In my opinion, YES. PictBridge is a method of printing photos directly
from a digital camera, bypassing a computer. It is standardized across
printer and camera brands, which is about the only thing it has going
for it, if you ask me.

I've written it several times before: There are few photos that wouldn't
benefit from a bit of tweaking before being printed. Very often, a bit
of cropping results in a much better photo. The same is true of exposure
adjustment. That's just the basics. Often, it would be nice to remove
something distracting from a scene, like a post or utility cable. And
many photos just have so many problems when you see them on something
other than that tiny camera LCD that they shouldn't have any ink wasted
on them - even cheap aftermarket ink.

In my opinion, PictBridge is a scam created by printer/camera companies
to get clueless consumers to print with expensive ink before they
realize what they are printing. The only possible camera owner who could
benefit from using PictBridge would be one who doesn't own a computer -
and even then it's doubtful they could get anything but poorer and more
expensive results than if they had used Costco or Wal-mart.

If anybody has a differing opinion, I'd be happy to read it. No flames
from me if you disagree - I promise. But, don't be surprised if I try to
change your mind...

TJ

"TJ" <TJ@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g20r17$5t7$1@registered.motzarella.org...
A lot of photo printers allow you to do basic editing in the printer,
such as, cropping, lightening, darkening, red eye removal, annotating,
etc. The newer HP printers have larger LCDs for this. Besides
PictBridge, don't forget the built in card readers. There are occasions
where instant card copy may be needed and that's where those small
portable battery powered printers would be useful.

Since most people using this are printing jpegs from a P&S there ain't much
to adjust, silk purses/sow's ears and such.

dullpain wrote:
P&S and DSLRs there are many common issues that need to be corrected.
While there may be less on noise and sharpness there are similar
exposure issues and blemishes and artifacts in addition to cropping and
color correcting including but not limited to white balance.

measekite wrote:
Best you just STFU seeing as how you have no idea (as usual) what you're
talking about.
Frank

dullpain wrote:
While it's true that you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear,
with a bit of effort you can make a nice leather one, and there's
nothing inferior about that when it comes to holding money. Jpegs from
point-and-shoot cameras can be improved a great deal with a little
effort, too.

TJ

It is the safest way to print your pictures off of a secure digital or XD
card.
In the cold climates we get static electricity when walking along carpeted
areas and if you would touch those exposed contacts the pictures are gone.
I have even seen a compact flash card get zapped!

"TJ" <TJ@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g20r17$5t7$1@registered.motzarella.org...

Michael Grey wrote:
camera's usb cable? How so? Why is it safer to connect to a printer with
a cable than to a computer?

I know all about how it is in cold climates. I live in the Syracuse, NY
area, and while we didn't invent Winter, we're close to perfecting it.
Static electricity can be managed quite easily. Like anything else,
mostly you just have to pay attention to what you're doing.

TJ

TJ wrote:
movie theaters and a main drag where you can walk from one end to the
other in a short time. No basketball team, no football team, no hockey
team, no baseball team

Now you do have 6 months of gray depression and freezing cold and then a
hot humid couple of months with a big bunch of mosquitoes. And in
between you get rain.

measekite wrote:
Then I take it you won't be moving here any time soon? Spectacular! Your
loss, not mine.

TJ

TJ wrote:
Actually, it sounds like it is your gain. If cold weather will keep him
away, it may be worthwhile moving somewhere even colder, just to make
sure (although Syracuse gets pretty darn cold in the winter). ;-)

Art

Arthur Entlich wrote:
Yorkers don't get all in a dither over a few snowflakes like some others do.

TJ

TJ wrote:
nite for a panty raid.

TJ <TJ@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:g20r17$5t7$1
@registered.motzarella.org:

Well, it might be a handy option for some so it is not a scam but it is
not certainly something I would use for the reasons you state even though
my printer does have Pictbridge.

"dullpain" <fac_187@hotmail.com> wrote in
newsGX0k.3572$xZ.3127@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:

Most photos could do with a bit of cropping at least.

House Of The White Rose wrote:

Real professional photographers never crop any photo.
Frank

Frank <fb@sto.clm> wrote in news:4847f90f$0$5104$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

What's a *real* professional photographer? And I call BS too. Most magazine
fashion photos have been heavily edited. Or are they not *real*
professional photographers? And who was talking about professional
photagraphy in the first place? Dumbass.

House Of The White Rose wrote:
According to a friend who's a semi-retired editor, newspaper photos are
cropped all the time, to showcase the newsworthy subject. Does Frank not
consider newspaper photographers to be professional? Or maybe they
aren't "real."

TJ

TJ wrote:
I'm referring to pros like Ansel Adams, who I believe, never, ever
cropped any of his photos.
Frank

House Of The White Rose wrote:

Frank &lt;fb@sto.clm&gt; wrote in news:4847f90f$0$5104$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:



Real professional photographers never crop any photo. Frank



What's a *real* professional photographer? And I call BS too. Most magazine fashion photos have been heavily edited. Or are they not *real* professional photographers? And who was talking about professional photagraphy in the first place? Dumbass.

Not only are you correct but it is obvious that one cannot handle even 4th grade math to make a statement that professional photographers never crop any photo.

Many professional photographers sell 11x14 prints as a popular size and then matte and frame them.&nbsp; Now if you divide 14 by 11 you get an aspect ratio of 1.27.

These so called professional photographers use either a 35mm film camera or a full frame digital camera like the Canon 5D, Canon 1DsMkII or a few even use the new Nikon D3.&nbsp; The film or sensor is 36x24 so if you divide 36 by 24 you get an aspect ration of 1.5.

Now a school kid will tell you that 1.27 is NOT equal to 1.5.

Therefore you cannot print full frame.&nbsp; Something is going to get cropped.

Now can anybody prove that I am incorrect MATHEMATICALLY?