have no idea how the technology works
but I have software that will create a negative
from a digital image. I suspect that any good
image editing program can do it.

And why wouldn't it be lossless...the image
could be reversed and printed without saving.
It's the resaving of a .jpg that causes the loss.
=================================

I have silver-halide prints from less than
25 years ago that have faded noticeably,
so I'm not sure that silver-halide is necessarily
a superior method for digital prints. I'll
post back in 25 years and let you know!

=================================
Great! I'll be expecting your message in 2029.

There are so many variations to any process
it's hard to pinpoint what the *best* is. I have
some very old photos that are perfect and
some that are totally faded. I also have some
ink jet images that are faded after only a couple
of years. My only point was that digital can
be processed the same as film.

--

John Inzer
Picture It! MVP
return e-mail disabled

Picture It! Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/2po2o

Digital Image Support Center
http://tinyurl.com/3xxqg

 

[Phil McCracken]

================================
I have no idea how the technology works
but I have software that will create a negative
from a digital image. I suspect that any good
image editing program can do it.

And why wouldn't it be lossless...the image
could be reversed and printed without saving.
It's the resaving of a .jpg that causes the loss.
=================================


=================================
Great! I'll be expecting your message in 2029.

There are so many variations to any process
it's hard to pinpoint what the *best* is. I have
some very old photos that are perfect and
some that are totally faded. I also have some
ink jet images that are faded after only a couple
of years. My only point was that digital can
be processed the same as film.

An intersting article on the subject: http://tinyurl.com/3oqw7