BetterPhoto.com - Become a better photographer today!
EMAIL:
PASSWORD:
remember me:     
     


Photography QnA: Printing Digital Pictures

Browse by Category | All New Questions | All New Responses | Q&A Home

Category: All About Photography : Digital Photographic Discussions - Imaging Basics : Printing Digital Pictures

Find the best rated printer for printing digital pictures or find tips for making your digital pictures print out better in this Q&A.

Page 1 : 1 -10 of 94 questions

  skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | >> ...10
Next 10  >>
     
 
Photography Question 
Clayton T. Williams
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 9/16/2006
  1 .  Matting Prints for Odd Sizes
Anyone have any suggestions on what size to mat a 10x15 with or a 10x20? What size would they look good matted with? Basically, I am trying to frame these "odd sizes" by matting them into a more common size.
Travis

5/14/2010 3:39:49 AM

  Hi Clayton,
Your 10X15 prints will fit a 16X20 mat very nicely. I actually stretch my photos to 10 1/2 X 15 3/4 and they still look very good. As far as the 10x20, it is so far off from the standard sizes only a custom matte will work. Don't worry about it. Only the uninformed will not realize that it needs a custom frame. I feel that you are doing the right thing by cropping to best suit the photograph and not the standard mat. I have one photo that is 5 1/2 X 16 and needs a 10 1/2 X 20 mat that I have sold three times.
If you are doing the framing, the small bit of extra cost is worth the price. Let the customer get the frame that best goes with his/her home or taste.
I hope that you are using backboards for your matted photos. It looks a lot more professional when you do and lessens the chance for damage to the matte and print.

5/14/2010 9:59:05 AM

Clayton T. Williams
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 9/16/2006
  Thanks for your answer. I have tried cropping to fit standard sizes, and I am just not happy doing that because I shoot through the viewfinder and not with a preconceived thought to crop. What do you mean by using backboards? I mount my photos to masonite before I matte and/or frame, if this is what you are talking about. Again. Thanks for the answers. I will try the 16x20.
Travis

5/16/2010 8:08:02 AM

Allen M. Aisenstein
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/3/2005
  I suggest matting out your photo to the next larger "standard'size" avilable frame. That way your customer has the option of avoiding the "high" cost of custom framing. The difference in price can be huge. This has always worked for me.

5/18/2010 1:13:49 PM

Amanda Haddox
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 9/27/2003
  I ordered 20 (10 white and 10 black) 11x16 mats with the inside window cut for a 10x15 print from Randy at Bux 1 Matting for $100.00 shipped. You can contact Randy if you are interested at mdetect@att.net

5/18/2010 1:56:59 PM

Clayton T. Williams
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 9/16/2006
  Thanks for the feedback. Anyone else have solutions I would greatly appreciate hearing it. All these ideas work great. Thanks Allen A. I am really trying to keep my customer from having to custom frame their prints.
Travis

5/18/2010 5:57:07 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Beth Verser
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/14/2007
  2 .  Desktop Vs. Laptop Monitors
I have both a desktop and laptop I have been doing a lot of my work on the go I have noticed that pictures done on my lap top seem darker on my desk top which I have never had any problem with. I called my photo lab, and they said the desktop is more dependable and that it is hard to calibrate the laptop. Any ideas for using my laptop? I need to be able work on the run. Thanks!

4/20/2010 11:51:23 AM

Claud B. Yeiser
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 4/20/2010
  Have you calibrated your monitors to ensure that you're using a good color profile? I use the Datacolor Spyder3Pro to calibrate all my monitors, and it keeps all my images looking the same no matter where I display them.
You should try and calibrate your monitors in the same lighting that you use when editing and viewing. This helps to ensure that you are seeing what you think you should be.

4/21/2010 4:18:24 AM

Roy Blinston
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 1/4/2005
  If you are using PHOTOSHOP software, go into the PREFERENCES on your Laptop and increase or decrease your DOT GAIN value (trial and error) and edit your pics until they start to look the same on both monitors).

4/27/2010 12:30:27 PM

Dan W. Dooley
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 10/28/2005
  Beth, I have a similar situation in that much of my editing is done on my laptop (Lenovo ThinkPad with ATI graphics and 1680x1050 resolution). Same resolution as my desktop Samsung 22".

Both Claud and Roy have offered good suggestions. You are not going to be able to make all things exactly equal but if you can get close by tinkering with the laptop settings, it will at least be easier to judge that what you see on the laptop screen will be as close as possible to what you see on the desktop screen.

For example, though I have tried everything possible to match what I see between the two screens, there are slight differences in some colors. The same thing would apply somewhat if using two different desktop monitors from two different makers. Though not as much of a difference as with a laptop screen. Anyhow, I find that red and yellow tend to want to look blown out just a little in highlights on the laptop screen. With practice I have been able to learn to judge that what looks like a small blown out area on the laptop screen will not look that way on my Samsung screen. Some colors are just as bright on both screens while others are not exactly the same. Learning what is what will let you adjust a picture on the laptop and have a better feel for what it will end up looking like on the desktop screen. It's not a perfect science but for those of us who must (due to travels or other reasons) rely on a laptop, it's the best we can do.

4/27/2010 1:25:46 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Aldo Tristan

member since: 12/4/2001
  3 .  Photoshop Printing Warning
 
  Photoshop Warning
Photoshop Warning
Screen shot
© Aldo Tristan
Canon EOS A2E (EOS...
 
Every time I use Photoshop and make some adjustments to one of my photos, I get a warning/message when I try to print the photo. When the printer is done printing the photo, the results are awful. Colors are all out of whack. I'm using Photoshop CS (Mac version) and my printer is a new EPSON Stylus model.
Best Regards,

9/25/2008 7:03:48 AM

  You are most probably set up wrong and making the wrong choices in both color management and when you go to print. Printing can be tricky between installing and selecting the right drivers, calibrating your monitor, and making color management choices that make sense.
It is a big issue, which is why I teach a 4 week course in color here at better photo. I've also blogged about it recently:
The Psychology of Color Management and Calibration
I think you need to start by having the right drivers installed for printing, as if you are choosing the right one, it will know the printer is not postscript. That will not solve the color management problems which will have to be addressed separately.
Does that help?

9/26/2008 7:33:40 AM

Aldo Tristan

member since: 12/4/2001
  I downloade the drivers from Epson website and restarted the computer and I still get the same warning message.

Aldo

10/8/2008 8:41:51 AM

  Downloading and installing are good steps. Are you sure you are using the printer driver you installed? Can you display the Print dialog here?

Richard Lynch

10/8/2008 9:26:45 AM

Aldo Tristan

member since: 12/4/2001
 
 
  Print Settings 1
Print Settings 1
Print Settings using Photosop
 
  Print Settings 2
Print Settings 2
Print Settings 2
 
 
Here are the printing settings using Photoshop.

Thanks,

Aldo Tristan

10/13/2008 8:28:04 PM

  Aldo,
Please click on the Color Management drop list, choose Output and take another screen shot. If you have checked boxes on that screen (this is where settings for emulsion, interpolation, etc., are), this may be the issue.

Richard

10/14/2008 4:43:11 AM

Oliver Anderson
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 11/16/2004
  Richard, Downloaded the driver's for my buddys MAC and his new HP printer. (I'm a PC guy) So it presented quite a challenge....Getting it to USE the profile was a whole other problem but its using WAY less ink and the photos look great now. He was hesitant to let me do it and now he's a complete believer.

10/14/2008 2:13:44 PM

Aldo Tristan

member since: 12/4/2001
 
 
  Color Management Options
Color Management Options
 
 
Richard thanks for your response, sorry I took so long to reply. By clicking on the Color Management I don't get many options (see attachment).

10/26/2008 10:13:01 AM

  You have to click on Color Management, but select Output as it changes the view of the screen. After the view changes, then take the screen shot.

Richard

10/26/2008 10:39:41 AM

Aldo Tristan

member since: 12/4/2001
 
 
  Color Management 2
Color Management 2
 
 
Ok, here it is. Thanks for your help by the way.

Aldo

10/26/2008 3:24:24 PM

  Hi Aldo,
I noticed you do not have use color calibration which is what you will set your profile to and it appeared you were printing from an sRGB file.
I highly recommend that you take Richards class and get up to speed with color calibration and printing. I would also recommend that you print from your high res tif image and not a small res jpeg file.
Good Luck - Carlton

10/26/2008 9:02:36 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Beth Howe
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/17/2008
  4 .  Monitor Calibration Problem
Hi Everyone:
I'm using a new iMac with Leopard (OS 10.5). And I've just calibrated my monitor using Spyder 2 Express. Now, I realize that although I just bought this version of Spyder 2 Express, this software was created in 2005. So, I'm wondering, do I need to get some sort of software update from ColorVision? Although I followed the directions implicitly, the calibration has not helped my print quality at all. The colors I see on my monitor are quite different on my prints. This is so frustrating. I should mention that I'm fairly handy with Macs and am doing my photo editing in Photoshop Elements 6 for Mac.
Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions!

7/21/2008 12:34:49 PM

  Howdy Beth,
How are you? Do you have your printer set to the same profile as your monitor ?
When I run Spyder2, I set the profile created (I name mine "Spyder2") on my Imac (also running Leopard) and then also designate my Canon 9000 printer to use the same color profile and my prints match perfectly.
One thing about Spyder2 is to run the calibration for the light you usually work in. I do most of my work at night, so I keep the room pretty dark and then run Spyder2 calibration. Then when I tweak images, I try to keep the room lit the same as I had it when I ran my calibration. If I try to tweak images in the daytime, they do look very different on my monitor and I could run calibration again with daytime lighting but choose just to wait til it gets dark again. I calibrate every 30 days but some people do so every 2 weeks. My Spyder2 from 2005 is working just fine, and I have not yet seen a need to upgrade.
Hope this helps!

7/21/2008 7:43:09 PM

Ann E. Swinford
BetterPhoto Member
annswinfordphotography.com

member since: 12/31/2005
  HI Beth and Carlton,

Thanks for starting this link. I was just starting to deal with calibration. In the meantime I have a question: Does CS3 work okay in the leopard environment? I'm in OS 10.4.11 (another cat- I forget which one) and I cannot decide if I should upgrade- I would hate for CS3 to fail in the leopard environment.

thanks,

Ann

7/30/2008 7:16:11 AM

Beth Howe
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/17/2008
  Hi Ann:
I don't use CS 3. But I've heard that it does work with 10.5.
If you go to Adobe's web site, they'll have info there that'll let you know for sure if it does work with Leopard.
You can also 'Google' the question: "Does Photoshop CS3 work with Leopard?" And see what answers you get from that.

Re: Calibration. Carlton is the expert on that and has been tremendously helpful to me (via e-mail).
On his advice, I purchased the Spyder 2 Express monitor calibration product.
After many hours of frustration, and a long call to Canon tech support (my printer manufacturer), I got it to work. But only in a darkened room, with almost all the lights out. The next morning when I went to print, the results were awful.
So, I became totally fed up with all the hassle and sent the product back to the retailer. I'll just stay with the factory calibration that came with my iMac.
Good luck with your ventures.
Cheers,
Beth

7/30/2008 9:01:46 AM

Beth Howe
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/17/2008
  Hi Ann:
I don't use CS 3. But I've heard that it does work with 10.5.
If you go to Adobe's web site, they'll have info there that'll let you know for sure if it does work with Leopard.
You can also 'Google' the question: "Does Photoshop CS3 work with Leopard?" And see what answers you get from that.

Re: Calibration. Carlton is the expert on that and has been tremendously helpful to me (via e-mail).
On his advice, I purchased the Spyder 2 Express monitor calibration product.
After many hours of frustration, and a long call to Canon tech support (my printer manufacturer), I got it to work. But only in a darkened room, with almost all the lights out. The next morning when I went to print, the results were awful.
So, I became totally fed up with all the hassle and sent the product back to the retailer. I'll just stay with the factory calibration that came with my iMac.
Good luck with your ventures.
Cheers,
Beth

7/30/2008 9:03:18 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Amber J. Skene
BetterPhoto Member
amberskene.com

member since: 7/2/2007
  5 .  Color Management and Dark Prints
I have been having a problem with color management. My monitor is calibrated with the Spyder 3 and I have the ICC profiles from the lab. I'm also soft proofing in CS3. My prints keep coming back too dark and flat. So, I have adjusted my brightness and contrast on my monitor to hopefully help with my prints. I just sent them off to the lab to see how they come back.
So my questions!
What else can I be doing to get this color management right? I'm shooting in sRGB, have CS3 in sRGB and do my edits from CS3, and saving as sRGB.
Also, although they look okay on a calibrated monitor, they are blown out on a non-calibrated monitor. So, I have clients that do online proofing on my site. I don't want them to think that they will be blown out. What can I do about this?
Any and all help is greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Amber

7/11/2008 11:19:22 PM

  Proper color management is soup to nuts, not just calibration. You do NOT want to adjust your monitor -- especially not after calibration.

Two things here don't seem to work together: your images seem blown out and they print flat. My suspicion is the lab profiles, which I am not sure you need to use at all. If you are supplying them a tagged sRGB image and not converting to CMYK prior to sending the image, I am guessing that it is the profile causing the trouble. One other trouble there is that you say they look blown out on an uncalibrated monitor...if the monitor is not calibrated there is no reference, so likely they could look blown out just as easily as they'd look flat.
Also, depending on your color settings, your previews might be completely wrong - and considering that you are not predicting well using soft proofing, it really isn't proving valuable. Soft proofing is only valuable when you have tested it, and that means running prints that are successful (which means having color management set correctly, etc.), and being able to match those prints with previews on screen.
Many people over-complicate color management. If you look for other posts of mine on the subject there is an outline to follow ... though I also teach a course here at BetterPhoto in color management (available again in September).
I hope that helps!

7/12/2008 10:49:59 AM

  Rich,

Even though I'm not the one asking the questions, I always find your answers very useful and informative. I just wanted to thank you for them!

dvc

7/12/2008 7:26:49 PM

Amber J. Skene
BetterPhoto Member
amberskene.com

member since: 7/2/2007
  Richard,

Thanks for responding. The problem was that the prints were coming back too dark and flat from the lab. Since then, I adjusted my brightness and contrast because they suggested that the screen may be too bright. Then I recalibrated and edited a few photos in CS3 and soft proofed (although hardly any change happened between my soft proof image and my orginial). I then posted them on my website (for my clients) and looking on an uncalibrated monitor (which I am sure they have!), is when the images were blown out in brightness.

I would lve to take a class, just right now the funds are not there. Maybe I can in September!

Thanks,
Amber

7/12/2008 9:54:56 PM

  Amber,

Rich, please correct if any of this is wrong...

I read (somewhere) that when calibrating a CRT, you should first
a) set contrast to max and
b) set brightness as follows:
- set your desktop background to pure black and close all windows & turn off wall paper
- resize image area smaller so you get some border (turn up brightness if needed so you can see this)
- now adjust brightness down until the background just turns the same shade of black as the border area
- resize your image area back up (you'll need to maximize a window or turn back on wall paper to see this.)

also, when adjusting your display area, you may want to display an image of a perfect square (you can easily make one in any graphic editor) so you can measure it with a ruler to insure your ratio is exact.

Then, calibrate normally.

dvc

7/12/2008 10:59:42 PM

  David (and Amber),
Really you should follow the manufacturer's instructions for calibration hardware. Generally the instructions say to max the contrast and set brightness so particular targets (like the one in Adobe Gamma or Apple's Display Calibrator Assistant) appear correctly, and THEN you calibrate. You should always take steps to 'normalize' the monitor before calibration as the settings themselves can get in the way of proper calibration. It seems that may have happened for Amber.

When in doubt, read the manual!

The method you describe here for brightness adjustment may give you pure blacks, but it may not be the best for the entire range of the monitor -- depends on the monitor, its response, etc. The targets can help you balance more than just the shadows. While I see the point of the method you describe, I am not sure it will always be the best.

Funny thing about monitors -- few people ever consider the 'correct' resolution, where the ruler around an image in Photoshop will actually display inches as an inch -- both horizontally and vertically. A lot is generally taken for granted, starting with the idea that the monitor will automatically display the right color.

It is often more complicated to get it right than just working out of the box. Follow manufacturer instructions for setup PRE-calibration. Regretfully all services won't always give you the best information (often staffed by well-meaning people who tell what has worked for them). Monitor manufacturers may have their own suggestions as well, and sometimes the monitor and calibration device will have contradictory instructions...

Practice and effort learning about color and calibrations will usually help. But you've got to handle the whole process correctly, not just one part.

Richard Lynch

7/13/2008 6:30:18 AM

  Thanks Rich!

I'll have to see if I can find such instructions for my monitor... it's a really old 17" Dell Trinitron.

...which I really need to replace soon... :)

I'm hoping to take your course in Sept, btw.

dvc

7/13/2008 10:48:07 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Kevin Skinner

member since: 5/26/2007
  6 .  Color Management
 
  Hermitage Falls
Hermitage Falls
Sample image to check calibration
© Kevin Skinner
Canon EOS 30D Digi...
 
I'm finding Colour Management rather a never-ending pursuit. I'm having problems with my monitor at the moment. I'm using Color Munki. However, when I'm adjusting the brightness and contrast controls, the contrast I can achieve but the brightness will not go low enough for calibration purposes (set at zero at the moment!). The program moves on from there and gives me a profile but it does look a touch bright to me.
So is my monitor calibrated too bright now (which will mean my images are too dark) or are they just right? Also does this mean that my monitor cannot be calibrated?
Cheers in advance,
Kevin

6/28/2008 3:17:16 AM

Pete H
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/9/2005
  Hello Kevin,

I don't have a specific answer for you.

That being said, here are my comments on color management.

At one time I chased this elusive spectre. My opinion now is that given all the variables, color management for the photographer with any real degree of accuracy remains elusive as well as next to impossible.

Why? Look at all the variables. Some are controllable, some are not.

To mention a few: Color LCD screens have a "viewing angle." Move your head this way or that way, and it changes.
LCD screens also physically change in color, contrast and brightness over time.

A color calibrator such as the "Spyder" look at the screen at zero degrees; we as humans do not.
CRT screens remain the best for accuracy and rendition, though they too suffer from age degradation.

Gamma and luminance: I find gamma, while interesting, useless to the photographer; just ask Ansel Adams on this. LOL. Luminance or brightness. This is a rather subjective term not to be confused or used with terminology like "blown Hi-lites."

Next; color and intensity of color are are represented by the RGB system in monitors... 000,000,000 and 255,255,255 being black and white. The combinations of these values will render a wide array of color with many gradations we can't even see!

Now factor in the many ICC profiles we as photogs must come to grips with. The screen SHOULD match what is output to the printer; be it OUR printer or a commercial printer. So now we need a standard for not only our screen but our printer as well.

Then we need to wonder if the printer will even lay down the color as it should be. I don't care if it's ink or dye sublimation, we ultimately have to believe THEIR equip is properly calibrated and working properly.
Usually; it's "good enough."
This is exasperating!

Ok, so what else? Oh ya; how I see RED may not be the way YOU see red. This is a variation how humans see and interpret light, be it color or brightness.

So what do I do?
I take it on faith that Red, Green and Blue are represented numerically.
As long as I have my black set to black, my white (255...255...255) set to white and my primary RGB values set accordingly, I am happy.

In my opinion, while total visual accuracy and measurement is necessary in pure science, it is not needed in photography. I know that is a pretty bold statement and likely open to disagreement, but nonetheless, it is what I believe.

I no longer agonize over "perfect" color calibration. I find it a futile effort. For me and my photography, close enough is good enough.

When I use a commercial pro printer, I enclose a guide print when it's important. The commercial printer people I use have a ICC profile on what (I) want; not what the Spyder says.

The guide print and ICC profile they have on record for me does NOT indicate perfect calibration, it indicates how I want the final print to look and has little to do with someone elses ICC profiles and color accuracy.

It remains purely MY opinion, we as photographers have been sold a bill of goods with color calibrators and the assortment of books written on color management.

While a good solid GENERAL understanding is good concerning color management, I feel some of us get way too carried away with it.


all the best,

Pete

6/28/2008 5:40:44 AM

  I recently answered a similar question on the forum and I'll copy it here (below). The 'problem' of color management is often over-complicated, and solutions illogical - which of course leads to poor or unpredictable results. I blame some of this on bad information that floats around the Internet, and some of it on Adobe. My goal for color management has been to simplify it and make it logical and easy to follow. An inherent difference in RGB (an additive color theory based on light) and CMYK (a subtractive theory based on light absorption) is that the two are never the same exactly. This does not, however, mean you can't have reasonably get predictable results. But before I repeat myself ad-nauseum, the following is copied with a few changes...

---
The question of getting prints to match is a heady one ... one that I answer all the time in my From Monitor to Print: Photoshop Color Workflow course ... Books are written on the subject of color management spanning 500 pages. That is, a short response here won't do it all for you. However, the important things:

- Calibrate your monitor (I use Spyder Pro)
- Create a custom ICC profile (usually part of #1)
- Decide on a sensible workflow (handling of color and color spaces from camera to print)
- Make the most of your corrections (correct your images to look their best)
- Embed your working space profile (some suggest specific printer profiles or other things, but generally these would only be helpful in situations where you have converted to CMYK)
- TEST. Don't go right for that 28x20 print ... get the service to print 3x5 or 5x7s as a test on the SAME MACHINE.

Each service will be a bit different, as will each paper and each machine they use. This will lead some to want to use custom profiles for output. That can really become a headache ... and another step where people can ruin their chances of getting the right results by assigning profiles incorrectly. I print with a service even though I have pre-press experience as I will not buy a $60,000 printer for my home, but can print on one cheaply at a service.

There are inherent differences in CMYK and RGB, and you see on screen in one and generally (with variations) print in the other. You will not get them to be identical, but you can get them pretty close with "normal" images. I like the idea and results I get with Laser Light printers (also sometimes called LED or CRT), which project light to expose paper which is then run through a photographic process ... no ink. The printers themselves are really expensive and you wouldn't likely own one, but services often do and can make your inkless prints for a bargain.

A lot of what you hear about working spaces and profiles is junk. Your workflow needs to make sense more than conform to sRGB, AdobeRGB, ProRGB, or whatever. It is often the "making sense" part that people leave behind as it is the biggest pain. I calibrate with a hardware device on any machine I correct images on ... I use a ColorVision Spyder. You can get away with the Express model. Hardware calibration is superior to software calibration.
---

If your monitor is an issue and images are important to you, get a better monitor. I use a 30" Apple Cinema Display and a Mac Pro laptop - and as good as the latter is, I do not correct images on it. I have worked with other monitors that are suggested as excellent, and, honestly, they have ranged from crummy to OK. I only switched from CRTs this past December because of the flaws in flat screens.

So I think generally Pete and I agree that people get carried away with color management for minimal and unnoticeable 'gains' in performance.
I teach a class in Color Workflow because it is such an issue ... I'll be writing a book for the next few months but will be back teaching again in September.
Hope that helps!

6/28/2008 8:52:22 AM

Roy Blinston
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 1/4/2005
  If you print your images on your desktop printer, then you are using CMYK inks - but your file is RGB (video) so it has to be converted on-the-fly when the file is downloaded to your printer. It does this automatically in the background.

RGB and CMYK settings are totally different. Try it yourself in Photoshop. Convert one of your normal pics from RGB to CMYK and see how the colours change (especially some blues). This is normal.

If you print your images at a Lab where they use an LED printer (ie: Light Emitting Diodes) this uses RGB settings because it is "light" not "ink". In this case you should get a result more closely matching your file on screen.... RGB to RGB.

Remember... ink and light are totally different. You can edit your pic on-screen to show colours that are physically impossible to print on a CMYK printer.

PS: CMYK means.... Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black (K).

7/8/2008 4:34:49 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
DENNIS E. GRANZOW
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/8/2007
  7 .  Photo Processors
I have recently been getting my prints made at Costco. Their quality is good, and their prices are unmatched by anyone I've seen yet. The only problem is that the prints always appear darker then my JPEG file. The Costco representative told me that to resolve this problem I need to calibrate my monitor to their printer. They showed me a Web site that I could use to get it down. However, it's very confusing. Isn't there another way to resolve this? Any help out there?

6/19/2008 3:13:13 PM

Pete H
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/9/2005
  Dennis,

You face a rather difficult problem when dealing with the "quickie" develop houses.

You COULD simply raise the overall brightness of your images to compensate; but at the risk of blowing out some hi-lites. It really depends how much darker they are printing what you are submitting. Half stop darker?..Full stop?

What they are referring to is really not that difficult. It is essentially (their) program for a WYSIWYG.

For photos you desire enlarged and that you feel have a lot of aesthetic value, I suggest using one of the many pro internet digital photo developers. They are NOT that much more than the 1 hr places, and you will find their work to be far superior, not only in color accuracy, but also you will have a far greater selection of paper styles.

Most post processing editors such as Adobe, have the ability to load a (ICC Profile) " International Color Consortium" This is nothing more than a standard that various printing machines use to assure consistancy in both color and exposure. Different equip uses different ICC Profiles.

I'm sure if you dig deep enough, Costco also uses some particular ICC Profile. You might have to ask the photo operator to ask the equip rep what it is and how to down load it. Once downloaded, it is a simple matter to tell Adobe or whatever you use to "Load ICC Profile."
Once that is done you will see exactly how your image will look once printed, assuming you have calibrated your monitor. This is the preferred method for total control.

Assuming you DON'T want to do that, why not make a "guide print" yourself and then ask the operator to come as close as they can to what you have. The one hr operators DO have the ability to play with exposure some, they're just lazy and don't want to. LOL

Finally, if you decide to use ICC Profiles; remember, not all commercial printing use the same ICC Profiles, so what may look great from company A, will look horrible from company B.


all the best,

Pete

6/19/2008 6:32:54 PM

DENNIS E. GRANZOW
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/8/2007
  Thank you Pete. This is very helpfull

6/19/2008 8:08:35 PM

Sarah G

member since: 10/30/2007
  Just tagging this for the info.

6/20/2008 6:59:19 AM

Alan N. Marcus

member since: 3/4/2006
  Believe it or not, equipment employed by photofinishers (both amateur and professional) has evolved leaps and bounds. The real breakthroughs started in the mid 1950ís. This is when printing machines acquired electronic logic coupled with auto-adjusting lamp-houses filters. That was the start whereby the printing machine was vested with ability to assist the operator to correct shortcomings in color balance and density. The success and popularity of color negative film is testimonial. You see, the printing process is actually a re-exposure process. The re-exposure is the printing exposure; it transfers the image to photo paper. This step provides the opportunity to correct errors made during the first exposure (the picture taking session exposure). The technological advances in photofinishing far exceed advances in the chip logic of the camera due mainly to the availability of vast computing power incorporated within the printing machine. I can attest to these facts first hand. Let me add, these technological advances fully apply to the printing of digital files on photo paper or via ink or dye sublimation or whatever.

All imaging editing software, worth its salt, includes routines to adjust your monitor. One of the best commercial sites is found at http://www.drycreekphoto.com/

Let me add that photo prints on paper are composed of dye or pigment on a white substratum, usually clay. When we view, light enters the structure of the paper, transverses the dye, strikes the substratum, reflects back and transverses the dye for a second time. The dye is Cyan (blue-green) Ė magenta (red-blue) Ė yellow (red-green). Whereas, light from a monitor emanates from glowing phosphors (CRT) or red-green-filters blocking florescent generated light (LCD). No one has yet to make the two technologies match. You can get close if you apply due vigilance. Itís a containing battle, not just a one time affair.

The real test is the prints themselves. Do you like their color and density? If you cultivate a rapport with the photo lab, they can customize a color and density profile just for you. Thatís a real advantage.

Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
ammarcus@earthlink.net

6/20/2008 8:34:48 AM

DENNIS E. GRANZOW
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/8/2007
  Alan.....thank you for taking the time to offer this information. It is very helpful.

6/20/2008 10:45:54 AM

  Dennis,
The question of getting prints to match is a heady one ... one that I answer all the time in my From Monitor to Print course ... And books are written on the subject of color management spanning 500 pages. That is, a short response here won't do it all for you. However, the important things:

- Calibrate your monitor
- Create a custom ICC profile (usually part of #1)
- Decide on a sensible workflow (handling of color and color spaces from camera to print)
- Make the most of your corrections (correct your images to look their best)
- Embed your working space profile (some suggest specific printer profiles or other things, but generally these would only be helpful in situations where you have converted to CMYK)
- TEST. Don't go right for that 28x20 print ... get the service to print 3x5 or 5x7s as a test on the SAME MACHINE.

Each service will be a bit different, as will each paper and each machine they use.
As Alan says, there are inherent differences in CMYK and RGB, and you see in one and generally (with variations) print in the other. You will not get them to be identical, but you can get them pretty close with "normal" images. I like the idea and results I get with Laser Light printers (also sometimes called LED or CRT), which project light to expose paper which is then run through a photographic process ... no ink. The printers themselves are really expensive and you wouldn't likely own one, but services often do and can make your inkless prints for a bargain.
A lot of what you hear about working spaces and profiles is junk. Your workflow needs to make sense more than conform to sRGB, AdobeRGB, ProRGB, or whatever. It is often the "making sense"' part that people leave behind as it is the biggest pain.
I calibrate with a hardware device on any machine I correct images on ... I use a ColorVision Spyder. You can get away with the Express model.
About changing images to get better results in print independent of the way they look on the monitor ... I suggest trying to avoid that, and using it only as a last resort. There are lots of services and some will be better than others - regretfully better on certain days (depending on the technicians).
Hope that helps.
Richard Lynch

PS - I'm taking a few months off from teaching BetterPhoto courses, but will be back in September!

6/21/2008 6:50:39 AM

DENNIS E. GRANZOW
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/8/2007
  Thank you Richard.....as always, very helpful. And for free :-)

6/21/2008 10:18:15 AM

Dennis C. Hirning
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/17/2005
  Something that I have found with Costco is to make sure that they don't "auto correct" your image. This can be done on line but you probably need to tell the operator turn it off if you take your images in for printing.

6/24/2008 6:27:41 AM

Debra Booth
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/2/2004
  The Costco in my area does great work, but they have a couple of employees who have been in the business for a long time.

I learned how to use printer profiles from the Dry Creek site, this page in particular: http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/using_printer_profiles.htm

Use this page to find the profile to use for your Costco: http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/

Good luck!

6/24/2008 7:15:27 AM

Beth Verser
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/14/2007
  I don't know what you are using your prints for but I have always used millers. They have a upload and ship that day for any one wanting to use the service and shipping is $5.00 but the prints are cheap it is www.mpix.com
They also have one I use when reselling my prints or events that I do it requires you fill out a questionaire and get accepted it is www.millersphotography.com they have multiple services they offer

6/24/2008 7:25:33 AM

Beth Verser
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/14/2007
  I am sorry the website for millers lab is www.millerslab.com the prints run $1.00 higher but the process within hours of getting your order and they ship free overnight fedex

6/24/2008 7:31:16 AM

Nancy Lynch
BetterPhoto Member
nanseaphotography.com

member since: 1/6/2004
  This is problably too simple an answer! I corrected my photos and then took them to Costco and asked them to "not" do any touchups. When they cam back they were a perfect match. I know my monitor and theirs match. This works for me.

6/24/2008 5:34:08 PM

DENNIS E. GRANZOW
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/8/2007
  Thanks to all for your feedback and suggestions.

6/24/2008 5:54:20 PM

Jeffery Haws
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 11/4/2004
  Hello Dennis, ditto on your printing situation with Costco, coming out dark, etc. I just gambled with my pictures and hoped that they were still good enough to use. One of the members of my camera club told me how to fix it for Costco, or any place that prints photos. You just need to find the exact model of printer they use. I also agree that Costco has great paper, quality and prices.

If you use Windows this will work, if not, use whatever file folder that you would use if you have an Apple system. Download the ICC profiles that Debra C showed you to your desktop. Then if you have windows, copy it to windows\system32\spool\drivers\color. When you get to the color directory, you will see many icc codes that are already on your computer. You will just add these to the list. This will allow you to see and select them when you click on the edit column in Photoshop while working on your photos. Notice how your open photo changes, when you select the Costco profile that you want to use. If you have a version of Photoshop that allows you to assign a profile to the file you are editing, you just assign that photo to that the Costco profile you want to use, the Lustre or Glossy. It will go dark, just like they turned out when Costco printed them before. Then edit the photo to your liking and it is going to be extremely close to what you expect, if not right on. I used this method now and I am very happy with my photos I send to Costco. I hope this is of value.

FYI, Keep a favorite on the page that has your profile, because it gets updated periodically and you should replace it when needed.

http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/index.html
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/profiles.htm
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/using_printer_profiles.htm
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/Profiles/California_profiles.htm#alah

Good luck

6/24/2008 11:46:11 PM

Mary E. Heinz
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/23/2005
  I just read through briefly so hope my
"two cents" makes sense...my suggestion:
look up WHCC/ White House Custom Color
for ordering your prints. I love their
service...yes on editing program make
sure you have ICC checked...but they can
also help you with settings when you setup an acct. for them. You'll love it !
any questions feel free to email Mary at
marinz@netzero.net

6/25/2008 12:00:25 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Becky Eastham
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/8/2007
  8 .  Prints: Borderless, Ratio
I was wondering why when I shoot pictures on my D300 and get them printed, there are always white borders around the pictures. Can you not get borderless prints with digital?

6/11/2008 11:23:01 AM

John Rhodes
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/24/2005
  Becky, your question topic says "print sizes," but you didn't mention a print size in your question. To answer your question about getting borderless prints with digital: Yes.
Now, as to what you are getting from your print service, you need to take that up with them. Perhaps you need to specify borderless.
What you need to ensure is that the photo is set to the specific aspect ratio for the print you want.

6/11/2008 12:56:39 PM

Alan N. Marcus

member since: 3/4/2006
  Hi Becky,
You are asking: How do we avoid or circumvent a format mismatch when ordering prints? Your camera, the Nikon D300, has an image sensor that measures 15.8mm by 23.6mm. Thus, the format ratio is 23.6 ų 15.8 = 1.5. Itís nice to know the format ratio because we can use simple math to calculate what print size we need to order to avoid a format mismatch.
First, we decide on a paper width. Letís say the lab has 3 1/2 inch width paper in stock. We multiple 3 1/2 x 1.5 = 5 1/4. This tells us that if we order a print on 3 1/2 inch stock, the length must be 5 1/4 inches.
Letís try another width. The lab has 4 inch paper in stock. We multiply 4 x 1.5 = 6. Thus, we can order 4 x 6 prints.
Table of perfect format matches for your camera in inches: 3 1/2 x 5 1/4; 4 x 6; 5 x 7 1/2; 6 x 9; 8 x 12; 10 x 15; 11 x 16 1/2; 12 x 18; 14 x 21 ... Note: all lengths are 1.5 times the width.
Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)

6/11/2008 5:03:52 PM

Bruce A. Dart

member since: 1/7/2007
  Hi Becky,
Alan is correct, albeit very technical.The so called "standard" sizes have never been the same ratio as you go from size to size. The 3-1/2 x 5, 4x6, 5x7, and 8x12 are more nearly the same aspect ratio as most 35mm and now digital cameras. The 4x5, 8x10 and 16 x20 are close to the same ratio. If you have a "full frame" image made you will get all of your image but it may not fit the standard sizes. An 8x10 would crop about 20% of a 35 mm image. Now with digital, it's slightly more. When you are counting on "what you see is what you get" you will be disappointed unless you keep this in mind. Why manufacturers never truly "standardized" the sizes is beyond me. Even now, as popular as digital is with hardly anyone still shooting film, you can only obtain 8x12 frames, for example, in a custom shop. An 11x14, a popular size for decades, doesn't fit either of these aspect proportions (as you can see from Alan's calculations.) when getting prints made with any lab, however, sometimes you have to specify (or ask what their equipment is capable of)about borders or not. There is much to be said for finding a good processor and sticking with them to produce consistent results.
Most people make an assumption that making prints is an EXACT science, when in fact there are many variables. Teaching film classes I used to point out that you could send the same negative to the same lab on three different occasions and conceivably get three very different results. While the equipment is better, electronic files can do the same.
Bruce

6/17/2008 5:30:54 AM

Alan N. Marcus

member since: 3/4/2006
  Print sizes thus format size: Photography was born in the Victorian age owing to the success of Daguerre 1839. Oil painting had dominated for centuries thus canvas and frame sizes were fixed by a flourishing industry. Most came from the discovery of the Golden Section/Golden Mean by Pythagoras plus the universal appeal of the 1.6 ratio in use for thousands of years.

As photography evolved it moved away from the silver plated copper sheets of Daguerre to glass plates. Again a flourishing industry was already in place making tiny window glass for cabinets. Most large camera formats were born due to convenience and price of cabinet size glass.

At first photo paper and glass plate sizes were matching. The Dutch dominated in paper making. They had perfected a machine that made a singe paper sheet that measured about the distance between the outstretched hands of the machine operator. This sheet was cut into smaller sheets, the idea was reduced waste. The English consumed large quantities of 8x10 drawing paper.

Thomas Edison invented motion pictures. For the film, he turned to Kodak, madding a deal with George Eastman. Kodak was making 70mm wide film for their ďyou push the button we do the restĒ box camera. Edisonís engineers, for economical reasons, slit the 70mm thus making the finished film 35mm wide. Further they punched sprocket holes on both sides to facilitate smoothly transporting the moving film. The space between the sprocket holes allowed for an image 24mm wide. They set the height at 18mm thus for many years motion picture projected a rectangle with a ratio of 1.33.

The 35mm still camera: The German camera maker E. Leitz marketed the Lieca camera. Their chief engineer, Oskar Barnack designed this camera around surplus motion picture film stock, it was plentiful. The Lieca camera retained the 35mm film width and the 24mm frame width however since the camera was to be held mostly horizontal, Mr. Barnack doubled the 18mm height making it 36mm. This the current full frame 35mm remains 24mm height 36mm length a ratio of 1.5.

Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
ammarcus@earthlink.net

6/17/2008 8:09:04 AM

Amy L. Maalmi
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/11/2007
  Hi Becky. I'd just like to ask where you are printing your pictures? I work for Inkley's as a photographer and their print lab allows you to choose whether you want borders or not. However, for some odd reason, they have decided to make default for those borders to "Add borders", so if you don't uncheck that, you get them whether you wanted them or not. If you are printing there, or one of their affiliates (Wolfe or Ritz) this could be your problem. Hope that might help.

6/19/2008 4:39:12 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Jess Griffin
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/21/2008
  9 .  Printing Images - Crop Factor
I am just starting out, and I have run into a problem with getting my images developed. I have a Nikon D300, and it takes awesome shots that are so clear they could be developed into large prints. My problem occurs after I edit some of my photos and try to send them to a local one-hour photo place in my town just to print 4x6s ... I get prints with heads chopped off. I don't what I can do to get these images to be able to print in not only 8x10s but 4x6s as well. Help!

3/21/2008 8:03:32 AM

Alan N. Marcus

member since: 3/4/2006
  Hi Jess,
The D300 produces an image that is almost an exact match to the 4x6 print. This is what we call a 1.5 ratio meaning the length is 1.5 times the height. Now, your photofinisher is slightly over magnifying the image when they produce a 4x6 print. You should ask them to print using a lower magnification. Tell them you do not like your prints cropped i.e. you want as much as the frame is possible.
They are doing this because their printer has a pre-set magnification. Set to avoid borders. If they will not accommodate or lack the skills to do so, change to a different lab.
The 8x10 format is more square than the 4x6. Its ratio is 1.25. Having the lab make 8x10 wills likely make the problem worse.
You need to always compose and then back up or zoom out a little to give yourself more space around the principal subject. You are discovering that common print sizes are not always a good match for the cameras format.
Alan Marcus

3/21/2008 8:28:40 AM

Pete H
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 8/9/2005
  Jess,
Even the cheap 1-hour labs have a crop and position setting when you either upload locally at the store or use the internet.
The aspect ratio Alan is speaking of is well known to digital shooters using APS sized sensors. Because of this, with time, you will have to learn to leave enough head room when shooting a photo if you plan to enlarge it later - especially 8x10. For example, if you are shooting a sweeping landscape with subject matter filling your viewfinder totally from side to side and top to bottom? There is no way an 8x10 will you get all the image printed that you see. Leave space ... lots of it if you plan to make 8x10s or larger. Even 5x7s will crop heavily.
All your images should be "pre-cropped" before you send them to any photo finisher ... even the 4x6 so you can position the slightest change.
All the best,
Pete

3/21/2008 9:38:51 AM

Sherry King

member since: 6/25/2006
  Another suggestion (if you are printing many 4x6 photos), purchase a small printer that specializes in 4x6 prints. We used the Epson Picturemate for years and recently purchase the HP Photosmart A717, which does both 4x6 and 5x7. Both are inexpensive, create good small prints, and allow you more control over what is printed.
Sherry

3/25/2008 4:55:40 AM

Allison W. Laster

member since: 1/9/2007
  i am finding that I am having the same problem. would you also suggest to get a printer, say an epson r800, to print my own prints or continue to use an online printer such as bay photo or mpix? would using my own printer solve the croping problem? thanks.

3/25/2008 5:37:40 AM

Mary Iacofano
MARYIACOFANO.COM

member since: 10/12/2005
  Hi,
at one time I experienced the same problem. When I asked the clerk at the quick lab, this is what she explained to me and how to correct.
Before the final upload to the lab, there was an edit button. When I clicked on this, an imaginary crop box layered over my image. I had to drag & drop the box over my image to adjust the labs cropping. Thus, dragging the box so the heads were not cut off. Hopefully your issue will be as easy to correct. see if the website has an edit button and go from there.

3/25/2008 6:18:39 AM

Mark Groves

member since: 5/28/2003
  My guess is that you are cropping these to a incorrect size at the start. In the editing program that you use check image size when you are done if you want a 4x6 your edited photo should be this size to ge the the best results. you must crop each photo size for each print size desired.your editing program should give you size choice before you crop Grover

3/25/2008 6:23:05 AM

Allison W. Laster

member since: 1/9/2007
  thank you for the tip about the editing box. I guess I am still confused about printing out my own images. would the picture be cropped if I printed the image on my own printer? (i don't have a printer to work with, I have been thinking of buying one.)thanks.

3/25/2008 7:33:54 AM

Alan N. Marcus

member since: 3/4/2006
  Hi all

Taking pictures and then viewing them is what photography is all about. As you progress in this hobby, you will need to procure editing software. Once you load imaging editing software, a whole new world awaits. You will be able to enhance your images as to color and contrast and crop to an exact size. In essence, such software will give you the control you want.

Why not download free trial software?
I suggest Paint Shop Pro
www.corel.com

Others will also suggest. I find Paint Shop Pro and its cousin Corel Photo Album, very nice for what you want.

Best regards,

Alan Marcus

3/25/2008 8:25:23 AM

Allison W. Laster

member since: 1/9/2007
  thanks everyone for you help.

3/25/2008 8:59:38 AM

  I always get my images printed in either 8 x 12 or 12 x 18. This gets your entire image in the frame without anything getting cropped.

3/25/2008 11:01:17 AM

Robert F. Wilson
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 10/24/2002
  Hello Jess, I don't know if you have a Sam's Club near, but they do a good job for people just starting out and they give out a free software disc so that you can upload your images and then make adjustments to the image(crop,red eye,etc.)then print whatever size,pay for them and pick them up at the nearest Sam's Club. If you get to know the lab well enough, if you don't like the final product, they may reprint it for free.
Thanks, Robert F. Wilson

3/25/2008 12:59:53 PM

Sherry King

member since: 6/25/2006
  I can't say if you should buy a printer or stay with the 1-hour labs or use the online labs. I have not used the 1-hour labs in years -- we have multiple photo printers. I think it really comes down to how many photos are you printing, how much control do you want, and just personal preference.

Sherry

3/25/2008 7:21:00 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Jennifer Collins

member since: 3/4/2008
  10 .  8x10 Prints Cut Off
Hi. I just had some pics developed at Walgreens on 8x10 paper and the image is cut off! My camera was set at the highest megapixels for my 6 megapixel camera when I took the pic and I thought with a 6, it was possible to have 8x10 images printed without compromising the original image, but perhaps that is not the case. The 4x6 developed picture looks great. Any suggestions? Thanks!

3/4/2008 2:20:44 PM

John Rhodes
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/24/2005
  Jennifer, This has nothing to do with the megapixels of your camera. What you have here is a difference in the aspect ratios of the two sizes you had printed. Your camera likely produces a 3:2 ratio, which matches to the 4 x 6 you successfully printed. However, 8 x 10 is not in the 3:2 ratio, thus some cropping is required. You can't leave it up to Walgreens to decide how to crop, so you need to crop the images with your photo editing software before having them printed. Just set the crop to 8 x 10 (or 10 x 8, depending whether it was a vertical or horizontal image), and decide what you want to keep.
John

3/4/2008 2:33:42 PM

Jennifer Collins

member since: 3/4/2008
  Thank you, John. That is helpful. I learn something new every day when it comes to photography. My response to your response is what if I don't want to crop any of the image, should I then just not develop on 8X10. How do I determine what developed images on what sized paper will jibe with the 3:2 ratio? Many thanks for your help.

3/4/2008 2:45:08 PM

John Rhodes
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 2/24/2005
  Jennifer, the sizes that correspond to 3:2 are 4 x 6, 8 x 12, 12 x 18. I print almost all my images to 12 x 18. If you need an 8 x 10, just remember to leave room to crop the long dimension by 2 inches if you start with an 8 x 12. Keep in mind, for 8 x 12s, there is no standard frame size, so either custom framing or the metal frames you put together.

3/4/2008 3:17:33 PM

Christopher A. Walrath
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 4/25/2006
  Hi, Jennifer. Anything with an aspect ratio of less than 3:2 and you will lose data along the longer axis. More than 3:2 and you will lose from the shorter axis. 4x6 turns out fine. 5x7 and you will lose a little on one of the shorter edges. 8x10 and you will lose even more beacuse that evens out to a 4x5. You lose 17 percent of the image on the long axis. If you want to print in 8x10 specifically you might want to leave some extra expendable space on one of the short edges. Otherwise, best to print in sizes as pointed out by John.

Thank you
Chris

3/4/2008 4:48:39 PM

Jennifer Collins

member since: 3/4/2008
  Thanks to you both!

3/5/2008 10:17:57 AM

  Jennifer you can get 12 x 16 frames with a 8 x 12 mat opening. They are made by Nielsen Bainbridge and I purchased them through a local art supply store.

3/11/2008 4:45:49 AM

Curt Morris
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 7/31/2007
  Jennifer, When you order photos at Wallgreens, or any other photo processor, be sure to look at the preview. I just did that at wallgreens.com and once in the preview mode, there is a crop feature. you just drag your photo to get it centered as you would like. As you have been told, each print size has a different aspect ratio so any time you change the size, you need to be sure you are getting what you want.

3/11/2008 6:44:37 AM

Courtney Lawyer

member since: 2/26/2005
  Question about John R.'s response - what are the "metal frames that you put together"???

Jennifer - For all my clients (I'm a portrait photographer) and for myself I crop my 8x10s in photoshop or with my ordering program so that I can control the cropping. Not having standard frames is a big issue for my customers so I have to offer standard and just try to make sure I shoot with enough clearance or border around my shots. It took me a while to be able to gauge the space I need and sometimes I forget, but leaving that space has really helped me.

3/11/2008 6:48:10 AM

Donna L. Jones
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 4/22/2002
  Jennifer, I had this problem constantly when I began. Now I just remember to frame the picture the way I want it in the camera.....and then back up and leave extra space for cropping before I take the photo. It's habit now and I seldom get a picture without enough room to crop and still get what I want...hope this layman's answer helps!
Donna

3/11/2008 7:10:30 AM

Floyd Lawrence

member since: 11/18/2003
  There's another option that I often use. I have a lab make an 8x12 print, buy an 11x14 frame and an 11x14 mat with a pre-cut 8x12 opening (available at photo stores or online). I like the fact that I get my full frame with its increased horizontal area. I've never liked the 8x10 ratio for its boxiness. And I'll never understand why photo paper isn't sold in 8x12 sizes. On some occasions, I have hand cut 13x19 paper into two 8x12 pieces and made prints on my home printer.

3/11/2008 7:22:12 AM

  I agree with Floyd! I do the same thing. I order my mats cut at Logan Graphics in the 11x14 with an 8 x12 opening. You have to order 50 at a time.Or you can buy your own mat cutter and cut them yourself. I have found that Logan's prices are about the same as buying matboard and cutting them yourself, so you might as well let them cut them for you :-)

3/11/2008 10:16:42 AM

Jennifer Collins

member since: 3/4/2008
  Thanks, everyone. Now, I'm a bit averse to the idea of cropping for the time being, so where might I be able to develop 8x12 or 12x18 prints? I don't think Walgreens is an option, how about Wolf or Ritz Camera, Costco? I live in San Francisco so any suggestions for one of these chains would help. Jennifer

3/11/2008 10:32:13 AM

Floyd Lawrence

member since: 11/18/2003
  Serving the masses as they do, the big chains aren't set up for 8x12 printing. Try to find a smallish camera/photo shop instead. Just call a few in the phonebook. Such places also may sell mats with an 8x12 opening. If you can't find one, you should know that you can upload images to Adorama in New York, which charges $2.49 for an 8x12 (as opposed to $1.99 for an 8x10). I don't know what postage runs. Take a look at the price list here:
http://www.adoramapix.com/PriceList.aspx

3/11/2008 10:55:14 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
  skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | >> ...10
Next 10  >>

Copyright © 1996-2014 BetterPhoto.com, Inc.ģ All Rights Reserved.