s*****g
发帖数: 5159 | 1 I have been a adoramapix customer for three years until a friend recommended
mpix to me. I had a set of pictures, taken by Kodachrome using a Contax T2,
developed and scanned by Dwayne's Photo. The resolution suffices 300dpi. I
had adoramapix print one set and mpix print another set using the same origi
nal jpeg embedded sRGB color space. The extra set was for my parents.
I chose metallic paper from both labs (no lustre coating from mpix). For a 4
x6 print, it cost 29c at adoramapix and 59c at mpix. Mpix roughly double the
price.
The packaging of mpix is slightly better but both over suffices protection p
urpose.
Both of them use Kodak Professional Endura paper, adoramapix has a more shin
ing finishing in its surfaces.
For a long time I was not happy with the details of adarama prints - it's wo
rse than my Canon MP980 printer on Canon Photo Plus paper. Mpix is doing bet
ter but not much - still worse than my home printer.
Talking about the "edges" (object contours) in the prints, mpix is slightly
more crispy. Mpix offers more stereo human face on portraits than adorama. T
hese can be identified by naked eyes. Using a Pantex 5.5x Loupe, I could see
finer edges on mpix prints with about 1.5x resolution than adorama. There a
re more noise on adorama prints.
Overall, mpix is about 20-25% better than adorama. But I do not think it wor
th double the price. For photo enthusiasts, adaramapix is good enough. |
|
