PDA

View Full Version : Help with monitor settings please?



toriaj
10-31-2006, 10:25 PM
I sent my photos to Mpix to be printed, and they came back with this funny cast. The pic on the left is my file. The one on the right has been adjusted (roughly, I know :eek: ) to show how it looks in the print.
16855 16856

On my screen, the one on the left has a very clear, grassy, leafy green in the grass and the blue sky has a touch of gray. In the print, everything has a dark yellow cast (although you can't really see it in the grass. It looks pretty yellow in the print, but I couldn't figure out how to make it more yellow in PP. It just made it more red.) The sky is pretty gray and the trees are dark and reddish.

Does my description of the pictures sound like what you see on your screen? Maybe my monitor is just really off.

I have a laptop computer. I know that's not great for editing pictures, but it's what I have right now :rolleyes: Some monitor calibration tools have been suggested on this forum, and I may be interested when my credit card cools down :eek: but for now I was hoping I could just save a scheme of monitor settings to adjust for the cast. I found the "place" in the monitor/graphics software where I can adjust the gamma, brightness, and contrast and save it as a scheme. I can also load a bitmap, but I don't know what that means yet.

But I tried adjusting the gamma, brightness, and contrast, and it was really hard. I couldn't seem to get it right, but practice/guidance might make it work.

Okay. Any suggestions for me? Is it realistic to adjust the gamma, brightness, and contrast and save that as a scheme to use to edit pictures before sending to mpix? Any other ideas?

sjseto
11-01-2006, 02:57 AM
Forgive me if this is a silly question, but could it just be a problem with the place that printed your pictures? Do all of the pictures that they printed have that brownish/yellowish cast? I'm thinking that maybe you can try one or two other places before you go through all the trouble of editing your photos to compensate for the colour change in mpix's prints.

Stephanie

Prospero
11-01-2006, 01:07 PM
I don't think there is anything wrong with your monitor, the picture on the left looks exactly as you described. The colours are great. My monitor has been callibrated well enough to make my prints exactly the same as they look on the screen, so that means your monitor must be calibrated about right as well.

When I print my pictures here in the Netherlands, I print them at a professional lab. They do not tamper with the pictures. The only thing they do is convert the pictures to the icc profile of the printer (but if you want to you can even do that yourself to be in absolute control of the result, since they provide their icc profiles on the website). Once, I printed my pictures at a cheap lab, but that was pretty dissappointing. The colours were entirely different from the colours on my screen.

I think the lab you are using alters your images (by automatically adjusting levels). It seems to me the lab is on autumn mode, giving everyone warm autumn colours, wether they asked for it or not ;).

toriaj
11-01-2006, 07:04 PM
Ok, thanks for the input! I'm glad to hear that my monitor seems ok ...
Any input from fellow mpix users?

sla
11-10-2006, 01:10 AM
Hi
Toriaj, why don't you ask Mpix directly? Send them both pictures and simply ask.
And, like Stephanie asked, do all of pictures have this brownish cast? The problem may be, that they may have a poor lab machine (or lab operator).
As I print photos in labs, sometimes there is some cast, but it happens rarely, accidentally and cast is rather not so strong. But When I did photos in one lab, 25% of photos had cast similar to yours, or even stronger (they looked almost like "sepia" filtered). And I didn't buy those photos.
Try to ask Mpix.
regards
S.

adam75south
11-17-2006, 08:13 AM
Hi
Toriaj, why don't you ask Mpix directly? Send them both pictures and simply ask.
And, like Stephanie asked, do all of pictures have this brownish cast? The problem may be, that they may have a poor lab machine (or lab operator).
As I print photos in labs, sometimes there is some cast, but it happens rarely, accidentally and cast is rather not so strong. But When I did photos in one lab, 25% of photos had cast similar to yours, or even stronger (they looked almost like "sepia" filtered). And I didn't buy those photos.
Try to ask Mpix.
regards
S.
i didn't have a problem with them turning out yellow, but my monitor is brighter than my prints. almost a stop underexposed in print. and my monitor is calibrated by eye-one display 2. this really makes me want to look into buying a printer.

anyway, i emailed mpix and they are sending me a free calibration kit to calibrate to their printers, you should do the same.

SpecialK
12-07-2006, 06:55 PM
2 suggestions.

Take a picture of a photo "gray card" (for correct exposure) with color patches next to it. Kodak used to have them in their old reference guides. Compare the print to the real life card/patches to determine the color shift the lab is giving you. I no nothing about your printer/processor but in general you will get only "approximately" good proof prints, and sometimes having them reprinted will have a better result.

Also, Google "monitor calibration test" and calibrate your monitor. It's not hard. Basically you tweak one setting so you can see all the gradations of squares from white to black, and maybe do a gamma adjustment, etc.

I tested my monitors and they were always fine out of the box.

toriaj
12-07-2006, 09:15 PM
Thanks, SpecialK. I've calibrated the monitor, and getting the profile from Mpix was very helpful. Yep, the pictures were printed pretty much exactly the way they look on-screen using the profile. The only problem? That's not how I want the pictures to look, and I can't seem to change the colors to be what I want.

I took some pictures to a different Wal-mart today, and I was satisfied. I think I just won't use Mpix ... :(

SpecialK
12-09-2006, 04:45 PM
Not really related to your issue, but you getting prints done made me to a year ago when I "went digital". I scanned all my old proof prints, negatives (found some I forgot about) and slides. Kept the slides and negs, and threw out all the paper prints. Some of the old prints in my albums were literally rotting away and were sticking to the album pockets. It was odd (perhaps not really) that the worst of it was at the open edge of the middle picture.

I bought a Canon Selphy CP400 dye-sub printer a while back when it was on sale for $50 just so I could do small prints once in a while. What a neat little printer - it has a cassette of yellow/magenta/blue film, and the paper goes in and out 3 times - once for each color, plus the clear coat. Max print size is 4 x 8 "widies", but I can do 2 side by side or 3 stacked. The 4x6 paper has all the post-card address lines and stamp rectangle (plus Canon logo) on the back.

That is a nice shot by the way.

toriaj
12-11-2006, 08:27 PM
I'm glad you found a printer that works for you, SpecialK. And yes, archiving photos is a hobby unto itself ... :eek:

Thanks for your comments on the picture. This was my first experience with how a 3x2 image does not always crop well into an 8x10 format. Now I know to leave some more room around the subject ... or to print to an 8x12 :)

P.S. I'm so curious about your signature. What did your groin have to do with it? :D

SpecialK
12-11-2006, 09:32 PM
...P.S. I'm so curious about your signature. What did your groin have to do with it? :D

It kept pointing toward the really expensive stuff.

toriaj
12-12-2006, 11:30 PM
roflmao :D :D :D :D