jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I just got an email from Costco telling me that after today, I'll have to go to Shutterfly or elsewhere to get prints made. If you have images stored at Costco, you can download them.

Louis in QC Loc: Gatineau QC Canada

Or, you can have the images you have in Costco Photo transferred to the Shutterfly/Costco account, with just a few clicks of the mouse...

nmw1004 Loc: Dresher PA

I ordered a couple of prints from Costco a few days ago. I recieved no info about them closing.

Louis in QC Loc: Gatineau QC Canada

I am in Canada, my be different according to area?
Here is detailed info I have access to : https://support.shutterflycanada.ca/hc/en-ca/articles/9944178816411-Costco-Members

kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

I print my own.
Is there a difference going to Costco, Shurterfly, etc?

kenpic Loc: Edmonds, WA

It's my understanding that Costco moved everything BUT regular printing to Shutterfly. That includes calendars, canvas prints, etc. I just got some 4x6's back from Costco; 11 cents each and free shipping. Shutterfly would charge me 16 cents plus shipping. I will agree the announcement is confusing.

nmw1004 Loc: Dresher PA

Price and quality. 2 -8x12 were $1.95 ea. including shipping.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Printing is becoming less and less profitable for retailers. Shutterfly laid off 800 people last year, and their Lifetouch subsidiary laid off 360 people this month.

People want their images on their screens. Even film photographers want their film scanned, not printed.

Folks, "Bits beat atoms," as MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte preached to the Photo Marketing Association International crowd, around 20 years ago. I was there. PMAI no longer exists, if that tells you something!

If you have photo albums, film negatives, and slides sitting on a shelf or coffee table or hiding in a closet, get them digitized. Your offspring will appreciate that a lot more than the physical albums. But pass down those, too!

I'm digitizing hundreds of my wife's family photos now. Most are prints. Black-and-Whites turn out fine, but original color prints from the 1960s look like crap. Almost all of the cyan and some of the magenta dye layers are gone from most of them.

Kodachromes copied with a digital camera and processed from raw files in Lightroom Classic look terrific. B&W negatives look fantastic when converted via Negative Lab Pro plug-in and Lightroom Classic. Ektachromes tend to fade to blue-cyan. Fujichromes tend to fade to a salmon-pink color.

So if you have some old media you care about, scan or macro-copy them now. Consider converting to B&W if they are too far gone to recover the color.

redlegfrog

Do you do anything different with Ectachromes?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I copy them with a macro lens the same way I copy all slide films. But I adjust color balance in Lightroom Classic to suit my taste. You can't put back what has faded away, but you can rebalance what remains to get the most pleasing effect you can. Sometimes, it works okay.

The same is true of all old color films, both negative and positive. Sometimes, I can bring enough back to make a convincing image. Other times, I give up and convert to black-and-white. Uneven fading is the usual culprit that drives me to black-and-white. Severe single-layer dye fading is another.

Kodachromes are very stable. Kodak had a winner from the start. Even Kodachromes from before World War II still look reasonably good. Anscochromes are often quite well preserved, too. But some versions of Ektachrome and Fujichrome just didn't last.

noall Loc: Riverside, CA USA

Transferring the account is simple. It took me a few minutes.

redlegfrog

One of my great errors in life, switching from Kodachrome to Ektachrome. To rub salt in the wound, My Grandpa's slides still look pretty good!