Professional Web Applications Themes

Discreet photo processing - Photography

Taken some "discreet" photos? Convenient Photo processes all images.* Professional quality service. check out our website here: [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url] or call (954)587-9899 135, 126 or APS Kodak royal paper Kodak equipment Kodak chemicals Guaranteed satisfaction Low prices - Fast service All photos delivered unmarked via FedEx for security. Photos transferred on CD. Digital image files printed on Kodak Paper. *No illegal acts, kiddy etc......

  1. #1

    Default Discreet photo processing

    Taken some "discreet" photos?

    Convenient Photo processes all images.*
    Professional quality service.
    check out our website here:

    [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url] or call (954)587-9899

    135, 126 or APS
    Kodak royal paper
    Kodak equipment
    Kodak chemicals

    Guaranteed satisfaction
    Low prices - Fast service
    All photos delivered unmarked via FedEx for security.
    Photos transferred on CD.
    Digital image files printed on Kodak Paper.

    *No illegal acts, kiddy etc...


    R & A Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    Because FedEx wouldn't leave your discreet photos in your neighbor's
    mailbox.


    "T_Man" <tman63841@webtv.net> wrote in message
    news:16447-3F4D2A59-97@storefull-2356.public.lawson.webtv.net...
    > I'm not exactly sure why you would ship Fed Ex for privacy. USPS has to
    > obey privacy laws and Fed Ex doesn't. In fact, the local gym owner in my
    > town got his butt handed to him when Fed Ex peaked into his steroid
    > shipment and decided to set up a sting for him. It wasn't news to me
    > when I was told about this, as I used to post a lot on the controversial
    > fitness boards and stories like that were common with Fed Ex. Right or
    > wrong, you have to wonder what the hell they're doing going through
    > people's packages like that.
    >
    > USPS (not UPS) has to go through paper work to open your packages. Plus
    > the mailman has a thousand other houses to hit and he could care less
    > what's in your package (and again he absolutely cannot open it anyway,
    > even were he to find your package suspicious he'd have to report it to
    > management, and then management would no doubt have to go through
    > inspectors.) I'm not a big fan of Fed Ex at all.
    >
    > My recommendation is to use USPS whenever in doubt.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >


    R & A Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    x-no-archive: yes
    "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    news:vks2g1rsfs8o4e@news.supernews.com...
    > Because FedEx wouldn't leave your discreet photos in your neighbor's
    > mailbox.
    I suspect that it is more aimed at steering clear of possible postal
    violations for shipping ographic material via the mail. Using a common
    carrier takes it out of the federal postal regulations.

    Frankly, if I were doing that type of photography, I would go digital and
    handle it all in-house. This is one area of photography where digital
    clearly represents a better choice.

    There is simply no way to be certain that a lab will keep its promise and
    not keep copies of your photos for other uses. And, these "discrete photo"
    specialty labs typically charge a lot for their services--just look at the
    price list and the FedEx charge schedules!

    There must not be much growth potential in that business. Who needs a
    middleman these days?


    Jeremy Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    Jeremy...

    While I'll agree that digital makes a better choice for control of your
    "discreet" photos, I take offense at your charge that the costs charged by
    our lab are high. Our rates (especially for 5x7 prints) are some of the
    lowest for "discreet" processing out there...and our charges for FedEx
    delivery are below what you would pay FedEx directly.

    We pride ourselves on our quality and prices...do a search on any major
    search engine for "discreet photo processing" and compare what's out there.
    Convenient Photo offers tremendous value.

    Remember...when taking that Jamaican vacation to the beach...who wants
    to lug the $500 Nikon digital camera when you can shoot a one use camera
    (with sand all over it) for $10.

    The growth may be slowing due to digital...but people still go on vacation
    for weeks on end and don't want to buy hundreds of dollars worth of memory
    cards to store all those prints...or worse carry their laptop across Europe
    for downloading.

    Plus...we offer quality digital to paper printing...far beyond what your HP
    at home can do.

    Think about it...would you want your digital camera to fall into the sand or
    salt water?

    Convenient Photo
    [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url]



    "Jeremy" <jeremy@no-spam-thanks.com> wrote in message
    news:AFo3b.20719$8i2.3937@newsread2.news.atl.earth link.net...
    > x-no-archive: yes
    > "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    > news:vks2g1rsfs8o4e@news.supernews.com...
    > > Because FedEx wouldn't leave your discreet photos in your neighbor's
    > > mailbox.
    >
    > I suspect that it is more aimed at steering clear of possible postal
    > violations for shipping ographic material via the mail. Using a
    common
    > carrier takes it out of the federal postal regulations.
    >
    > Frankly, if I were doing that type of photography, I would go digital and
    > handle it all in-house. This is one area of photography where digital
    > clearly represents a better choice.
    >
    > There is simply no way to be certain that a lab will keep its promise and
    > not keep copies of your photos for other uses. And, these "discrete
    photo"
    > specialty labs typically charge a lot for their services--just look at the
    > price list and the FedEx charge schedules!
    >
    > There must not be much growth potential in that business. Who needs a
    > middleman these days?
    >
    >

    R & A Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    $0.89 is not bad for a 5x7 print. I just ordered 5x7's of Ophoto and they
    were $0.99 each, the same price a local 1 hour photos. I would have to
    agree with Convienent Photo.


    "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    news:vkum2ssiv0sh8d@news.supernews.com...
    > Jeremy...
    >
    > While I'll agree that digital makes a better choice for control of your
    > "discreet" photos, I take offense at your charge that the costs charged by
    > our lab are high. Our rates (especially for 5x7 prints) are some of the
    > lowest for "discreet" processing out there...and our charges for FedEx
    > delivery are below what you would pay FedEx directly.
    >
    > We pride ourselves on our quality and prices...do a search on any major
    > search engine for "discreet photo processing" and compare what's out
    there.
    > Convenient Photo offers tremendous value.
    >
    > Remember...when taking that Jamaican vacation to the beach...who
    wants
    > to lug the $500 Nikon digital camera when you can shoot a one use camera
    > (with sand all over it) for $10.
    >
    > The growth may be slowing due to digital...but people still go on vacation
    > for weeks on end and don't want to buy hundreds of dollars worth of memory
    > cards to store all those prints...or worse carry their laptop across
    Europe
    > for downloading.
    >
    > Plus...we offer quality digital to paper printing...far beyond what your
    HP
    > at home can do.
    >
    > Think about it...would you want your digital camera to fall into the sand
    or
    > salt water?
    >
    > Convenient Photo
    > [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url]
    >
    >
    >
    > "Jeremy" <jeremy@no-spam-thanks.com> wrote in message
    > news:AFo3b.20719$8i2.3937@newsread2.news.atl.earth link.net...
    > > x-no-archive: yes
    > > "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    > > news:vks2g1rsfs8o4e@news.supernews.com...
    > > > Because FedEx wouldn't leave your discreet photos in your neighbor's
    > > > mailbox.
    > >
    > > I suspect that it is more aimed at steering clear of possible postal
    > > violations for shipping ographic material via the mail. Using a
    > common
    > > carrier takes it out of the federal postal regulations.
    > >
    > > Frankly, if I were doing that type of photography, I would go digital
    and
    > > handle it all in-house. This is one area of photography where digital
    > > clearly represents a better choice.
    > >
    > > There is simply no way to be certain that a lab will keep its promise
    and
    > > not keep copies of your photos for other uses. And, these "discrete
    > photo"
    > > specialty labs typically charge a lot for their services--just look at
    the
    > > price list and the FedEx charge schedules!
    > >
    > > There must not be much growth potential in that business. Who needs a
    > > middleman these days?
    > >
    > >
    >
    >

    news-server.austin.rr.com Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    And that .89 price is just for a reprint...check out the lower prices to
    print 5x7 at time of developing!

    Convenient Photo


    "news-server.austin.rr.com" <blah@blah.com> wrote in message
    news:EnJ3b.14259$_B.931540@twister.austin.rr.com.. .
    > $0.89 is not bad for a 5x7 print. I just ordered 5x7's of Ophoto and
    they
    > were $0.99 each, the same price a local 1 hour photos. I would have to
    > agree with Convienent Photo.
    >
    >
    > "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    > news:vkum2ssiv0sh8d@news.supernews.com...
    > > Jeremy...
    > >
    > > While I'll agree that digital makes a better choice for control of your
    > > "discreet" photos, I take offense at your charge that the costs charged
    by
    > > our lab are high. Our rates (especially for 5x7 prints) are some of the
    > > lowest for "discreet" processing out there...and our charges for FedEx
    > > delivery are below what you would pay FedEx directly.
    > >
    > > We pride ourselves on our quality and prices...do a search on any major
    > > search engine for "discreet photo processing" and compare what's out
    > there.
    > > Convenient Photo offers tremendous value.
    > >
    > > Remember...when taking that Jamaican vacation to the beach...who
    > wants
    > > to lug the $500 Nikon digital camera when you can shoot a one use camera
    > > (with sand all over it) for $10.
    > >
    > > The growth may be slowing due to digital...but people still go on
    vacation
    > > for weeks on end and don't want to buy hundreds of dollars worth of
    memory
    > > cards to store all those prints...or worse carry their laptop across
    > Europe
    > > for downloading.
    > >
    > > Plus...we offer quality digital to paper printing...far beyond what your
    > HP
    > > at home can do.
    > >
    > > Think about it...would you want your digital camera to fall into the
    sand
    > or
    > > salt water?
    > >
    > > Convenient Photo
    > > [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url]
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Jeremy" <jeremy@no-spam-thanks.com> wrote in message
    > > news:AFo3b.20719$8i2.3937@newsread2.news.atl.earth link.net...
    > > > x-no-archive: yes
    > > > "R & A" <RFrancis@underwriting.com> wrote in message
    > > > news:vks2g1rsfs8o4e@news.supernews.com...
    > > > > Because FedEx wouldn't leave your discreet photos in your neighbor's
    > > > > mailbox.
    > > >
    > > > I suspect that it is more aimed at steering clear of possible postal
    > > > violations for shipping ographic material via the mail. Using a
    > > common
    > > > carrier takes it out of the federal postal regulations.
    > > >
    > > > Frankly, if I were doing that type of photography, I would go digital
    > and
    > > > handle it all in-house. This is one area of photography where digital
    > > > clearly represents a better choice.
    > > >
    > > > There is simply no way to be certain that a lab will keep its promise
    > and
    > > > not keep copies of your photos for other uses. And, these "discrete
    > > photo"
    > > > specialty labs typically charge a lot for their services--just look at
    > the
    > > > price list and the FedEx charge schedules!
    > > >
    > > > There must not be much growth potential in that business. Who needs a
    > > > middleman these days?
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >

    R & A Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:02:01 -0500 (CDT), [email]tman63841@webtv.net[/email] (T_Man)
    wrote:
    >I'm not exactly sure why you would ship Fed Ex for privacy. USPS has to
    >obey privacy laws and Fed Ex doesn't. In fact, the local gym owner in my
    >town got his butt handed to him when Fed Ex peaked into his steroid
    >shipment and decided to set up a sting for him. It wasn't news to me
    >when I was told about this, as I used to post a lot on the controversial
    >fitness boards and stories like that were common with Fed Ex. Right or
    >wrong, you have to wonder what the hell they're doing going through
    >people's packages like that.
    >
    >USPS (not UPS) has to go through paper work to open your packages. Plus
    >the mailman has a thousand other houses to hit and he could care less
    >what's in your package (and again he absolutely cannot open it anyway,
    >even were he to find your package suspicious he'd have to report it to
    >management, and then management would no doubt have to go through
    >inspectors.) I'm not a big fan of Fed Ex at all.
    >
    >My recommendation is to use USPS whenever in doubt.
    There are laws restricting what can be sent through the mail that do
    not apply to UPS and Fed Ex.

    If you are sending something illegal it doesn't matter how you send
    it, you will get busted eventually.
    DTJ Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    It goes back to my original reply...If you send photos of illegal
    acts...(kiddy , bank robberies etc...) you have more to fear from us,
    than from FedEx.

    Convenient Photo
    [url]www.underwriting.com/discreet.htm[/url]

    "DTJ" <dtj@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:kcc4lv88664d00oetc4ik0hgbrp0vegig5@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:02:01 -0500 (CDT), [email]tman63841@webtv.net[/email] (T_Man)
    > wrote:
    >
    > >I'm not exactly sure why you would ship Fed Ex for privacy. USPS has to
    > >obey privacy laws and Fed Ex doesn't. In fact, the local gym owner in my
    > >town got his butt handed to him when Fed Ex peaked into his steroid
    > >shipment and decided to set up a sting for him. It wasn't news to me
    > >when I was told about this, as I used to post a lot on the controversial
    > >fitness boards and stories like that were common with Fed Ex. Right or
    > >wrong, you have to wonder what the hell they're doing going through
    > >people's packages like that.
    > >
    > >USPS (not UPS) has to go through paper work to open your packages. Plus
    > >the mailman has a thousand other houses to hit and he could care less
    > >what's in your package (and again he absolutely cannot open it anyway,
    > >even were he to find your package suspicious he'd have to report it to
    > >management, and then management would no doubt have to go through
    > >inspectors.) I'm not a big fan of Fed Ex at all.
    > >
    > >My recommendation is to use USPS whenever in doubt.
    >
    > There are laws restricting what can be sent through the mail that do
    > not apply to UPS and Fed Ex.
    >
    > If you are sending something illegal it doesn't matter how you send
    > it, you will get busted eventually.

    R & A Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    >There are laws restricting what can be sent
    >through the mail that do not apply to UPS and
    >Fed Ex.
    x-no-archive: yes

    Technically: yes and no. There are separate laws to shipping something
    through the USPS, but it's still a crime to ship somthing illegal
    through Fed Ex. Let me put it this way if we're talking about shipping
    something illegal (pretend for a moment pictures of naked women are
    illegal): with the USPS you'd have about a 1 in 1000 chance of being
    thrown in federal prison for 5 years, and with Fed Ex you'd have a 1 in
    100 chance of being thrown in state prison for 3 years.

    Why? Well for starters FED EX HAS A REPUTATION FOR NOSINESS and opening
    packages. I understand the "this stuff is legal anyway" angle, but why
    play up the Fed Ex for privacy angle? Fed Ex drivers CAN open packages
    without being thrown in jail. Mail carriers cannot. Funny, if you add
    the years of experience of the people I've known who worked in the Post
    Office, it would be 100+ or so, but I don't recall any story of packages
    being opened by a mail carrier. Yet I HAVE MET people who had packages
    opened by Fed Ex. If a Fed Ex driver wants to, he can sit in the back of
    the van and wank his pud looking at pictures of your wife. He might get
    fired, but it's doubtful he'll go to jail.

    Even better, with private services, if your schedule doesn't place you
    at home to sign for a package at a given time (which you DO NOT get to
    pick), well after 3 tries you get to come down to the local office and
    pick up your "discreet" package.

    Too, I used to live out in the country about 10 years ago, and if you
    didn't have your address marked clearly on your mailbox you actually had
    to field phone calls from delivery services and give them directions.

    T_Man Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Discreet photo processing

    x-no-archive:yes

    Don't get me wrong though. I think the service the guy's offering is
    perfectly valid and it sounds like he's got decent prices.

    I have a buddy for instance who's always going to Mardi Gras and party
    spots like that who's always talking about wanting to get pictures of
    some of the stuff he sees but he's not into digital photography.

    I've just grown to dislike the private carriers over the years.

    T_Man Guest

Similar Threads

  1. MM, Intel, Discreet and the future of Web3D
    By Lorax2003 in forum Macromedia Director 3D
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 23rd, 06:57 AM
  2. Fostering Discreet Plasma
    By Karl Sigiscar in forum Macromedia Director 3D
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 30th, 09:05 AM
  3. Merging a Photo into an already existing photo as a transpareny
    By Jonathon in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 8th, 10:02 PM
  4. help please for Canon Photo Base and Photo Studio
    By Stuart Elflett in forum Photography
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 7th, 12:00 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139