«

My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .

The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom of the
print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with white so
that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind you, the entire image
(including the white space), was still a perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.

Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
print?

No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead of a
5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
cropped off.

I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until next
week to get this redone.

So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen? Should I
have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a picture of police
tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered by the frame so that
nobody cuts it off?

Jon

Jon Danniken wrote:
> My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print
> back (I even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
>
> The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom
> of the print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in
> with white so that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind
> you, the entire image (including the white space), was still a
> perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
>
> Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I
> picked the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my
> nice 5"x7" print?
>
> No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that
> instead of a 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after
> the white was cropped off.
>
> I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait
> until next week to get this redone.
>
> So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen?
> Should I have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a
> picture of police tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered
> by the frame so that nobody cuts it off?
>
> Jon

Did you indicate that you purposely left the white border?
If not, then it is reasonable for them to assume you didn't.
Most framed "5x7" aren't really 5x7.
Tell them your intent next time...or print your own.

I use kodakgallery.com because they allow, _if you set it in your
account_, no cropping and no color correction on every pic you order,
sort of as a default once you set it.

Having been bitten by practically everybody else ; the flexible ones
only being flexible enough to let you say it per picture each time,
which is a mechanical process you'd have to spend hours doing each
time you ordered prints. As if nobody cropped their own pics the
way they wanted them.

--
Ron Hardin


On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Jon Danniken wrote:
> My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
> even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
>
> The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom of the
> print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with white so
> that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind you, the entire image
> (including the white space), was still a perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
>
> Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
> the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
> print?
>
> No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead of a
> 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
> cropped off.
>
> I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until next
> week to get this redone.
>
> So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen? Should I
> have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a picture of police
> tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered by the frame so that
> nobody cuts it off?
>
> Jon
I have done exactly what you describe with prints that I have sent to
Costco and they have come back just like I expected. It seems very odd
that anyone would take the time to trip a photo to size just because
there was some white boarder. In my case I was getting 4 x 6 prints
made. It is posible that 5 x 7 prints have to be hand trimed, in which
case I could see someone missing where they were to trim. Maybe a
light boarder instead of white would work better.

Scott

Jon Danniken <> spewed:
> So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen?
> Should I have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a
> picture of police tape on the part that I had inserted to be
> covered by the frame so that nobody cuts it off?

DotPhoto.com was notorious for doing that to my photos as well. Often I've
added borders or specifically cropped the image for a reason, and I was also
a bit annoyed when the images came back lopsided or trimmed. I switched to
XPPhoto.com and haven't had a problem with them... I suppose it all comes
down to who is running the machine on any particular day though...


--
The Toe Pages: http://www.rubbertoe.com

"Jon Danniken" <> wrote in message
news:...
> My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
> even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
>
> The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom of
> the
> print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with white
> so
> that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind you, the entire
> image
> (including the white space), was still a perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
>
> Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
> the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
> print?
>
> No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead of
> a
> 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
> cropped off.
>
> I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until
> next
> week to get this redone.
>
> So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen? Should
> I
> have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a picture of
> police
> tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered by the frame so that
> nobody cuts it off?
>
> Jon


Hi.

I think you are being a bit unreasonable. Those printing machines are fully
automatic.

They are programmed to cut the paper, when there is a straight edged area of
white from one side to the other, and if they are printing onto a 7 inch
wide roll, your added on piece of white just looks like the gap between 2
prints.

If you want prints made exactly the way you need, then pay for Hand Printing
and give precise instructions. I think you might well be surprised at the
cost of such a service.

Roy G

BTDT. Create the white space then select the outer border and stroke it
with black.

Tesco News wrote:
> I think you are being a bit unreasonable. Those printing machines are fully
> automatic.
>
> They are programmed to cut the paper, when there is a straight edged area
> of white from one side to the other, and if they are printing onto a 7 inch
> wide roll, your added on piece of white just looks like the gap between 2
> prints.
>
> If you want prints made exactly the way you need, then pay for Hand Printing
> and give precise instructions. I think you might well be surprised at the
> cost of such a service.

> "Jon Danniken" <> wrote
> > My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> > created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
> > even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
> >
> > The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom
> > of the print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with
> > white so that the frame matte would not obscure his paws.
> > Mind you, the entire image (including the white space), was still a
> > perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
> >
> > Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
> > the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
> > print?
> >
> > No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead
> > of a 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
> > cropped off.
> >
> > I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> > fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until
> > next week to get this redone.
> >
> > So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen?
> > Should I have expected this to happen? From now on should I put
> > a picture of police tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered
> > by the frame so that nobody cuts it off?

BTDT. Create the white space then select the outer border and stroke it
with black.

Reply via the web portal at www.faczen.com or
email usenet at firstaidco dot ca

Tesco News wrote:
> I think you are being a bit unreasonable. Those printing machines are fully
> automatic.
>
> They are programmed to cut the paper, when there is a straight edged area
> of white from one side to the other, and if they are printing onto a 7 inch
> wide roll, your added on piece of white just looks like the gap between 2
> prints.
>
> If you want prints made exactly the way you need, then pay for Hand Printing
> and give precise instructions. I think you might well be surprised at the
> cost of such a service.

> "Jon Danniken" <> wrote
> > My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> > created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
> > even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
> >
> > The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom
> > of the print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with
> > white so that the frame matte would not obscure his paws.
> > Mind you, the entire image (including the white space), was still a
> > perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
> >
> > Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
> > the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
> > print?
> >
> > No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead
> > of a 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
> > cropped off.
> >
> > I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> > fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until
> > next week to get this redone.
> >
> > So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen?
> > Should I have expected this to happen? From now on should I put
> > a picture of police tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered
> > by the frame so that nobody cuts it off?

Jon Danniken wrote:
> My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
> created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
> even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
>
> The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom of the
> print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with white so
> that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind you, the entire image
> (including the white space), was still a perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
>
> Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
> the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
> print?
>
> No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead of a
> 5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
> cropped off.
>
> I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
> fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until next
> week to get this redone.
>
> So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen? Should I
> have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a picture of police
> tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered by the frame so that
> nobody cuts it off?

add to the white part:
"Do Not Crop"

>
> Jon
>

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:42:07 -0800, "Jon Danniken"
<> wrote:

>My local photo lab prints images from digital sources at 300 DPI, so I
>created a 1500 x 2100 image in the hopes of getting a 5"x7" print back (I
>even specified, 5"x7" on the order). .
>
>The print was of my dog, and since his paws were close to the bottom of the
>print, the bottom 3/16" of the image I sent in were filled in with white so
>that the frame matte would not obscure his paws. Mind you, the entire image
>(including the white space), was still a perfect 1500 x 2100 pixels.
>
>Satisfied with the digital image, I dropped the CD off, and when I picked
>the print up a few days later (earlier tonight), did I have my nice 5"x7"
>print?
>
>No, I had a nice 5" x 6 and 13/16" print - someone decided that instead of a
>5"x7" print I wanted whatever size print resulted after the white was
>cropped off.
>
>I'm obviously not entirely pleased that my art was messed with in this
>fashion, and since it is so close to Christmas I'll have to wait until next
>week to get this redone.
>
>So my question to you, is have you had anything like this happen? Should I
>have expected this to happen? From now on should I put a picture of police
>tape on the part that I had inserted to be covered by the frame so that
>nobody cuts it off?
>
>Jon


I suppose you have to tell them no cropping - print as is!

It's the reason I do everything myself, can't trust people to do anything
right... I once took pictures of a house that was to be demolished for a
highway, for the people who lived there for their memories. I remember the photo
of their bedroom had both end tables and lamps just in the frame. The idiot
printer cut one of the lamps and tables in half, and the people who wanted the
photos gave ME ****! I showed them the negative - which was perfect - and had
the idiot print it again... needless to say, the goof cut the table again! I
give up. I am SO glad there is at home digital printing today!

If you want something done right, do .. ......... .