"A distant third is state-of-the-art equipment. This has more effect on machine
throughput (read profitability) than quality."
I would like to gently disagree here. When I switched to Kodak Premium for a
while, I noticed that the prints were slightly sharper. The Kodak rep
acknowledged this, and said the Premium line used better printers. As I said in
a previous posting, the Fuji printers used at Costco seem to be even sharper
than Kodak's Premium equipment. So you might want to keep an eye on sharpness as
well as density and color balance.
Pop Photo did a survey of color papers about a year ago and came to the
conclusion that although two of the four tested (Agfa, Fuji, Kodak, Konica) were
"better," over-all, than the others (I forget which), it was also true that Fuji
negatives printed on Fuji paper and Kodak negatives printed on Kodak paper gave
better results than mixing the negative and paper brands. So this is also a
variable in picking a lab.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|