Help with printing

[mark_s11]

<p>Hi all, I'm not sure where to post this question, the issue is with printing photos.<br>

So I've tried lab printing for small prints but they mostly look bad haha. The only time that prints match up is when I do posters from their large format printer meaning the problem isn't likely my calibration because posters look almost exactly if not better from what I see on the monitor. The problem with lab prints of small sizes is that they tend to have people in the photos look excessively oily with a strange combination of skin tonality and shadows.<br /><br /> I've also tried inkjet prints, that's not any better. I've tweaked the monitor to finally fit the proper brightness, contrast, gamma and color tone of the inkjet printer but the printed photo is still not good. The print matches the screen to a satisfactory perception level but the color depth is bad no matter what I do with tweaking and paper combos. The photos have this gummy sort of like they've been soaked in water type of look. The only photos that tend to be marginally satisfactory are close up portraits, anything else is bad.<br /><br /> Are there any other options? a type of printer that is accessible that does lab quality printing so I can control calibration or a lab that has a preset calibration and allows you to edit photos using their color system?</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>You need to answer several questions before someone can give you any solid advice:<br /> 1. what kind of monitor are you printing from, IPS or TN</p>

<p><br /> 2. are you calibrating your monitor?<br>

<br /> 3. what printer are you using?<br>

<br /> 4. what paper are you using and where are you getting your paper profile from?<br>

<br /> 5. what program are you printing from (Photoshop, Lightroom?)</p>

<p><br /> For instance:<br /> 1. an IPS screen will produce a more color accurate picture than a TN screen.<br>

<br /> 2. If you're not calibrating your monitor you're essentially wasting your time and money trying to print from it.</p>

<p>3. most printers will produce a decent looking print, but it still helps to know what you're using. Also whether you're using the manufacturer's ink or 3rd party inks.<br>

<br /> 4. cheap paper will produce cheap looking prints and an accurate paper profile is essential for an accurate print.<br>

<br /> 5. professional programs will allow you to softproof whereas some cheaper ones may not.</p>

<p>So if you're calibrating your monitor and then using an Epson printer with Epson inks on Epson paper and an Epson profile and softproofing you should be fine. But if you're not calibrating your monitor, using a HP printer with cheap 3rd party inks and printing on cheap Office Depot (or some other cheap brand) paper and not softproofing, there's no way you're going to get a decent looking print. </p>

<p> </p>

[paddler4]

<p>+1 what Mike wrote.</p>

<p>Even very inexpensive dedicated photo printers today can produced gorgeous prints, and good labs that will do the same (e.g., Bay Photo, which I use on the rare occasions when I don't print my own). However, you have to do things right. You need a calibrated monitor, as Mike said. You need good inks and good papers. You need the right ICC profile for the combination of the printer and paper. You may need to soft proof, depending on the paper. (Luster papers, for example, generally require less tweaking than matte papers.) To get things really right, you have to tend to details like output sharpening. </p>

<p>I am currently using a printer for which I spent exactly nothing: a Canon Pixma Pro 100 that came bundled with my last camera body. I am printing on good papers (mostly Moab and Red River, with their ICC profiles and recommended paper medium settings). The prints are usually great except when I screw up.</p>

<p>So my guess, without more information, is that you need to work on technique. I found it complicated at first, but once you have done a bunch, it becomes simple.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I am not so sure what you're complaining about as I don't think it's the monitor calibration problem. It may be the type of print or paper type etc..</p>

[mark_s11]

<p>Thanks for your help,<br>

I'm trying the soft proof method to see how much improvement may be possible but I'm having a difficult time bringing dark shadow areas/black colors into gamut, I'm almost sure this could be the root cause of the color depth problem. Adding lightness helps the whole image but there is no contrast and adding or darkening thereafter brings again the gamut problem in the dark areas, any idea how to fix this?</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>Gamut limitation varies with the printer, ink and paper you're using. For instance, as a rule matte paper and canvas have less gamut than glossy paper. But the gamut for glossy paper can also vary based on the type of glossy it is, such as RC vs 100% rag Baryta. This is why I originally asked you what printer, ink and paper you were using.<br>

But in softproofing are you also checking the different settings like Saturation, Perceptual, and Relative Colorimetric? These settings will have an effect on the gamut. And again, softproofing is only valid if you first have a good profile and a calibrated monitor.</p>

[mark_s11]

<p>What's available right now is a Canon inkjet MG5420 with it's own Canon matte paper, the ink is third party. Right now the difficulty is getting rid of that sandy yellowish cast that develops when switching to the matte proof setup while editing the photo. I've been trying different contrast adjustments and color filters but it doesn't get close to looking like the original default look, is there anything else I could do here?</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>There's your problem. The 3rd party ink you're using probably isn't as good as Canon's ink, and matte paper doesn't have the gamut of glossy. Plus you probably don't have a profile for the ink/paper combination you're using, and without a profile there isn't much you can do, though perhaps switching to glossy paper might help some. And I'm assuming you also don't have a calibrated monitor. Without any of these the best you can do is trial and error (mostly error). </p>

[mark_s11]

<p>Now that I understand soft proofing, matte printing with genuine or third party ink has equally been a problem with that specific sandy cast, the printed photo has shown it just like in the monitor. The problem is now I don't know how to readjust the shifting effectively and have it look more like the default file.</p>