Cheap photo albums aren’t always the most efficient way to save time on your photos, according to a new study.
Researchers at The Netherlands’ Technische Universität (NTU) used a computer simulation to look at how photos might fare in a real-world setting.
The researchers found that, in the real world, the cheapest photo album is likely to be the one with the highest number of photos and videos, the easiest to manage, and most expensive to use.
But in a simulation, they found that even the cheapest albums are likely to result in some savings, such as saving up to 50 percent of your total photo albums.
“The most efficient album is a cheap one,” researcher Elmar van der Linden told The Verge.
“But it also has a cost.”
Van der Lindens group, in collaboration with Dutch company PhotoDollars, has published a paper on the topic in the journal PLOS ONE.
The study examined a total of 6,813 albums from more than 4,500 brands, ranging from photographers to social networks to businesses.
In their simulation, each photo album costs about 0.06 euros ($0.05), and photos can be used up to three times per day.
This means that a photo album with 2,000 photos can only be used once per day, while one with 1,000 can be downloaded every 10 minutes.
A photo album can also be used to save up to 0.5 euros ($1.00), and users can save up 0.01 euros ($07) for every 30 seconds of use.
When the researchers ran the simulation for three years, they looked at more than 7,500 images, each with more than 400 photos.
The cheapest albums have an average size of 5.5 x 6.3 x 7.4 centimeters, and each photo has an average of 11 seconds of exposure time.
But even the least expensive albums are still quite expensive.
The average price of a photo with an average image is 0.08 euros ($06), while the cheapest album costs 0.12 euros ($09).
A photo with just 50 photos costs 2.11 euros ($3.10).
“We were not surprised that the cheapest and cheapest albums could have similar costs,” van der Linen said.
“For example, an album with only 10 photos costs more than 1 euro ($0) but costs 1.2 euros ($2.60) per photo.”
The simulation, however, didn’t include the cost of image processing, so this is likely true in the actual world.
The results also show that the average price for a single image is a little higher than that of an album, so the cost per photo is lower than the average cost.
And because there are more photos than albums in the cheapest photos, the cost goes down.
The best-performing album for this simulation was a cheap and cheap one with 50 photos, which cost just 0.13 euros ($05).
The cheapest one was an expensive one with 30 photos, with an overall cost of just 0 of 1 euro (0.08) per picture.
And the most expensive album was a good one with 70 photos, costing just 0,06 euros (0,25).
“It seems like the price of an image is always going to be a lot lower than its value, and the more expensive the album, the lower that price is,” van den Linden said in a statement.
“It’s a lot more efficient to save a lot of money on your images than it is to spend a lot.”