 Joseph R. Ward |
printing photos Hi all, I find that I always have trouble printing photos. I use a mac and rarely do I ever get in print what I see on my computer. Do I always need my own printer to get the same colors, exposur, etc. or is there something I can do to the files so when I print them they look like they do on my monitor. thx for your help as always Joe
|
|
|
|
||
|
John Rhodes |
Joseph, I don't understand what you mean by "Do I always need my own printer to get the same colors(?)." However, if you are having your prints done by an on-line service and are preparing your files in accordance with their instructions, and the prints still don't match what you see on your monitor, then the problem is most likely an uncalibrated monitor. Do a search on BP for monitor calibration. John
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi Joseph, A projection presentation (slide or movie)is the best we have and this method falls short of “real life” whereas a sunlit vista can read 2000:1 gleaming automotive chrome trim vs. black tire in shadow. That’s a 10 f/stop range. Should the movie/slide experience come close to “real life” one would be required to ware sunglasses at the movies. A high quality computer display remains abridged as far as ratio is concerned. Most computer screens are hard-pressed to display 7 f/stop range which is 1:128. The best print we can make is on glossy paper will measure only 1:64. That’s a 6 f/stop spread achieved only when using conventional chemical based photo paper. The 1:64 can only be achieved if camera exposure and printing method is spot on. To match with an inkjet, the printer must be loaded with glossy paper and sport multiple ink shades. Best current quality inkjet printing results when the printer sports two shades of black – two shades of cyan – two shades of magenta and one shade of yellow for a total of 7 ink supplies. This is true because we have yet to produce (discover) inks with exactly the right color and shading. We have not yet achieved the desired dye colors in conventional chemical based photo films and color and papers. I will predict that prints on paper, regardless of process will always appear substandard to projection viewing or computer display. This is a fact of life. You can become famous and rich beyond your wildest dreams if you are the one to prove me wrong. Alan Marcus (I dispense marginal technical counsel)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Joseph R. Ward |
thx for the help. I appreciate all you wrote allan. some of it is a litle over my head at this point. I guess I can try to calibrate my monitor to check. worried doing this will change the colors of my pictures and will then have to change them all. is this a ridiculous concern? sorry for taking so long to thank both of you joe
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Lynch |
Joseph, I just answered a similar question of yours here: http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/QnAdetail.php?threadID=29621 My course Color Workflow may be the crash course in color management that you need to make a difference.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael A. Bielat |
I would say you would need to get yourself a monitor calibrator. I had a similar issue way back where what I saw on my screen wasn't what ended up on print. So even though the exposure was correct (I went by the histogram), the colors didn't look quite right and even skin tones and so forth. Monitor calibration tools from Spyder (I think someone just bought them and it is under a new name), HUEY and some other companies offer the technology for as little as $60-$80
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||