best quality prints

[Kinz]

If get my photos printed by a photofinishing place where I live, and I can send the files by e-mail. I want very good quality, clear prints, because I sell them matted and framed. My question is, is there any difference in the quality of the print if I send a 87kb file, or the original 2.7mb file? I would think so, but I'm wondering if the file size is just reduced, but the actual picture will still be the same. Thanks

[korman]

The resolution probably will be the same, but the JPG compression will hit your image so hard that you'll have more artefacts than Indiana Jones at the end of the movie. Basically you'll lose a lot of details.

And if you change the size of the image, well it will have less pixels, but I guess that wasn't the question.

Korman

[Kinz]

well, I'm not sure what the question should be...but here's somethign maybe to clarify it.
The original file size is 4288x2848, a 3.1mb file. When I send it via Windows Mail, the file is "reduced" to 28.5kb So I guess I'm wondering if it's just reduced in size for emailing purposes, or if it is actually reduced in size, and when it's printed, it might not be as clear of a print, than if it was sent in the original 3.1mb size.

[korman]

Send it to yourself, look what you get and weep. Most likely some clever program will decide for you that a mailed picture doesn't need to be bigger than 800x600 in low quality setting and mangles your picture automatically.

Korman

[mario]

Originally Posted by Kinz

well, I'm not sure what the question should be...but here's somethign maybe to clarify it.
The original file size is 4288x2848, a 3.1mb file. When I send it via Windows Mail, the file is "reduced" to 28.5kb So I guess I'm wondering if it's just reduced in size for emailing purposes, or if it is actually reduced in size, and when it's printed, it might not be as clear of a print, than if it was sent in the original 3.1mb size.

The reduced file size will greatly interfere with the quality of your print... and the larger you print, the worse it will be. Viewing on screen is different from getting a clear print. It's worth the extra upload time to send the larger file to your photofinishing place. Most photofinishing places that take files online will let you upload vs email. If Windows mail is reducing your file seize, I'd upload it rather than email.

[Kinz]

Thanks for the responses. I decided to stick with the larger file size for the reasons people said. I'm not sure why it's reduced sometimes depending on how I send it, but I'll send it in a large size, if for no other reason than it makes sense. Thanks.

[boikman]

If your files are being reduced,it is because of your e-mail settings. Try right clicking on an image, then "send to "...it will then ask you what size you want to send. At the bottom it says "more options" , in there you will find "original size" and click on that. No more small file sizes that way !
Hope this helps...

[kris10]

Originally Posted by mario

The reduced file size will greatly interfere with the quality of your print... and the larger you print, the worse it will be. Viewing on screen is different from getting a clear print. It's worth the extra upload time to send the larger file to your photofinishing place. Most photofinishing places that take files online will let you upload vs email. If Windows mail is reducing your file seize, I'd upload it rather than email.

Mario is defnitely correct on this. I upload and have images printed at MPIX all the time and my image files are usually a minimum of 4MB's. It definitely takes some time to upload them when they're that big but the result is a high quality print that looks great. The smaller you go, the worse your final print will look.

[Kinz]

Thanks Kris, I am sending them as large as I can. Although I sent some smaller ones a couple of times and that's what got me wondering. There is a place here in town that does a really nice job with a 2-4mb file. So I'll keep sending the largest file I can. Thanks again.