To enter a coupon code in your post please enter the following info:
Coupon Code:
Coupon Offer:
Merchant:
Expires (optional):
Restrictions (optional):
saving...
Quick Summary is created and edited by users like you... Add FAQ's, Links and other Relevant Information by clicking the edit button in the lower right hand corner of this message.
I saw CompUSA selling the same specs for same price. I was tempted but after seeing the quality, I'm really not convinced they're worth even $50... The resolution looks blocky when you get close. I think you could get away with it on a 5.6" frame, but not the 7".
I mean, it's a good deal as far as picture frames go (prices are moving the right direction), but you'd have to be ok gambling with $50 to see if you like it. Just my 2 cents.
Anyone else want to comment on these? Perhaps it's all the pollen in my eyes...
edit:clarified for the slow...
also: this review from the shack's page is my sentiment: At only 480x234 reso.... By: Alex R., Frisco, Texas | 02/17/07
Overall rating:
At only 480x234 resolution I felt the quality was poor. The pictures seemed distorted and not anywhere near the clarity advertised on the box.
lzpoof said:quickNdirty said:CUSA was selling Optimus frames?
apparently canuck might not be a very knowledgable board member or lying...........
No I think he's saying they're selling a product with the same specs. The CompUSA frame is made by Mustek (or is branded that anyways). Pretty low resolution for that size frame.
Here's the CompUUSR link and you can see that specs are the same: Mustek 7" frame
lzpoof said:quickNdirty said:CUSA was selling Optimus frames?
apparently canuck might not be a very knowledgable board member or lying...........
Duh...
Thanks to kimgkimg for thinking outside the box; geez, I guess I was a little to vague in my choice of words for these guys. I guess some people think there is actually an Optimus Manufacturing plant making picture frames JUST for the Shack.
Yes, I meant the same specs. I was talking about the resolution quality. Chances are the LCD panels are the same made in the same factory... Most all these things are brothers or cousins in some way or another.
I don't understand the allure of putting up a 480x234 digital picture frame, when you can send the 5-8 megapixel photo in for printing for like 20 cents.
neo1022 said:I don't understand the allure of putting up a 480x234 digital picture frame, when you can send the 5-8 megapixel photo in for printing for like 20 cents.
The digital picture frame will periodically change the picture on display (and that's the real advantage to these things).
neo1022 said:I don't understand the allure of putting up a 480x234 digital picture frame, when you can send the 5-8 megapixel photo in for printing for like 20 cents.
Is your printed photo going to do a slideshow of other photos while it sits stationary in its frame?
I think most people bought the digital photo frame to place it on their desk. For about the same price AR, I bought a portable 7-inch LCD DVD player to place on my desk. Powered by 12-volt adapter or built-in rechargeable batteries, it plays almost everything including music CD, CD-G (karaoke), mp3 CD, mp3 DVD, movie DVD, VCD, SVCD, photo CD, photo DVD (4.7GB worth of photos!!!). To make the photo CD or DVD, it's really easy, just copy your favorite photos to a blank CD or DVD. Then load it in the player, all the photos will cycle in a slideshow without music background, just like the digital photo frame but you can fast forward/pause/reverse with the included remote control. There's a lot of softwares such as Dazzle DVD Complete, Sonic my DVD, Sony Vegas Studio, etc. that help you make a musical slideshow then you copy it to a CD or DVD to play it.
Just wanted to give you guys my thoughts after buying two (Mother's Day is coming up) and trying them:
1. The resolution is NOT 480x234, it is actually 480x270. I can verify this, as I cropped all pics to the orginal misquoted incorrect specs and had black bars on the top and bottom. The aspect ratio is 16x9.
2. Some images looked pretty good, while others not so good. The ones that looked the worst were the images that were very bright or light and looked washed out. Good quality pics, actually looked okay.
3. The frame itself is very nice looking. It does not look techy and geeky as most of these frames seem to look. It acutally looks pretty good, black and conservative.
4. There are lots of setting and adjustments. I think that it is a good deal for $50 bucks. If the images looked too choppy, I was going to return the frames. But after viewing the frame working, I think that it is a decent enough deal, as long as you do not expect a $400 frame for $50.
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
