PhotographyBLOG: New Reviews!

#1 Ian Burley

I reviewed this drive over 3 months ago!

You can read the review, including a gallery of product shots, at http://dp-now.com/archives/000037.html

Don't forget the X's Drive I, which is cheaper, if a bit slower. It's reviewed at:

http://dp-now.com/Features/Peripheral_reviews/perif8/perif8.html

Which one did you go for, Mark?

Cheers!

Ian

10:30 am - Friday, August 1, 2003

#2 Mark Goldstein

Hi Ian,

I bought the XS-Drive version 1. It was by far the cheapest portable storage solution when I bought it (and still is I think), and I couldn't see much difference between the 1st and 2nd versions (except for the LED screen and USB 2).

Mark

12:22 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#3 sean

Hi Mark

I have also just been trying out various online labs. Namely Peak Imaging, BonusPrint, and Jessops.

I uploaded a set of images on Monday evening to each lab. On Wednesday the Peak Imaging arrived on the mat, very prompt service. Today (Friday) the BonusPrint prints arrived. Still waiting for the Jessops prints.

I also have an Epson 1290 so I can compare my printer output to a lab. My reason for using a lab is to get prints with better longevity, and maybe better quality. I recently did some wedding photo's for friends and I didn't want these fading after a few years.

The quality of the BonusPrints is very good, virtually indistinguishable fromt he Peak prints. Packaging was good, and price is a lot less than Peak, particularly for small size prints. I would definitely use them again.

Also, my Epson 1290 prints are again almost identical. Some slight differences in saturation and tone but nothing dramatic.

Looking forward to your results from all the other labs.

Sean

1:31 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#4 Mark Goldstein

Thanks for that Sean - very informative. It's good to know that I'm not the only one worried about the archival quality of my prints

Dye-based inkjet prints are fine if they're for your own personal use - if they fade you can just print off another one. Not so good if you're selling your work though.

As you point out, the Bonusprint prices are dramatically cheaper than the Peak ones - 15p vs 79p !! I just hope that the quality is similar.

It's quite en eye-opener to order prints from different labs then lay them all out together on the floor. You can immediately see subtle differences between them, which obviously wouldn't be apparent if you were ordering from just one company. I think it will be well worth spending a bit of cash up front to determine which company offers the best overall package of price, service and quality.

I'm also going to print out the same images on my Epson 890 and compare them to the lab prints.

Mark

1:45 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#5 Ian Burley

I'm sure Mark won't mind if I point you to a dp-now forum thread on this subject. I was so impressed by Photobox (used 4 times and every order arrived the next working day) that I have signed dp-now up to be an affiliate. You can also read an article I wrote on this subject in the current What Digital Camera magazine. Photobox was also named online photofinisher of the year by Amateur Photographer.

Here's the forum link:

http://www.dp-now.com/cgi-bin/forum/forum.pl/read/9025

Cheers,

Ian

2:13 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#6 Mark Goldstein

That's fine by me Ian - I've signed-up for the DP-Now Photobox offer myself

2:30 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#7 sean

Photo-Box look to be worth trying. I will also give them a go. Thanks for the tip.

Also, I reckon a 7x5 print on my Epson 1290 works out at about 30p a print, using Epson inks and Premium Glossy Paper.

So these online services certainly rival having your own PhotoPrinter in terms of cost.

3:26 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#8 Mark Goldstein

If the BonusPrint service and quality is as good as you say, then at 15p for a 6x4 inch print, it definitely is a serious contender for producing smaller sized prints.

Mark

3:39 pm - Friday, August 1, 2003

#9 Mark Goldstein

The BonusPrint order turned up on Saturday, so I'm just waiting now for the Jessops and TopFoto orders. I'll then be comparing the prints from each lab.

Mark

2:10 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#10 Ian Burley

Jessops is almost always the slowest service in my experience. And they compress your image files further on upload. But it doesn't seem to affect print quality, at least not up to 6x8, which I have tried and is not bad at all.

Ian

3:36 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#11 Mark Goldstein

Do you know how much they compress the files by? I didn't see anything about this on their website or the Jessops software - I think they should at least warn you up-front about it.

Mark

3:52 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#12 Ian Burley

You can tell because the upload tales a fraction of the time that it does elsewhere. But I have no information on how much or even how...

It may even be smart, discarding data it knows will be surplus to the requirement of the print size.

Ian

5:42 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#13 Mark Goldstein

I wondered why it only took 2 minutes to upload!

Still, I think I'd rather have the choice of being able to upload quickly or not. I'll have to wait and see if it makes any discernible difference to the print quality.

6:17 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#14 sean

My Jessops prints arrived this morning. Quality seems similar to BonusPrint and Peak, i.e. very good.

Interesting that the Jessops system might be compressing the images. I didn't take much notice of upload time or file size. Next time I will.

Packaging on Jessops prints is ok, although a bit more flimsy than Peak or BonusPrint.

Overall, I am impressed with all three online labs. The upload software is easy to use, and print quality is very good. Price wise BonusPrint and Jessops are far cheaper than Peak so better value for those holiday snaps.

I will be interested to read Mark's side by side comparison of the labs he has tried.

7:22 pm - Monday, August 4, 2003

#15 Mark Goldstein

I received the prints back from Jessops today, so I'm just waiting for TopFoto now.

Mark

2:49 pm - Tuesday, August 5, 2003