Photo-finishing pitfalls in the Digital Age

[Turbo DV8]

I always wondered...

We have photoshop which allows us to tweak the image of a picture just so. So, before I take my digital images down to the photo-finisher, I bump the brightness up a bit on that picture, the contrast down on this picture, and change the hue on this one and the color on that one. Now everything looks splendid... on my monitor. The photo-finisher has their own monitor, too. Unless every monitor used along the path is not professionally calibrated to a unified standard, how is there any way to know how the end print will appear? Say, unbeknownst to me, my home monitor is set up just a little dark, but I bump the contrast up so it looks good on my monitor, and the print ends up being too bright. Or the photo-finisher's equipment is not calibrated the same as mine, is it any wonder you get any accurate print rendition at all?

 

[Coop]

How about this: take a picture of a color reference card, edit the pic so it looks good on your screen, take it to the photofinisher, ask them to process it without color adjustments. take the print home, adjust your screen so it comes as close as possible to the print.
Now always ask the photofinisher to print without color adjustments...

 

[geepondy]

I bought a Spyder2express which is a hardware monitor calibrator for I think either $60 or $70 and it does a fine job of calibrating my monitor. I tweak my photos the way I want and then when I order from Costco, choose the do not auto correct option and the prints come out really close to the way I see them on my monitor. There are other hardware monitor calibrators out there and I recommend the use of one if you are serious about editing your digital photos.

 

[Stillphoto]

Well you already sound like you know where your monitor falls in the scheme of things...Calibration will certainly help you maintain a particular standard that you can bring your monitor back to time and time again as it falls out of calibration.

(Keep in mind most of the time a calibrated monitor may look a bit darker than you're used to).

I worked at a professional photo supply that also housed a professional lab. They offered enhanced prints (color and density corrected by their printers) and straight (uncorrected) prints. Enhanced prints cost more since someone looked at/adjusted each shot.

I would often tell people the easiest way to "calibrate without calibrating" is to do what you did. Make the print look good on your monitor, then bring it to your lab, and ask for a "straight" print (no color corrections). Take it home, and compare what they look like. Then you'll know ok it looks good on my screen its a bit yellow in the print, etc. You can then make corrective actions on your end to ensure a proper printing result.

Keep in mind that every lab is different, every printer (the actual person) has different eyes, and every machine outputs a little different. Most printers that are worth their salt work against their visual bias and try for neutral results. Some people like things a bit warmer than others..etc.

Plus, chemistry varies on a day to day basis. Even though the images are digital, the actual photo paper still goes through numerous soups of chemistry. Every morning at the shop I was at, they would have to run a color balance for each different type of photo paper being used (4 inch wide, 5 inch wide, 10 inch wide, matte, glossy, etc). Honestly it can be a real crapshoot sometimes.

The onslaught of digital photography has brought color correction and density issues to the everyday consumer. In the past you'd drop off your film, get your prints back, and for the most part life was good. The printers would be the ones that had to deal with color correcting and adjusting brightness. People for the most part never gave it a thought that each frame was being adjusted one by one (best case scenario)

My advice is find a quality lab in the area (or whatever is good enough for you) and stick with them (try contacting a few local wedding photographers and see who they use, they are cranking out lots of images on a regular basis and need consistancy).

Creating a relationship with a lab and its printers can help you get more reliable results more often.

Sorry if that was bit long winded...just something I've thought about alot recently.

 

[RA40]

I concur with Stillphoto, this is going to be a challenge though. Trying to dial in your monitor to match the lab's is going to cost lots of $$ and yield plenty of circular file prints. As your monitor ages and drifts, it will be a constant battle. A monitor that is used regularly will shift enough in 3 days if not within 6-8 hours that trying to gauge critical color will be futile. You will need to have a means of calibrating your system and matching it with the printers your lab uses. As well, you will want the ICC profiles to apply to your image files.

The metering algorithms in contemporary cameras are sufficient to nail the exposure. They tend to do a pretty nice job of getting reasonable color without massaging. At minimal, I'd suggest just printing them straight as they are processed in-camera and go from there. If the photo finisher has a reasonably calibrated machine, the prints straight from the camera may surprise you.