Printing your digital photos allows you to cherish memories in a tangible way, but finding Affordable Photo Prints without sacrificing quality can be a challenge. This review examines several popular online photo printing services to help you discover the best options for getting beautiful, affordable prints delivered right to your door. We’ve analyzed print quality, pricing, shipping, and user experience to guide you towards the most valuable choices for your precious photos.
Mpix, a well-known service with a convenient smartphone app, unfortunately didn’t impress our review panel. Despite its popularity, Mpix photos were ranked as the least favorite due to significant cropping issues, particularly when printing smartphone photos. This forced cropping can be a major drawback if you pay close attention to image composition and are looking for prints that accurately represent your original photos. Services like EZprints and RitzPix offer smartphone-friendly 4:3 aspect ratio print sizes, while Printique and Nations Photo Lab provide uncropped printing options regardless of aspect ratio. Currently, Mpix lacks both of these crucial features for affordable and accurate photo prints.
Bay Photo offers smaller print sizes suitable for smartphone photos and boasts sturdy packaging. However, in our tests, the print quality was only average. Participants in blind tests often placed Bay Photo as a decent second choice but rarely as their top pick, indicating it provides satisfactory but not outstanding affordable photo prints.
Snapfish stands out as one of the most budget-friendly services, offering incredibly low prices. However, this affordability comes at a cost in print quality. Both 8×10 and 4×6 prints exhibited harsh contrast, resulting in lost detail in shadows and highlights. Portrait photos displayed noticeable orange skin tones. Packaging was also a concern; smaller prints arrived in thin cardboard envelopes without padding, offering minimal protection during shipping. An 11×14 print, while shipped in a tube, lacked internal padding, leading to damage during transit, as shown below.
A close-up of the edge of a rolled-up print from Snapfish that was damaged during transport, showing a crease from hitting the tube's end cap.
Snapfish’s attempt to protect an 11×14 print with a tube failed due to the absence of internal padding, causing edge damage from the end cap during shipping, highlighting issues with affordable but potentially lower quality and packaging. Photo: Amadou Diallo
RitzPix also experienced packaging issues, resulting in damaged affordable photo prints. An 11×14 print was shipped in a flat envelope with thin backing boards, insufficient for protection. The envelope’s tight fit for the 11×14 photo led to corner damage when the package was crushed in transit. Simple improvements like a larger envelope or a box, used by other services, could have prevented this damage. The inadequate packaging was particularly disappointing given RitzPix’s high shipping fee of $14.95, significantly above the average, making their service less appealing for affordable photo prints when considering potential damage and cost.
A close-up of the corner of a damaged photo print from RitzPix against a green backdrop, illustrating shipping damage due to inadequate packaging.
Shipping damage to an 11×14 print from RitzPix occurred because the undersized envelope was crushed on the corner during shipping, emphasizing the risk even with services aiming for affordable photo prints. Photo: Amadou Diallo
EZprints, similar to Snapfish, delivered prints that were notably subpar. Every print had a hazy, washed-out appearance, lacking sharpness and displaying a mottled texture in areas of consistent tone. These were the least sharp photos among those tested, making EZprints a less desirable option for those seeking quality even within the realm of affordable photo prints.
Shutterfly, despite being the second most expensive service tested, offered only average print quality. The primary concern with Shutterfly was packaging. Small prints were sent in a flimsy flat envelope, and 11×14 prints arrived in a tube, resulting in curled prints requiring flattening. While a tube offers some protection, the curl necessitates extra effort to prepare the prints for display, detracting from the convenience expected from affordable photo prints services.
A curled large photo print from Shutterfly, demonstrating the effect of tube shipping and the need for flattening before display even with affordable photo prints.
The significant curl in a photo print shipped by Shutterfly in a tube shows the inconvenience of flattening prints received from even widely used affordable photo prints services. Photo: Amadou Diallo
Zazzle provides photo printing services but is better suited for single, customized orders due to its user interface and limited paper choices. The print size selection process is cumbersome, requiring individual dragging of each image onto a print-size template per order page. This tedious process makes Zazzle unsuitable for ordering multiple affordable photo prints, especially in larger quantities.
Two coffee table books are placed on cardboard to flatten a photo print, illustrating a method to correct curling from shipping tubes used by some affordable photo prints services.
Flattening a curled photo print between cardboard sheets under heavy books, a recommended method for prints from services like Shutterfly, ensures affordable photo prints are presentable. Photo: Amadou Diallo
Winkflash has accumulated numerous negative reviews. Beyond reports of customers losing access to stored photos due to ownership changes, many users have complained about poor customer service, limited to a web form with no phone or email support. These significant issues make Winkflash an easily dismissed option when considering reliable and affordable photo prints.
FreePrints allows users to order up to 1,000 4×6 prints annually for free, only charging for shipping. However, their website is minimal, offering little information about the company, print quality, or ordering process, and everything must be managed via a phone app. The lack of transparency and reliance on a “too good to be true” free offer raises concerns about the overall value and quality of their affordable photo prints service.
Amazon Prints offers 4×6 prints at a competitive price, though slightly higher than ultra-low-cost rivals like Snapfish. For Amazon Prime members already using Prime Photos, ordering prints is seamless. Print quality was rated as mid-range – not exceptional (skin tones tended to be orange) but not the worst either. Prints arrived within six business days, but packaging was basic – a flat mailer with thin cardboard, resulting in corner damage to one print. While reasonably priced and convenient for Amazon users, the packaging and print quality are average for affordable photo prints.
Walmart offers a 4×5.3-inch print size, accommodating smartphone 4:3 aspect ratio photos without cropping, which is a plus. However, their overall selection of print sizes is less extensive compared to top-rated services. Walmart can be a convenient option for affordable photo prints, particularly for avoiding cropping smartphone photos, but might lack variety for diverse printing needs.
Conclusion
Finding truly affordable photo prints involves balancing cost with quality, packaging, and service reliability. While services like Snapfish and FreePrints offer enticingly low prices, print quality and potential damage during shipping can be significant drawbacks. Amazon Prints provides a middle-ground option with reasonable pricing and decent quality, especially for Prime members. For those prioritizing smartphone photo printing without cropping, Walmart’s 4×5.3 option is worth considering. Ultimately, the “best” affordable photo prints service depends on individual priorities, whether it’s the absolute lowest price, acceptable quality, or specific features like uncropped printing and robust packaging.
