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!!

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??"

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

And replace it with?

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.

Originally Posted by Baldy 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

Other services call them digital prints. 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.

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?

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


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.

Originally Posted by DoctorIt 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?

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.

Originally Posted by Baldy 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 .

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

Originally Posted by Baldy 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

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

Nik 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.

Originally Posted by dragon300zx 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

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 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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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


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

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?

Originally Posted by DoctorIt prints from point and shoot cameras(digital only)

You're calling my 828 "point-and-shoot" ?

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!

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