Laptop Darkroom = Shady Prints, Low budget solutions please!

[rj russell]

<p>So I spent all of my toy budget on my camera and lenses... spent the past 1.5 years building my skills in

the field as well as the digital darkroom. Now with christmas coming I have performed a few shoots with

my daughter and others children for xmas pics. Everything looked beautiful and then I had

them printed @ blacks photography lab... the results are somewhat devastating, shady for sure and the

colors slightly out to lunch!<br>

As mentioned earlier, my budget is gone... therefor no new monitor and no fancy calibrating equipment will b

e purchased anytime soon! Please help me achieve the best solution within my reach, and yes I kno

w creativity will count!</p

>

<p>Thanks a million in advance for all of your great recomendations. </p

>

<p>Ryan</

[Uhooru]

<p>Take them to a printer that will color calibrate and adjust for you. </p>

[rainer_t]

<p>-- "I had them printed @ blacks photography lab... the results are somewhat devastating, shady for sure and the colors slightly out to lunch!"</p>

<p>Just a thought ... have you handed them images with a colorprofile other than sRGB (Profoto or Adobe-RGB for instance) ... eventually they ignore colorspace/profile and just assume everything is in sRGB?</p>

[ronald_moravec1]

<p>I would not adjust color bal from the camera unless I had a calibrated monitor. If you got the right WB when the pic was taken, assume it is correct. Maybe even post a sample and ask.</p>

<p>Set the camera to sRGB and photoshop preferences to the same. If the pics come back bad, it is the finishers fault. FTP future business to MPIX as they will get things correct. Their finished pics come in the mail in a few days. They provide the FTP program.</p>

<p> </p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>Sorry, no magic trik here; you need a calibration device, cost around 200-300$. Until then, all and everything you print will be trial and error = money spend for nothing = more expensive than a calibration device.</p>

<p>also, when you send image to a external lab, send it as sRGB, and ask the rep not to do any color correction to your image.</p>

[rj russell]

<p>they were definetly srgb. What is FTP? And somebody please show me magic tricks! </p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>File Transfert Protocol.</p>

<p>a way of sending file or bigger file..nothing to do with color..kind of like a better way of emailing image : )</p>

<p>If your print doestn look like expect and they are in sRGB;</p>

<p>1_your monitor need calibration with a device</p>

<p>2_your lab did some color correction on those file</p>

<p>3_your lab suck</p>

[rj russell]

<p>Thanks Patrick... very clear! My monitor probably is effed, the lab was given instructions not to perform any correction and they may very well suck... I was always to assume blacks was good, they are huge in Canada but perhaps there just good at business!<br>

With all of the suggestions for a second monitor, what would be something I may be able to find used?</p>

[images_in_light_north_west]

<p>Get a used dell or samsung monitor but get a good one, Dell link <a href="http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-7540">$220 New</a> just make sure it does NOT have a gloss screen.</p>

[rj russell]

<p>To add to the confusion, why do all the photos on photo.net look good on my monitor? Is everybody else printing dark shots also?</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>look good, and look like they are suppose to look its 2 things. until your monitor is calibrated you wont know for sure if the color look really good.</p>

<p>then, even if they look good on monitor, thing can get ugly when print for various reason; bad paper profile , bad printer etc..</p>

<p>You have to understand that those are 2 different thing. You could ahve a good view and a shit print..or get a nice print from a purple image on screen..</p>

[rj russell]

<p>Thanks Patrick, I have found this article <a href="http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:eCtdnJORoPoJ:dpiphotocenter.com/Articles/WHY%2520DON%27T%2520MY%2520PRINTS%2520MATCH%2520MY%2520MONITOR.doc+how+to+match+monitor+to+blacks+prints&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7">http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:eCtdnJORoPoJ:dpiphotocenter.com/Articles/WHY%2520DON%27T%2520MY%2520PRINTS%2520MATCH%2520MY%2520MONITOR.doc+how+to+match+monitor+to+blacks+prints&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7</a><br>

which offers a good staring point without calibration software. What do you think?</p>

<p>For future reference, would the Dell that Ross suggests above^ @ $220 be a reliable monitor matched with spyder3 priced @ $134 on Adorama?</p>

[jim mucklin]

<p>Ryan, start from the begining and take the risk out. With all due respect, is it the camera, printer or operator? I had terrible problems with white balance and exposure when I went digital. What I recomend is to set up the shot ( a box or crayons works well). If you camera suppports it, shoot a custom white balance, them comes you exposure, shoot the same shot brackets at a half stop below,zero and a half stop above. <br />Then go to a local printer and ask them for a straight print, no adjustments, then lay the photos next to the crayons and you will determine if it's the camera or operator. My theory is if you can get it right in the camera and find a printer that knows how to print your on your way to a lot less stress, but on the other hand there are no magic potions when it come to "bad photos in bad photos out" there are limits to editing software, if you over expose it by a stop and a half, no matter what you do in ps or raw it's still overexposed.<br />Onto your monitor, laptop screens usally suck when it comes to editing, can you find an old crt around or do your editing when you get home on a desktop? Veiwing angle, screen brightness and room brightness has to be controlled. There are no shortcuts to calibartion, but if I were you an had no money I would hook up to a crt and use one of the free online gamma chart to get my monitor close, then get out the camera and shoot the red, green, blue crayon and go back to the printer and now tell him that you got the color right and now you are checking brightness and contrast and if he would be so kind and print you three photos, with no corrections. Total cost-6 4x6's. This is no reflection on the printer you used but many offer free corrections which are sometimes done on non calibrated monitors by some one pushing the sliders till "it looks goods" Don't believe me, take a head shot and send it to three different printers and lay them next to each other.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>the major problem with that *kind of solution* is it create what its call a close loop; your print will only look good at that palce..but what apend when you get a inkjet? or change store? you will have to redo everyhting again?!</p>

<p>get a calibration device, spend 200-300$ and get over it finally and for good.</p>

<p>NOTHING beat a eye1 display device (or similar device) certainly not a free color correction soft, and certainly not your own eye.</p>

[jorge]

<p>Ryan,<br>

I've used the Spyder3 and while it lacks in bells and whistles it performs a decent job on CRT and LCD monitors. The main problem with laptop monitors is that they are continually changing their angle of view. Thus for proper calibration you need a decent desktop monitor. It doesn't need to be big nor expensive but for a reasonable amount of money you can get a very good piece of hardware. For example, the 19" Samsung T190 lists at US$211 at B&H and is an excellent monitor, with a native resolution of 1440x900, a 20000:1 contrast ratio and a reported angle of view of 160/170°. It comes with a nice calibration software that while not as reliable as a spyder, it allows you to come very close to an exacting calibration, specially if you perform it in a darkened room.<br>

I have one of those in my office desk connected to an HP docking station for my notebook (Mex$2600, 15% VAT included, @ Sam's Club) and it allows me to print beautiful glossies on my old Epson 2200, which was replaced recently at home by a 3800. :-)<br>

You could even opt for a cheaper 17"er, you can find one for about US$150, but most lack in performance as well as size, being oriented more for a business environment than graphics.<br>

Before plunging for the spyder, I'd try the free "<a title="Monitor Calibration Wizard" href="http://www.hex2bit.com/products/product_mcw.asp" title="Monitor Calibration Wizard">Monitor Calibration Wizard</a> " or the Photo Friday <a href="http://www.photofriday.com/calibrate.php">Monitor Calibration Tool</a> . Both help a lot! But you really need a desk monitor first. That notebook display is never going to have a consistent position relative to your eyes.</p>

[rj russell]

<p>Thank you everybody.<br>

And thank you Jorge, $211 quality monitor with calibrating software... sounds to good to be true! Is it a glossy screen?</p>

[jorge]

<p>Ryan, sorry for the late reply. Got the family visiting for Xmas (3 daughters with hubbies and 4 kids) and just left. I'm not at the office right now but if memory serves me, no, it's not a glossy screen. BTW, I ran a Spyder3 over it and didn't notice a significant improvement over the eyeball calibration via the bundled software. Right now I'm looking at a calibrated Viewsonic VP2250wb. Not that great a difference with my office setup.</p>

[jorge]

<p>Ryan,<br />I verified today at the office (again, apologies for the tardy reply, I had to reinstall Vista et al in my home machine due to a faulty disk). The screen is definitely matte and sending a straight print from photoshop to a puny Epson CX4700 multifunctional printer loaded with Epson Premium Semigloss Photo Paper turned out a cuasi-perfect match between print and monitor, so I can comfortably label it as a wysiwyg system. Truly outstanding for an office setup. I swear it almost matches what I can turn out on my calibrated home setup and Epson Stylus Pro 3800. I hope you find a good monitor, whatever you choose.</p>