DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Look at this please.......
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/13/2006 02:08:04 AM · #1
I have been trying to get a print of this for a guy for 3 weeks now. Nobody can reproduce this file as is. By "as is" I mean exactly the way you see it here. I've had DPC make a print, it was so dark you could barely see it. We have a place her in town that specializes in large size digital reproductions, and they can't get it right either.
My question being, do you think technology for screen resolution and maybe digital cameras have out-paced the printing industry? Are they not able to reproduce colors that can achieved by todays editing softwares. I'm sorry to say Walgreens has gotten closer to the actual look than anybody.



Message edited by author 2006-01-13 02:12:58.
01/13/2006 02:19:09 AM · #2
Maybe you pushed the sats into a range they cannot duplicate. I did notice that the sats have been pushed a lot as there is an odd bright blue blotch in the water (lower right)
01/13/2006 02:26:40 AM · #3
The blue blotch in lower right is a copyright
01/13/2006 02:28:24 AM · #4
1) You're not using any exotic color profiles that the printer can't figure out? Every profile conversion changes the image looks a little, so you'd better find out what profile your printer requires and do the conversion yourself. But then, of course, converting to Adobe RGB you'd need an Eizo monitor.
2) You haven't submitted an 8-bit RGB jpg to the printer, expecting 16-bit CMYK output quality?
3) You have calibrated your monitor to make sure you see the image right, before saying the printer gets it wrong?

Message edited by author 2006-01-13 02:29:30.
01/13/2006 02:32:03 AM · #5
Try mpix.com

They do a wonderful job.

But make sure your converted profile is correct. I send them adobe 98 files.
01/13/2006 02:34:17 AM · #6
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:

Try mpix.com

They do a wonderful job.

But make sure your converted profile is correct. I send them adobe 98 files.
Ditto.
01/13/2006 02:35:05 AM · #7
Only basic editing was done to this photo. Levels, curves, USM etc. The guy at the digital print place opened the file and I viewed it on his monitor. The difference between monitors was minimal.
01/13/2006 02:36:23 AM · #8
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:

Try mpix.com

They do a wonderful job.

But make sure your converted profile is correct. I send them adobe 98 files.


What's adobe 98 Brent?

01/13/2006 02:41:06 AM · #9
Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by Brent_Ward:

Try mpix.com

They do a wonderful job.

But make sure your converted profile is correct. I send them adobe 98 files.


What's adobe 98 Brent?


Let me recommend you a good source of knowledge of digital imaging:

//www.123di.com/

Costs a bit, but is well worth it. Covers all ends of a learning curve and the list of contents is comprehensive.
01/13/2006 02:51:41 AM · #10
Originally posted by Didymus:

Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by Brent_Ward:

Try mpix.com

They do a wonderful job.

But make sure your converted profile is correct. I send them adobe 98 files.


What's adobe 98 Brent?


Let me recommend you a good source of knowledge of digital imaging:

//www.123di.com/

Costs a bit, but is well worth it. Covers all ends of a learning curve and the list of contents is comprehensive.


I don't need a book. I've had 100's of 8x10 reproduced by the same means and this one is just being a pain and I don't understand why. I would think no matter what my skill level is, if I take a photo, do some basic editing to it, it should be able to be reproduced. Mind you I said "basic editing"

Not trying to be rude Didymus.

Message edited by author 2006-01-13 02:52:50.
01/13/2006 03:26:42 AM · #11
Originally posted by dsmeth:

The blue blotch in lower right is a copyright


lol - could not tell on the small veriosn. Sorry
01/13/2006 03:32:52 AM · #12
You weren't rude in any way. I was just trying to point out the best source to answer your question about Adobe 98 gamut/profile. This electronic book will explain color theory, gamuts, profiles, conversions etc in a very readable yet comprehensive manner.

But, briefly explained, digital images use limited subsets of full color space of visible light. These subsets are called gamuts. Some are bigger and contain more colors, some are smaller. Digital cameras mostly use sRGB gamut, which can be more or less adequately displayed on computer monitors. AdobeRGB/Adobe98 are larger gamuts and yield therefore more latitude for color shades in an image, but there are only a few monitors around, capable of reproducing full Adobe gamut on screen (mostly made by Eizo). So, if an image is based on Adobe gamut, it will look more close to real life in print (if printed properly), but as monitors can not display all colors in the image and will struggle to find a best match (or just clip the channels in some cases), AdobeRGB images will not look so good on screen.

sRGB - medium size gamut, but WYSIWYG.
AdobeRGB - large gamut, good for print, but requires high end monitors.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/27/2025 05:17:42 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/27/2025 05:17:42 PM EST.