Prints from small cameras equals bad wording!!

[minoltaman]

:help :puke
Geesh, discriminating against all of the folks that shoot or crop images in 4::3?

To tell the customer that the print they are about to order is coming from is from a small camera is like telling them not to buy it in my opinion!!!!! WOWZA!!:scratch

Why should someone with a camera that shoots both aspect ratios or has a 5-8 mp camera that shoots 4::3 have to have his images labeled "prints from a small camera??":uhoh

This is a horrible name for a print option. Small means suckier to many people and as a pro I don't want the 4::3 prints I upload to smugmug to only be available as "prints from a small camera" What, you mean small like like a toy?? geeesh....Just make it say 4::3 and 3::2 or something if you can't think of anything better than that! Or go back to your old wording.

I will stack my images from my "little" camera against most any image from your big camera anytime and I am willing to bet my small camera will eat your big camera images for for lunch in many cases.

You could have just named the 3:2 aspect ratio "prints from cameras without live preview", I say. Or you could make it say "prints from people that bought something they do not know how to use properly"

"Prints from a small camera" is possibly the worst marketing blunder for pros shooting images in a 4::3 format that I could imagine or think of. Maybe not for you, but for the pro shooting some 4::3 stuff is he now looking sorta like an idiot here. Please, please, please, please....change the name to something other than "prints from small cameras".

You can print some humongous prints from some of these 4-8mp beauties and just because you have some old 3mp dslr with a larger sensor or a pocket instamatic does not mean you have big camera.

The cameras may have a different size sensors but calling the 4::3 "prints from small cameras" is a somewhat of a joke.

I am supposed to offer 25k to 50k picks here at smugmug as "prints from small cameras"...I don't think so, that's just a bit crazy.


Please get rid of the wording "prints from small cameras",

Thanks

-don

[Baldy]

And replace it with?

[marlof]

Just a suggestion: you do have the D for "digital" with those prints, so may be it could be

"4:3 digital format prints"
"2:3 classic format prints"

E-1 and E-300 users that shoot in the 4:3 aspect ratio would be happy with that. And I guess people shooting in the 2:3 aspect ratio might even like the "classic" sound. Or leave it at standard.

[minoltaman]

And replace it with?Take a poll with some other options, I am not great with titles, I just know that one sucks bad.

Maybe something similar to one of these:

Put both aspect ratios under one option...prints
4:3/3:2 prints
Standard 3:2/Digital 4:3
use your old way
standard/modern
traditional/modern
old format/new format
old print sizes/new print sizes


I am sure someone can come up with something better than I as I have to finish my taxes now and am not great at thinking of catchy descriptive names anyway. When I am finished with my taxes I will try to think of something better. What do all of the other services that you know about call 4::3 prints?

I dunno yet, but "prints from small cameras" is not the greatest term to use by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe Nik can think of something, he is good with that sort of thing.

-don

[Baldy]

Other services call them digital prints (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0007/00071101photoaccess43.asp). Been there done that. The customer hasn't a clue why one digital camera's prints should be called digital prints but prints from their Digital Rebel aren't.

The consumer doesn't know for 4:3 ratio prints.

The consumer won't know old/new. I'm not sure I do either. The first digital cameras were 4:3 so are they old?

We're certainly open to suggestions so keep 'em coming.

[marlof]

I think that's why you shouldn't call them just "digital prints" (which is weird wording anyhow) but "4:3 digital format prints" as opposed to "2:3 standard (or classic) format prints". The aspect ratio would say enough for experts, and the "digital format" and "standard format" should say clear enough for end users that it's about the format of the print, not the way the file is treated or whatever. This might work, since after all, you do expect them to grasp the 4xD idea after they selected "small camera print", and have a great text helping you in getting that across.

On a side note: didn't Olympus state the 4:3 format allowed them to build small cameras? :D

[DoctorIt]

this is a tough one. I gotta say that when i ordered prints this morning, I saw that "...small camera" thing and said
:scratch

so I agree with both sides. small camera's is a weird title, but also, most consumers won't have a clue about the correct ratio. And classic? forget about it! What about all those new Drebel people - they have 3:2 format and would never think they're latest greastest dslr was "classic".

it's probably best the way it is. those of us in the know will look at this and explore deeper, while it remains obvious for those with less tech knowledge.

[Andy]

And classic? forget about it! What about all those new Drebel people - they have 3:2 format and would never think they're latest greastest dslr was "classic".

remember new coke and classic coke?

how about the buick classic?

:lol3

[marlof]

As long as you're printing your own prints -all I ever do- there's nothing wrong. People with smaller cams will know where to go, 4:3 DSLR owners will learn to swallow their pride, and the rest is standard. ;) But when ordering prints from other peoples pictures, things can go wrong. How does the unknowing customer know what kind of camera shot the picture? Wouldn't he be more confused by the new wording? Just thinking out loud, trying to help.

That said: I do understand smugmug making it as easy as possible for as many people as possible, and Baldy probably has more experience with people getting mixed up by unclear wording than we.

[dragon300zx]

You're correct. Far as I can tell looking through the top 100 print-selling pros, they're all using 3:2 cameras.
Baldy,
But what about the upstart pro who doesnt have a 3:2 camera yet? What about the freelancer who may use both 4:3 and 3:2 or only a 4:3? Put another way I have been doing shoots for some ZCar clubs lately and am about to be posting them online for the guys to order prints. I was planning on signing up for a smugmug account for this but to be quite honest if some of my prints are going to be called a print from a small camera that is really bad marketing. They are prolly gonna think why buy my prints cause they have small cameras too and could just try to reproduce my picture on their camera. Or who knows what else as consumers always look for the cheapest way.

I understand your point but at the same time you have more than 100 clients with pro accounts I am sure. So does it mean that only your top 100 clients get consideration in this matter because they all are using 3:2 cameras and the rest of your clients don't matter? Cause thats how that statement reads. Even calling them Crop Factor 1 and Crop Factor 2 would seem better when it comes to marketing the prints from small cameras. I do understand your point but you even admit that it doesn't sound good. Which leaves me at do I still go with smug or figure something else out :dunno:cry:uhoh.

[Baldy]

Hi Dragoon,

Certainly for someone whose customers actually end up in the cart, we'd love to have a cart that works for them and hence the call for better wording.

I shoot cars at Pebble Beach Concours each year and sell lots of enlargements, and I tend to pre-crop to a .75 ratio before uploading to smugmug. It wouldn't make things clear for my customers to see prints for small cameras in the drop-down.

For the bulk of our customers, however, it's a much clearer term than what we had before. If someone trumps it, we'll switch.

Thanks,
Baldy

[Nikolai]

And replace it with?I hear ya: for grandma Betty or uncle Joe all those fancy terms (dslr, ratio 2:3, 4:3) mean jack.

OTOH, we have other (usually younger and more computer/photography literate) crowd, for which those tems make total sense.

I, for one, was a bit ticked off this morning when I saw that my 8mp sony 828 shots (yes, I did shoot few thousands pictures in 4:3, although now I'm almost always shooting in 2:3) fell into "small camera". Actually, I was ready to print a few, and that very wording killed my attempt..

Why don't we try a compromise - something, which grandma Betty would not have trouble to read through, and something that gives us geeks more info?

How about starting with simply smth like generic and non-camera-specific for gradma, and then getting more techy in the end?
Example:

Type A [all d-shots combo here ] ("4:3" digital only)
Type B [the other combo here] ("2:3" film/digital)
Use can use Type 1/2, Type I/II, or whatever, but it has to be something which cannot be misintepreted, hence it should be neutral.

Just my $.02

[dragon300zx]

How about starting with simply smth like generic and non-camera-specific for gradma, and then getting more techy in the end?
Example:

Type A [all d-shots combo here ] ("4:3" digital only)
Type B [the other combo here] ("2:3" film/digital)
Use can use Type 1/2, Type I/II, or whatever, but it has to be something which cannot be misintepreted, hence it should be neutral.

Just my $.02Nik That is what I was in the process of typing up but you beat me to it. However I was going to add this. Currently when someone goes to order a print if they choose non-crop from the crop menu they get a pop up that explains to them what crop non crop means, they also get the explination when they mouse-over the "crop" label. They also get a mouse-ver when they go over product that asks them to click on the product to get the details. You could also add the pop-up when they switch from product a to product b and so on explaining the differences and the ratio's. Thus cutting down on confusion, solving the problem of "prints from small camera", educating the customer, and not using any methods you aren't already using.

I think Nik's suggestiosn of product categories would work



Type A [all d-shots combo here ] ("2:3" film/digital)
Type B [the other combo here] ("4:3" digital only)
Or even change it to
Print Standard A (2:3 film/digital)
Print Standard B (4:3 Digital Only)

As is is the standard for photo gifts isn't normal and has an explination for it.

Using this method it's not as confusing, it educates the consumer, and it's not hard cause its methods you are already using. Plus with multiple layers of explination they consumer can't say the information wasn't there for them to see cause it pops up in front of them.

[Nikolai]

I think Nik's suggestiosn of product categories would work


Type A [all d-shots combo here ] ("2:3" film/digital)
Type B [the other combo here] ("4:3" digital only)
Or even change it to
Print Standard A (2:3 film/digital)
Print Standard B (4:3 Digital Only)

As is is the standard for photo gifts isn't normal and has an explination for it.

Using this method it's not as confusing, it educates the consumer, and it's not hard cause its methods you are already using. Plus with multiple layers of explination they consumer can't say the information wasn't there for them to see cause it pops up in front of them.
"Standard" in both cases looks better:thumb

[Baldy]

Okay, I moved the Minoltaman rants to their own closed thread, gave him his $100 back, and honored Shay's (actually now more than a dozen of our customer's) requests to put the ban on.

Back on topic: can we do better than "prints for small cameras"?

Type A and Type B is pretty geeky, no? They'd certainly have to be explained somehow. And what are other companies going to call them?

Can we do better?

[bkriete]

I think something like:

"4:3 ratio (example 9x12)"
"2:3 ratio (example 4:6)"

as the dropdown menu would work well...you could also put a mouseover popup similar to the one on the "color" option reading "Choose 4:3 ratio for compact camera or cropped SLR-type prints or 2:3 ratio for SLR and 35 mm prints in their original form." Somebody smarter than me can probably come up with better wording.

[DoctorIt]

I think something like:

"4:3 ratio (example 9x12)"
"2:3 ratio (example 4:6)"

as the dropdown menu would work well...you could also put a mouseover popup similar to the one on the "color" option reading "Choose 4:3 ratio for compact camera or cropped SLR-type prints or 2:3 ratio for SLR and 35 mm prints in their original form." Somebody smarter than me can probably come up with better wording.I think somewhere in between this and "prints from small cameras". Type A and B is pretty geeky, I agree with Baldy. Either call it what it is, 4:3 and 3:2, or put it in plain english, "prints from point and shoot cameras(digital only). Why introduce another "type " to confuse people even more?

I thnik we're all getting a taste of how hard it is to be Baldy... can't please everyone :D


(and thank goodness Minolta is gone, talk about short temper!)

[bkriete]

howzabout this...when someone adds a picture to their cart, instead of a screen having a bunch of drop-down menus, have a thumbnail of the picture superimposed over all of the different aspect ratios with the sizes and prices for each listed beneath? That way people don't have to understand aspect ratio, just "hey, this'll crop off some on each side" or "if I choose this, I'll get funny little bars." Would that require too much server-side processing?

[Nikolai]

prints from point and shoot cameras(digital only)You're calling my 828 "point-and-shoot":scratch ?

It's no different than the "small cameras". Means "crappy". The idea behind "Type A", or, even better, "Standard 1" is to have absolutely NO implication about potential image quality. We're talking about shape of the print, for crying out loud..

The name of the crop factor should have nothing to do with the camera/lens size.

We all saw great pictures from the "small" cameras and total crap from the most expensive dslrs.

My suggestion stands: provide absolutely neutral name first simply to distinguish the format separation (call it type, standard, crop, format, shape, selection, choice, group, set, collection, cluster - whatever denotes a number of similarly shaped objects), followed by a more precise technical explanation
(e.g. "4:3, digital only" VS "3:2, film/digital")

Thanks for reading!

[onethumb]

Remember, guys, we're talking about Grandma being able to order prints here.

She has no idea what "4:3" is, or why it's different from "2:3". She doesn't know what the heck "Type A" and "Standard 1" are.

She definitely understands that some cameras are different from others. It seems perfectly logical, in her mind, that smaller cameras take different photos than larger cameras. It's been this way since the advent of film - Ansel Adams' 9x10 camera was huge, and a Hasselblad is larger than a point-and-shoot. She gets this and needs no explanation.

We'd love to hear more suggestions, but they've gotta be Grandma suggestions - not techy photographer suggestions. If an explanantion is needed, it's not gonna fly - Grandma doesn't read explanations.

Don

[ginger_55]

I think I understood it before. I ordered prints before, successfully. I do not understand the ratios. Even as a photographer I don't want to be educated, I just want to get the job done.

I haven't ordered anything recently, but alot of the suggestions have confused me.

I have a 20D, I had a Rebel, before that I had a pt and shoot digital. I understand if my photo is going to have to be cropped a bit to fit the norm as I have known it my 65 years. Especially as there were marks to show me what I was going to get, I could move them to take more off the bottom or the top, whatever suited me. I basically understood it before.

But I don't understand the ratios, and I think I am a photographer. My daughter cannot even understand Elements. She uses words like "user friendly", still has her digital prints done by Sam's.

I don't know how far my daughter is going to get in her understanding, when, but this grandmother liked smugmug's way of doing things a few months ago, except for constantly being sent back to the photo page in so many seconds. I learned to work with it. Please do not make me work with ratios.

ginger (born in 1939)

[winnjewett]

Don, you say that suggestions have to be "grandma proof". I guess I need to find a grandma and ask her what "4xD, 5xD and 8xD" mean, because I haven't a clue.

I shoot the Olympus E-1, which is a professional 4/3 camera. The E-3 will be out in the not too distant future, and will probably cost $5k. It also will be 4/3, and is certainly not a "small" camera.

I think that in order to solve this delema, we have to go back to square one. Why did we split these two groups of prints in the first place? What is the primary difference? Do both groups fit equally well into picture frames?

How about one solution for pros who shoot or crop 4/3, and one solution for actual point and shooters.

The pro can call it whatever he wants, but it defaults to "prints for small cameras".

I think this is a very easy solution that addresses everyone's needs. What do you think?
-w

[winnjewett]

How about one solution for pros who shoot or crop 4/3, and one solution for actual point and shooters.
I forgot that there is only one cart; not one for each pro. Bummer.
-w

[Nikolai]

We'd love to hear more suggestions, but they've gotta be Grandma suggestions - not techy photographer suggestions. If an explanantion is needed, it's not gonna fly - Grandma doesn't read explanations.
DonOK, let me break it down.

We have two different sets of formats (one being 4:3, another being 3:2) in our shopping cart, in addition to the non-standard formats and gifts.

We have to explain this - very subtle - difference between the two to an audience that cannot possibly grasp the concept of difference between digital/film, p&s/slr, or any mathematical subject (ratio, proportion, format, shape, etc.) for that matter...

:scratch :scratch :scratch :scratch :scratch :scratch

My S/O (who will qualify for a "grandma" in a heartbeat:-) suggested "more squared" vs "less squared".. My teen daughters suggested "(more)squared" vs "(more)rectangular". They also suggested to provide a little glyph whcih would visually show ratio difference, smth like this:

[_] digital only
[__] digital/film
At this point I'm at a loss. I only know that I DON'T like "small" and "point-and-shoot" because of its "in your face" derogatory implication on the picture quality.

HTH

[Nikolai]

This is actual 4:3 20x30 vs 3:2 21x28 pixels. And since "grandmas do not read the explanations anyway", I hope it's ok to put some *real* explanation (sorry, Ginger:-)

http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/19790057-L.jpg film/digital (3:2 ratio)
http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/19790060-L.jpg digital only (4:3 ratio)
Since visual difference is *really* subtle I think it could be ok to exaggerate it a little and show 5:3 instead of 3:2.


http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/19792145-L.jpg film/digital (3:2 ratio) - actual glyph 5:3
http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/19790060-L.jpg digital only (4:3 ratio)
The important thing is to keep the area approximately the same to avoid the impression that one is bigger/smaller than the other.

Waddayathink?

[Mitch]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for having the different sections for ordering prints is so the drop down box doesn't drop off the bottom of the screen. I think that "Standard Prints", "Prints for Small Cameras", and "Specialty Prints" titles do little toward being grandma friendly. To grandma what difference does it make from what kind of camera the picture came from? What she is thinking is I want a picture of my grandkids to carry in my wallet or I would like to have a picture of the kids at the get together to frame and put on the end table.

As I see it the size of the finished print is more important to the "grandma" or anyone than what ratio it started out as. My suggestion is to create 4 headings:

Small Wallets to 5X7
Med. 8X8 to 11X14
Large 16X20 to 18X24
XL 20X24 to 30X40

Some how make the crop marks stand out a little better with maybe a warning "For this size print the picture will be croped Please choose another size or click on the crop button." If the raitos match them maybe something like "This picture fits this print size no cropping needed"

Well that's my 2 cents worth.http://dgrin.com/images/smilies/icon10.gif

Mitch

[Nikolai]

WTG, Mitch!:thumb

[Ben]

there are some great ideas in here, thanks for the feedback. A few things to keep in mind though that I have noticed just from dealing with the majority of the customer support emails:

-People don't read. They want to get through the shopping cart as fast as possible, so they don't read descriptions, help text, buttons... they just look for "next". You guys pay close attention, because you are selling prints through the system and want to know intimately how it works. The more words we add, the more people get frustrated and complain about how inconvenient the system is. It needs to be simple, have as few words as possible... and have those words be relatively simple to understand.

-Most consumers have no idea what xD means, but a huge number of them want it. We get far fewer complaints of people who get an odd shaped print than we got of people who lost the head or soccer ball or whatever when their image was cropped to put on a 4x6. If we lump xD prints in with all other prints, people won't choose them and we are back to square 1 on complaints.

-The more warnings and popups and nasty messages about how the world will end if they choose that print option, the more intimidated they will be by ordering and either give up, or not want to go through it again the next order.

I really like the ideas being kicked around, as this is exactly what the forum is for. I am not the person making the end decision of course, but my inclination is to be looking for a simple wording change for the "prints for small cameras". Changing the structure of the cart, and warnings in the cart opens up whole new cans of worms.

And lastly... remember, you are aiming this branding at customers who have no knowledge of cameras and/or prints. They don't know what a 3:4 is or a 2:3. All they know is 4x6, 5x7, 8x10. And they think all of those are the same size ratio and don't understand why you lose part of the image when printing a 4x6 at 8x10. So there is your challenge... lets keep the ideas coming. :D

[lynnesite]

there are some great ideas in here, thanks for the feedback. A few things to keep in mind though that I have noticed just from dealing with the majority of the customer support emails: -The more warnings and popups and nasty messages about how the world will end if they choose that print option, the more intimidated they will be by ordering and either give up, or not want to go through it again the next order.


And lastly... remember, you are aiming this branding at customers who have no knowledge of cameras and/or prints. They don't know what a 3:4 is or a 2:3. All they know is 4x6, 5x7, 8x10. And they think all of those are the same size ratio and don't understand why you lose part of the image when printing a 4x6 at 8x10. So there is your challenge... lets keep the ideas coming. :D

Wow, good stuff in this thread. As a pro who shoots events some of the time I am watching with great interest. I liked the "more rectangular" with image example with the aspect ratio alongside in parentheses.

And for what it's worth, I shoot with the 20D but crop shots to 4:3 or 3:4 (let's really confuse 'em) whenever that's the "right" thing to do for a particular image, and sell 'em that way. It is a great conundrum, my clients will accept "this oughta be an 8x12, not an 8x10" without argument, and thus informed, order the print-prepped version that way. I disable printing out of the proof galleries so they can't make mistakes. When I think a particular shopper is gonna be particularly confused, I set the pricing by image and ONLY make the sizes that work available for selection (thanks for that feature).

[Mitch]

And lastly... remember, you are aiming this branding at customers who have no knowledge of cameras and/or prints. They don't know what a 3:4 is or a 2:3. All they know is 4x6, 5x7, 8x10. And they think all of those are the same size ratio and don't understand why you lose part of the image when printing a 4x6 at 8x10. So there is your challenge... lets keep the ideas coming. :D
Which is why giving them the print sizes and saying either yes this fits or no it doesn't and if it doesn't but you still want this size then here is how to get it to fit.

There is another option. Don't give them all of the sizes to choose from. Just the sizes that will fit the ratio. Should be able to tell that a 2:3 ratio will not fit on an 8X8 print so don't offer it.

While I'm on a roll. I used to work in a camera store. When ordering print for most people the thought process goes something like this. Customer walks in...I want a print of #4. "What size?" Just the regular size. (Did I ge into ratio? No!) "Ok..that will be a 4X4 print (or what ever size came from the instamatic)." NO..I wanted the one that is taller than it is wide. "Ok...Yes sir 4X6, but you will loose this part of the picture." That's ok, no one in the family likes her anyway so you can cut her out.http://dgrin.com/images/smilies/yelrotflmao.gif "How many would you like?" 3 should do it. "Would you like those glossy, matte or luster?" Let's do the glossy.

You are right I have not worked in a camera store in a long time, but the customers are still the same. They have a rough idea of the size of print they want. How many they want. Maybe finish.


Keep it as simple for the customer as possible. If you think it is important to offer multi sizes then you have to tell the customer we are going to cut part of the picture off. If different sizes are not important then only offer the print that fits the ratio. Ok...maybe not in those words, but you get the meaning. I believe aprox print size is more important to the customer than is ratio. For those who know what they are doing (or just like to click buttons) there could be an advanced button.

My second suggestion. Move the finish choice further into the process.
1. what size
2. how many
3. what finish.

This would shorten the list of sizes and make it a little less confusing.

I as the photographer can restrict the sizes available to the customer by pricing. If it is important to me I will only price the print sizes that fit the ratio.

I guess 4 cents now, but who's counting.

[Nikolai]

There is another option. Don't give them all of the sizes to choose from. Just the sizes that will fit the ratio. Should be able to tell that a 2:3 ratio will not fit on an 8X8 print so don't offer it.
while I generally like the idea about breakdown by sizes, I would respectfully disagree about "leave only fitting sizes" idea.

Here's the case I started to bug Sm about "best-fit"/no crop feature upon.

I had a few pictures taken with "small"/"point-and-shoot" 8mp sony in 4:3.
I wanted to have them in 20x30. There was no 20x30D match, everything else was either smaller, or way more expensive. There was no warning "your images will be cropped ruthlessly" either. So, I ordered 20x30 only to realize upon its arrival that top and the bottom was cropped.

Oh, btw - did I mention the fact that the image had custom border:

http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/6029427-M.jpg

Well, you can imagine HOW it arrived. I lost about $50 worth of prints and practically stopped using SM printing service.

As I mentioned above, I was about to try printing again after best fit was added this week, but then I saw "the small camera" thingie...:uhoh

[Baldy]

How many 4xD, 5xD and 8xD prints do you actually sell? Reason I ask is most pros seem to behave like Lynnsite, only making available print sizes of their choosing, typically 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10 plus some enlargements.

I did a few user tests this a.m. and two things really popped out: if they are buying prints from their own albums that they shot, they get "prints from small cameras" quickly. If they're buying from a pro, their mindset is completely on what sizes fit their albums, frames, or spots on walls.

If you go into ratios, you're dead. Here's what a young mother said who had purchased a couple times from smugmug in the past:

"Oh... Gosh. (laughs) I'm trying not to think back on my sophmore math teacher. How would I know what the ratio is? (Long silence) So... If I knew the camera was a more rectangular one (looks at me curiously) ... would it say somewhere if that's what the camera was? ...Then (looks down at feet) I can't buy an 8x10? I thought all photographers sold 8x10s."

[ginger_55]

You know, I HEAR Mitch, and I CAN UNDERSTAND him. I don't usually shout, I am sorry here, but what he is saying is so on!

Now I have explained to a family member how to order from you all. Of course I was on the phone with her at the time and walked her through it. But we could order from you, if we figured out to go to cart and we might not be sent back "home", so to speak.

But if you don't leave IN the easy stuff, like Mitch is talking about it makes it much more difficult. IMO. If you have to talk to the pros, say "if you are a pro, you might want to know..............."after reading the first few words, no one else will, but they need to be able to order, and I could order from Mitch.

The more square and more rectangular does not do anything for me. Neither do those little photos with the choices, I just need to know what is going to happen and what my choices are.

And this is how it goes for me. I shoot digital 20D, and I am 1/8 pro say. I do know there is a choice for me. I can keep my whole print or I can lose part of it and put it into a regular frame. I learned that at Shutterfly and I don't remember what they said it was so long ago.

But now I am ordering from you all. I need to know how much is going to be taken off if I go the standard route. And I NEED to be able to say take it all off the bottom instead of equalizing it, I need those choices, and you did that fine with a red thing, I think it was.

Other people might not know about those choices, but you did have it pretty good before, I thought. The reason being, I am bringing my photo to "you" from my smugmug acct, and by that, you are telling me what I can have.

I am not running out to get a pt and shoot camera with a photo size based on what you say, I am just bringing you a finished product from my camera and your thing says if you get a 5 X 6, it will need to be cropped like this, if you want it differently ...or whatever.....

I think Mitch should just sell the photos........

I know more than some of my kids, but I don't know as much as any of the people who are interested in this thread. Why don't you have Leno or Letterman go out on the street and ask the average consumer what they know or want. (Actually ask Mitch, the guy on the street will just let you know that they don't know anything.) And they are not interested in a thread like this, either.

ginger

[ginger_55]

What happened to Nikolai should not happen to anyone. I have never used a service without a warning.

I would want all of my money back.

And I would want the choices made to me of whether to crop or not and where.

Also, I don't know what a small camera is. In my day, when I was not a grandmother, people still took BIG cameras out in the field. Hasselblads, were they big, or were they small. I think there were some 8 X 10 nuts out there, too.

I did not know they made square prints????? I don't know what you are talking about on that. I suppose people who shoot square might know, but I wouldn't.

I guess I am in a rant. We all want different things. You say you would like to change just that one word, and I agree. What is it, small camera? I would be leery of that, too. As I was trying to point out, what is a small camera?
(Maybe you could say "cheap" camera)

ginger

[Andy]

{snip}

I lost about $50 worth of prints and practically stopped using SM printing service.

nik, have you told help@smugmug.com of this? remember, they're in the customer service business :deal

[Mitch]

while I generally like the idea about breakdown by sizes, I would respectfully disagree about "leave only fitting sizes" idea.

Here's the case I started to bug Sm about "best-fit"/no crop feature upon.

I had a few pictures taken with "small"/"point-and-shoot" 8mp sony in 4:3.
I wanted to have them in 20x30. There was no 20x30D match, everything else was either smaller, or way more expensive. There was no warning "your images will be cropped ruthlessly" either. So, I ordered 20x30 only to realize upon its arrival that top and the bottom was cropped.

Oh, btw - did I mention the fact that the image had custom border:
Nikolai,

Not what I would go with either, but if you only could choose fitting sizes there would have been nothing that would have fit. Pictures would not have been printed.

It was the only other idea I came up with that did not include warning the customer that the image will be cropped. Or a button to let the customer crop.

Mitch

[Nikolai]

nik, have you told help@smugmug.com of this? remember, they're in the customer service business :dealI have a bad habit of not relying on customer service too much. I'm from ex-USSR, where it was inexistent. Instead I learned "not to step on the same rake twice" (russian saying:-).

I hear a lot of talking about grandmas lately.
Well, here I am, a well educated male, two university degrees (math and computer science), computer and photography geek. I know and understand all the photo and computer terms well enough. I know how to use my hardware and software.

Did the cart help me to make my choice? I would read the explanation, I swear! And I would definitely "honor" the warning..

I guess the key point here is that I'm NOT the grandma.
I don't sell a lot (I'm a programmer, remember?:-), and I don't buy a lot. Hence it's not really important. And I give it, it's not. I can go to my personal account at the same EZPrints and do what I want there.

As to those $50.. I susrvived:-). But I remember them. They serve as a scar not to step on the same rake ever again...

Just my $.02. I mean, my $50:-)

[Andy]

I have a bad habit of not relying on customer service too much. I'm from ex-USSR, where it was inexistent. Instead I learned "not to step on the same rake twice" (russian saying:-).

I hear a lot of talking about grandmas lately.
Well, here I am, a well educated male, two university degrees (math and computer science), computer and photography geek. I know and understand all the photo and computer terms well enough. I know how to use my hardware and software.

Did the cart help me to make my choice? I would read the explanation, I swear! And I would definitely "honor" the warning..

I guess the key point here is that I'm NOT the grandma.
I don't sell a lot (I'm a programmer, remember?:-), and I don't buy a lot. Hence it's not really important. And I give it, it's not. I can go to my personal account at the same EZPrints and do what I want there.

As to those $50.. I susrvived:-). But I remember them. They serve as a scar not to step on the same rake ever again...

Just my $.02. I mean, my $50:-)

well, for the future, we don't want you to have any more scars.

[winnjewett]

Can someone please explain to me what 'xD' means?

-w

[Nikolai]

well, for the future, we don't want you to have any more scars.I would appreciate even more if the cart become a bit more user-friendly not only for people who're ordering 4x6 and 8x10 of their (grand)kids, but also for the people with the "small point-and-shoot", yet pretty expensive 4:3-enabled cameras who actually take those pictures and sometimes even do some postrocessing and such...
Thanks for chiming in!:thumb

[Baldy]

Here's the case I started to bug Sm about "best-fit"/no crop feature upon...Ouch, I'm sorry that happened to you. Honestly, we see this so rarely we haven't been focused on it, but I suppose we could consider a warning since one is still one too many.

My suspicion is it happened on this print because of the white borders, something we don't see often either, making the crop lines easier to miss.

One thing we've learned, however, is that the term "best fit" or "fit" doesn't mean "no-crop" to the consumer. To them it means what they get from Blockbuster when they rent a movie — the movie fills up your screen with no borders.

[Baldy]

Can someone please explain to me what 'xD' means?http://www.smugmug.com/prints/4xd-prints

[Baldy]

And I would want the choices made to me of whether to crop or not and where.Unfortunately, it doesn't take long on smugmug's help desk to learn that most consumers don't want you making choices about where to crop their photos. Hell hath no fury like a bride for whom you just made a decision about how to print her photo.

And the no-crop option is a 1/4 of 1% thing. It's a very rare person who wants a print with two white borders. We see it maybe once a week.

[Nikolai]

Ouch, I'm sorry that happened to you.
It's in the past, though. You guys have provided a new rake, I'm ready and willing to try it.

I only wish the existing "4:3" option was not named "Picture from a person who has absolutely no idea how to shoot a decent picture. And, btw, are you really gonna pay for it???".

[winnjewett]

http://www.smugmug.com/prints/4xd-prints
From this page:
4xD prints are 4x5.3 inches, perfect for most compact digital cameras.


Why are they called 4xD instead of 4x5.3? This terminology seems unnecessarily confusing.

-w

[flyingpylon]

For what it's worth (not much) the movie industry has a similar problem with widescreen vs standard display of movies on televisions. I'm sure that millions have been spent trying to educate customers about the difference between formats, but it's just beyond most people. I don't know what the percentages are, but I know a lot of them just say "I don't like when they cut off the top and bottom of the picture with those black bars." So you can see how successful that industry has been at tackling this problem.

If we're really worried about which size grandma will pick, put "senior discount" next to the print size with the ratio closest to the original. :D

For a while I thought saying something like "Rectangular - like a movie screen" and "Square - like a television" would work, but then there are all sorts of issues with that as well (not to mention the fact that televisions are becoming more rectangular!) :scratch

At any rate, I generally agree with those that don't like the "small cameras" thing. I don't think it's really accurate, it doesn't seem to address the real problem, and especially for pros, it sounds like an insult. It's not the size of the camera that matters, it's the photographer behind it. :rofl (do people with small cameras feel the need to go out and buy flashy red sports cars?)

Well, I've exceeded my smiley limit for this post. It's an interesting problem. I'll think about it a bit because at some point I would like to start selling some prints and I'm not sure the current wording works for me (even though I use a "large" 3:2 DSLR).

What about "Standard Frame Sizes"... has that been mentioned? Would that work? That's really the issue...

[Baldy]

From this page:
4xD prints are 4x5.3 inches, perfect for most compact digital cameras.


Why are they called 4xD instead of 4x5.3? This terminology seems unnecessarily confusing.You know, winnjewett, you might have hit the jackpot with a blinding flash of the obvious. :D

After you asked, "what's an xD," and I sent that link in response, I went swimming. And with each lap I asked myself, "WHAT!? Why did we ever call it that?"

The answer is, other labs who offer them call them that and we don't want to contribute new terms multiplying like rabbits. But it seems obvious to just call them what they are, just like we do every other print size.

[georges]

Just a couple of comments that are not closely related to each other.

First - it annoys me that Kodak, Fuji, Noritsu and the other companies that make the minilabs haven't figured this out. Back when I was a boy (he said, scraping the mold of the north side of his aging body) you got prints that matched your film format. And we had a bunch of different film formats. We didn't have white bars, we didn't need no stinkin' white bars. We did have nice little white borders all around the print.

Ok I got that out of my system.

Second - Didn't the APS system have this problem? Didn't they have C, H and P? C was 4x6, H was 4x7 and P was panorama 4x12?

I always assumed the paper was on a 4" wide roll, they printed the short dimension to 4", let the other dimension fall wherever it came out and cut the paper accordingly. No white bars. Now, the process may have been completely different.

Is that what best fit does?

And I'll add a third - when I dropped off APS at the camera shop they would always ask the same question, "Do you want them printed a special size or just as shot?"

"As Shot" was always my choice.

See you later, gs

[Baldy]

Maybe the best thing we can do is get who the customer is clearly in our heads.

Whether we're smugmug, Starbucks, or pro photographers, we can't please everyone, so we might as well get in our heads who we're trying to please and who we can't.

Let me try to describe and you can correct me where I err:

1. It's not your grandmother.

If you look at the shots most pros are selling, they're of babies, families, engagement shots, sports (the biggest category), and events (next biggest, which includes graduations and weddings). The bulk of the buyers are early 20s to early 50s.

http://cmac.smugmug.com/photos/3747-M-1.jpg

Yes, it's true: some happy snappies are purchased by grandmother, but she's usually a young grandmother in her 50s, or else someone is ordering for her.

Ginger said some very interesting things about the expectations of that demographic, but they don't buy many prints online.

2. It isn't the customer Mitch described bringing film to the photo store.

Mitch said some fascinating things about how customers behave at the film store, but the buyer of prints from film can't see the original shot and doesn't know what they're missing when you crop. And they expect you to crop for them because they have no way to do it.

The online buyer knows exactly what the shot is and expects what they see to appear on paper. If they have to lose something, they sure don't want you choosing what it is they should lose.

http://cmac.smugmug.com/photos/19818589-M.jpg

3. It can be the passionate amateur, who hangs out in forums and shoots landscapes. This is a small but important group to us, important enough to be worth confusing the other 98% with options like no-crop.

I believe they are the ones who don't like the term "prints from small cameras." One option is to just leave the xD prints in prints from small cameras drop-down, and move the enlargements to specialty prints. Then pros can turn off the ability to buy the xD prints, which as far as I can tell they already do.

Or we can keep working on a term that doesn't insult passionate amateurs but also doesn't confuse our mainstream customers.

Keep those suggestions rolling.

[dragon300zx]

"Picture from a person who has absolutely no idea how to shoot a decent picture. And, btw, are you really gonna pay for it???".Nikolai,

This was what I find objectionable too. However in reading this thread I did see another suggestion I did like that although not perfect is gonna be more recongizable for people ordering prints than "print from small camera".

Wide Screen
Full Screen

Alot of people watch movies and TV (common admit it your a DVD junkie too) and although its not a universal language most people understand that wide screen is going to leave strips at the top and bottom of there tv unless they have the right sized tv (page). They also understand that full screen means it will fill up the whole screen (page). My grandparents are the most technologically loathfull people I know. I have built them several very nice computers over the years as gifts yet they continuously give them away cause they don't want to have to deal with them (I have learned no more computers for them). However they have 3 DVD players in their home and they understand wide screen versus full screen. If we don't wanna confuse them with the screen we could reword it to.

Wide Page Print
Full Page Print

Similar to the DVD discription, easy to interperet, and even my grandmother (and everyone else that I know) would understand it. Then we don't even have to mention anything about the camera.

[ginger_55]

I just went and "almost" ordered a 16 x 20 print. I decided I ought to ask my husband about my choice first. I did it because I want the photo and also because I wanted to see what the ordering was like now.

It was easy for me. Nothing confused me, I was not sent back "home". Since it was a 16 X 20 the crop lines were there, but so was the means to adjust them.
I had no problems. It was easier for me then than it has ever been.

I messed around to see what else was there, and I think I might be confused if I had a small camera. What does that mean anyway? I have been doing alot of posting, but I don't actually know what is different about a "small" camera. I used a Canon Elph for years, from what I can remember my cropping problems were the same as now, if one could call them problems. Maybe I am wrong, I am just curious.

This term re "grandmothers" is beginning to get annoying though. The older I get the more I know in this line. It is my kids who can't figure things out.
I am glad you check your demographics and stuff, I just am beginning to wish that the term for the "camera and/or internet challenged" would be changed from lil old grandmothers at the same time you change "small cameras".

Oh, the terms "to fit", I would not think from edge to edge, I would think it would be printed to fit what I sent.

I am sure that you all will be delighted to know that I like the ordering procedure now better than I have ever liked it. Except for the "small camera" words, I think even my kids could navigate it now.

ginger

[Nikolai]

As long as it's not "good-for-nothing-cheap-plastic-lens-crapola-camera" I'll take everyhting..:-)

full/wide is ok, but what if you're selling vertical shot? you never have TV on a side, but with cameras you quite often do..:dunno

[dragon300zx]

Same concept in the format of the print applies be it portrait or landscape. Now I admit some people may wonder about that at first but it is easy to figure out looking at the preview and like they have mentioned many people are lazy and will just assume things anyways. But we could make it

Wide/Tall Page Print
Full/Shorter Page Print

[Nikolai]

and we're talking 20..50 y.o active ppl..

And we can't use

digital only 4:3 format (full)
film/digital 3:2 format (wide)

or

break by sizes and replace xD thing with the actual size??

So they are smart enough to naviaget to SM shopping card but for the life of theirs they cant read two/three pretty common words?

Man, I'm missing something..:bash

OK, I'm officially out of ideas for tonite, maybe tomorrow..

[dragon300zx]

Nik I agree and I'm gonna sleep on it too.

[Nikolai]

Wide/Tall Page Print
Full/Shorter Page Print
..but so far it does not seem to get us any closer to getting rid of "small cameras"...:dunno

[muddyknees]

Agree with you about the minilabs "problem" matching film format. We need a "4x?" option that would be either 4" on long side by whatever, or 4" on short side by whatever. (And charge by the whatever linear inches.)

Also agree with other's commentis above that the focus in the cart should be on the product size/form factor no matter the type of camera of the source. (what I'd like to see is an enhanced crop-box tool that would respond to user attempts to pull it "outside the box" so to speak of the chosen print size by then showing the resulting "white-bars". Also, I'd like to be able to choose to "justify" my print to have just one bar that I could just cut off instead of two, or have an option to put a white border on all four sides to "hide" the misfit.)

But now to give my submission to the "small-camera" re-naming contest:
4:3 (most digital cameras)
2:3 (film/DSLRs)

Gary


Just a couple of comments that are not closely related to each other.

First - it annoys me that Kodak, Fuji, Noritsu and the other companies that make the minilabs haven't figured this out. Back when I was a boy (he said, scraping the mold of the north side of his aging body) you got prints that matched your film format. And we had a bunch of different film formats. We didn't have white bars, we didn't need no stinkin' white bars. We did have nice little white borders all around the print.

Ok I got that out of my system.

Second - Didn't the APS system have this problem? Didn't they have C, H and P? C was 4x6, H was 4x7 and P was panorama 4x12?

I always assumed the paper was on a 4" wide roll, they printed the short dimension to 4", let the other dimension fall wherever it came out and cut the paper accordingly. No white bars. Now, the process may have been completely different.

Is that what best fit does?

And I'll add a third - when I dropped off APS at the camera shop they would always ask the same question, "Do you want them printed a special size or just as shot?"

"As Shot" was always my choice.

See you later, gs

[ginger_55]

[QUOTE=muddykneesBut now to give my submission to the "small-camera" re-naming contest:
4:3 (most digital cameras)
2:3 (film/DSLRs)

Gary[/QUOTE]

That would work for me. I would assume my Rebel and 20D would fit in the second, I would not have to deal with ratios but those who wanted to could.

I also would assume that my daughter's new $250.00 user friendly digital camera would fit in "most digital cameras", as would she, as she would not understand any of the other numbers/words. All she knows is that she has a digital camera.

All I know is that I upgraded to a DSLR on the Canon side of the fence.

To think I used to have a "small camera" in the digital elph and never noticed a difference in ratios when I changed cameras. I just take the picture I am dealt in PS, or RAW and make it prettier than it is/was, cropping or not.

ginger (I would really go with those words here from Gary.) The old lady.....

[winnjewett]

You know, winnjewett, you might have hit the jackpot with a blinding flash of the obvious. :D

After you asked, "what's an xD," and I sent that link in response, I went swimming. And with each lap I asked myself, "WHAT!? Why did we ever call it that?"

The answer is, other labs who offer them call them that and we don't want to contribute new terms multiplying like rabbits. But it seems obvious to just call them what they are, just like we do every other print size. When your nose is pressed up against the photograph, it's hard to see the entire picture sometimes. I'm glad to help.

-winn

[Baldy]

But now to give my submission to the "small-camera" re-naming contest:
4:3 (most digital cameras)
2:3 (film/DSLRs)

GaryMost digital cameras is a good name! Makes more sense than small cameras.

[dragon300zx]

Woohoo No more Small Cameras.

[Nikolai]

Woohoo No more Small Cameras... it actually makes it to the cart.. Thus far it's still "small camera" and xD..:dunno

I saw Baldy's remark about "prophit=opinion, cash=fact".

I'm the same way: I like the opinion. But I wanna see the fact.

[Baldy]

.. it actually makes it to the cart.. Thus far it's still "small camera" and xD..:dunno:): You know us better than to think we're going make a significant change without user testing. Bug fixes, yes.

Unfortunately, "prints for most cameras" seems to be a little bit confusing. We hope something around it works but we should keep our thinking caps on.

We don't have a lot of space. The current character count just barely fits:

"prints for small cameras"

[Nikolai]

:): You know us better than to think we're going make a significant change without user testing. Bug fixes, yes.

I'm simply patiently waiting..:lust

[T4Tots]

I was about to reply with quite a post when it got eaten....grrr

I will condense this one as I am tired from my previous post.

Ok...I am mostly a portrait shooter. I send almost ALL of my customers to the cart. All my customers have a computer and some sort of intelligence or I don't send them to order online. They have seen my camera. They know their camera goes in their pocket and mine absolutely will not. I am not worried they will think my camera is small, but do know they would never order any prints of mine from a drop down menu that said small camera because as I stated they have seen my camera.

My sister, who is normally a very intelligent 35 year old, had trouble finding sizes. She has asked me how to order wallets because she never saw the drop down menu and thought wallets were standard for portraits. When I talked her through checking specialty prints....she was amazed at all the "new choices". I then had to explain they were there all along. I agree Grandma is a bad term. My 70+ year old Mother in Law ordered wallets.

Anyway...

My vote if all is said and done is so far for the xD prints to be renamed actual sizes and for the drop down menus of standard and specialty etc... to go away. I would rather just go in and find my size and order it.

When I go to custom pro pricing, I do not have to find anything from different drop down menus. All the choices are right there with the prices beside them. Why can't ordering them be as easy as pricing them.

I think anyone can understand the size drop down if all sizes are included. And keep the red lines to show cropping. This is incredibly easy to explain to the "Average Joe" (my better word than grandma!)

[ajason]

I'm pretty new here so I may be missing something but it seems to me that offering a buyer to choose "Prints from Smaller Cameras" is a very misleading and highly confusing term.

First, "Prints FOR Small Cameras" -- does the "FOR" mean that the print is somehow intended to be used for a small camera? (Using "from" instead of "for" would make more sense -- but not enough sense.)

And "Small Camera" -- you mean as compared to a "big camera" . . . ?

Why not just have the drop down box say "Prints"?

Why confuse people when you don't have to.

AJ

[Cindy]

Okay, I moved the Minoltaman rants to their own closed thread, gave him his $100 back, and honored Shay's (actually now more than a dozen of our customer's) requests to put the ban on.

Back on topic: can we do better than "prints for small cameras"?

Type A and Type B is pretty geeky, no? They'd certainly have to be explained somehow. And what are other companies going to call them?

Can we do better?

I just stumbled across it doing a search and couldn't help but hit the reply button. My customers get confused because the prints are not listed in order by size. Heck it confused me at first. Remember most pro customers don't have a clue about size ratios, etc... they just need to see a drop down that's easy to understand and clear as H2O so we don't loose them. I'm sure this has been beat up & disscussed before but if so it must have been before my time :-) so sorry if I missed it. Anyhow... how bout listing the dropdowns as wallet <-> 11x14 (or whatever) and the next size such & such <-> such and such.

Thanks for listening,
Cindy