DSLRUsers.com

Paid $26 for 'satin' which is a relatively matt surface.

Printed in the Canon printer (as opposed to the Kodak ) in one day. Colors came out pretty good (limited palette with blues and grays though) when compared to my basic calibrated setup. [No printer profiles used]

Very happy for hanging-around-the-house purposes. Professional results may vary..

No harm in giving a go I reckon.

[No I don't work for Officeworks]

Sounds cheap enough to give a whirl...if only i had something to print, and not the temptation to print at work!

Just to give you an idea of size; this is a 20 inch monitor.

Nice, the print looks good!

What res and dpi was the original pic?
u just take it in on a usb stick?
I'm really hopeless and haven't printed anything in years its all just digital but that print looks sweet

What paper are they using?

Divine,

my camera is 8MP. upscaled about 20% (in gradual increments) in PS. Saved as TIFF with ZIP compression. Used USB stick because their web interface is clunky to say the least. Also it's no joy uploading a 60Mb image.

Devilla, I have no idea about paper!

Service was very good as I turned up really odd times (8pm weekday) and when I went to pick the print, the people at the counter were really excited that the print came out well! One guy was yelling across the store telling me as such!

Nice one Surenj.
Looks like the print came out lighter than the version on your monitor.
Was that intentional ?

Also, for those looking to upscale images for enlarged printing, the formula I use when upscaling is:

(Required Length in inches) x (DPI being used) = Image length in pixels
(Required Height in inches) x (DPI being used) = image height in pixels

So, for a 30" x 20" print, being printed at 200DPI, you would need:

30 x 200 = 6000pixels (length)
20 x 200 = 4000pixels (height)

Thus, a native 3000 x 2000px NEF/JPEG would need to be upscaled to 6000 x 4000 for this 30" x 20" @ 200dpi

It is also usually fine to save as a JPEG (highest quality), but TIFF is also fine - it will just be a larger file size.

Cheers,
Dave

Aussie Dave wrote:Looks like the print came out lighter than the version on your monitor.

It's because I didn't balance flash vs ambient properly in this image. If anything, the image on the monitor is slightly brighter than the print. [Although it's hard to directly compare the two ]

Looks good Suren.
Trying to work out where the pic was taken
Are you going to frame it or mount?

Sounds good.... thanks for your information, I just finding somewhere provide this service!

Nioce Suren! and a fine image for printing!

Jenno wrote:Trying to work out where the pic was taken

hint, eastern burbs? south...

surenj, the print looks like its 2 stops brighter than the monitor, is that just the angle we're viewing it at or is the shot actually considerabley darker ?

biggerry wrote:hint, eastern burbs? south...

Close but no cigar. North Coogee. Remember last year..? 0430am Dec 19th or something!

Jenno wrote:Are you going to frame it or mount?

I mounted it on foam board with photo tabs! I know it will warp but it's not for long term use anyways...just playing around. I don't have facilities for complex glue sort of projects...

Rooz wrote:is the shot actually considerabley darker

Probably 1/2 stop or so. The monitor always looks brighter anyways. The flash in this photo is too much. The photo is reflecting the back wall as well.

Suren the print looks great, especially at that price. I normally pay around $60 for a similar size at my local my local pro photo place, so you've done well.