Jump to content

New Instax SP-2 Printer Does NOT SUPPORT Direct Printing From X Cameras Until Late August

pete1959

By pete1959
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

pete1959 Collaborator

pete1959

Posted
Posted

After many HOURS of frustration trying to connect and print directly from my X-10 to my brand new Fuji SP-2 SHARE Printer and failing I found BURIED in Fuji's website this:

 

"Direct connection function for FUJIFILM digital cameras will be available around the end of August 2016. Before then, please send images to your smartphone first and then use Instax SHARE app to print from Instax SHARE SP-2."

 

Link to website:

 

http://instax.com/share/en/faq/

I'm not happy with a product being shipped and released to me a full month before one of the, if not the, most important function is not working.

I'm further annoyed and bothered by there being NO MENTION in the SP-2 manual of the direct printing not ACTUALLY working. In fact you can find all sorts of instructions online on how to print directly from the X cameras to SP-1's and SP-2's.

 

There is ZERO MENTION of the fact that the SP-2 doesn't actually work in the direct printing mode!

 

I found the answer deep down in all Fuji's literature, but not in their support page, or instructions.

 

So if you can't connect your fantastic X camera to the new SHARE Printer SP-2 this is why.

 

On another note...the printer otherwise works fine when printing from smartphone using the share app. The print quality is just "OK".  A bit muddy, especially wide shots. I'd give the quality a 3 out of 5. I was hoping for a better uptick from the SP-1.

 

I will probably keep it despite it not being ready for prime time. Meaning you can't direct print from Fuji cameras....

It's a cool little gimmick that kids and families, parties, will love.

 

Peter

 

ps: this is a copy of my post in from another photo forum...hoping to get out the word so folks don't waste hours trying to make the thing work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
flysurfer Experienced

flysurfer

Posted
Posted

Pretty clear in my FAQ page...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
George_P Mentor

George_P

Posted
Posted

I may be missing something but I do not understand why would anyone want the Instax. I have the Canon Selphy CP1200 and I think it is much better. You can either connect it to your WiFi network or use it as a standalone WiFi Access Point (it creates its own network). The quality of the prints is much better than Instax and the size of the prints is more useful. They are also cheaper to print. You can get an elegant little travel case for it. Also a rechargeable battery if you think you need to print photos even when you have no power socket nearby. I transfer the photos to a tablet, edit/crop/etc. if I want to and print via Airprint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
George_P Mentor

George_P

Posted
Posted

OK but the Selphy is very portable too and looks cool as well. A great little gadget. Went hiking with my family and friends last weekend and I took it along. We stayed in a small village. There were two little boys, twins, climbing up a gate in a house nearby as we were coming back from the hike. I went back and gave a photo of the two little bandits to their grandmother. She was so happy and surprised. Good fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • jerryy
      Fungus

      By jerryy · Posted

      A fungus in the forest.

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      (p.s. Open Topic.)  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
×
×
  • Create New...