Home -- Back -- Part 2 test prints
I should say first of all that all of the digital prints appear more durable than inkjet prints and, ignoring image quality for the moment, the finish of almost all of them is comparable to standard prints from analogue film. If you are not too picky you may be happy with the image quality from most of the digital print services we tested. On the other hand, if, like me, you want reasonable quality prints from your digital camera then the results from many labs are disappointing. The main problem seems to be that most digital printing processes automatically "enhance" images. This may not be noticeable if the lighting in your image conforms to what the enhancement software thinks is correct but many of my photos have dark or light areas that I want to preserve without loss of detail. I think it is intrusive for the processing software to dabble with the exposure. I believe that these enhancements are much more noticeable with digital print services than with their analogue counterparts. In my opinion, and that of my fellow reviewers, this practice can result in some very poor quality prints. I think that all companies who use automatic image enhancement should offer the option for their customers to turn off this feature. After all, we can use our own photo editing software to modify the images that we think need it.
Anyway, below is a commentary on the quality of the prints from each company tested in this review.
Company |
Quality |
Comments |
Asda |
2.6/5 |
Matte,
not gloss prints. Dark images were brightened, with increased contrast
and colour saturation (especially greens). Sharpening artefacts were enhanced
and brighter parts of the image were burnt out with a loss of detail in
the highlights. Paper was thinner than some. |
Boots |
2.2/5 |
Noise
was emphasised, resulting in blotchy areas in some images. Some increased
contrast and sharpened edges, but less so than the prints from the worst
companies. Colours were brightened, especially greens. Paper was thinner
than some. |
Colorama |
1.3/5 |
Dull,
pale colours with a grey/brown/yellow cast. Contrast was increased and
dark images were brightened more than expected, resulting in some unpleasant
prints. |
Digital-lab |
1.5/5 |
Images
uploaded via the Internet were printed at a low resolution. I complained
and was asked to supply the images on CD-ROM. Even so, some images were
still printed at reduced resolution. Pale colours. One print was badly
cropped/cut with a white border that should not have been there. Contrast
was increased. Paper was thinner than some. |
Fotoinside |
2/5 |
Blotchy
skies, probably due to noise being emphasised, also grey skies were printed
blue. Greens were brighter than expected. Either the image resolution
was reduced, or the jpg compression level was increased/emphasised. Increased
contrast, brightness and colour saturation. |
Jessops |
2.2/5 |
The
short edges of the prints were cut roughly, with jagged edged. Some browns
were printed grey. Noise was emphasised, resulting in some blotchy areas
of constant colour, especially skies. Detail was burnt out in bright areas
and contrast was increased. Some prints were paler than expected. |
Klick |
1.8/5 |
Dark images were brightened, with increased contrast and colour saturation
(especially greens). Sharpening artefacts were enhanced and brighter parts
of the image were burnt out with a loss of detail in the highlights. Paper
was thinner than some. |
Local
shop |
2.1/5 |
Dark
images were brightened, with increased contrast and colour saturation
(especially greens). Sharpening artefacts were enhanced and brighter parts
of the image were burnt out with a loss of detail in the highlights. This
was even worse than some other companies that did the same sort of "enhancement".
Paper was thinner than some. |
Ofoto |
4.3/5 |
Slight
yellow tint to greens. Good colour reproduction otherwise, with no obvious
contrast, brightness or saturation modification. Prints curl more than
others. |
Peak
Imaging |
4.2/5 |
Good
colour reproduction, no noticeable increase in contrast, brightness or
saturation. Slight banding observed in areas of constant colour that was
not seen in other comapanies' prints. |
Photobox |
2/5 |
Dark
images were brightened, with increased contrast and colour saturation
(especially greens). Sharpening artefacts were enhanced and brighter parts
of the image were burnt out with a loss of detail in the highlights. Paper
was thinner than some. |
Photodeal |
3/5 |
Good
colour reproduction. Reduced resolution and/or increased jpg compression
artefacts resulting in indistinct edges and which may have also been the
cause of some colour blockyness. |
[Back]