Photos Don't Match Monitor Screen Images

[colliewalker1]

I would be interested to know if members who have well calibrated monitors find that prints of photos are identical to the same images displayed on their screen.


I have an ancient Iiyama 17” monitor and have tried to calibrate it using some free software but it hasn’t been very successful and I think my monitor is beyond such fine tuning.


I have just received a batch of 7”x5” prints from Kodak Easyshare (was Ofoto) and when I first saw them I thought they looked good: however, on comparing them with their monitor screen counterparts they are a little darker and photos of elephants for example showed them changed from an authentic looking grey to brownish grey:confused: .


The strange thing is that when the photo CD was shown on my wife’s PC the monitor screen images were identical to mine and when they were printed on our own printer they showed the same changes as from Easyshare ; likewise when printed from my PC to our home printer.


I can’t understand what is going on here and I don’t feel confident that if I bought a new monitor( I have been thinking about a ViewSonicP97f+SB) I would find that prints were an exact match with the screen display.


I have been looking at a review of Digital Printing Services http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~dgriffin/digitalprintreview/jun04.html (http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~dgriffin/digitalprintreview/jun04.html)
and it is interesting to see the comparisons of best and worst photo prints: even the best versions showed differences in coloration from the original.


(a)Is it impossible to obtain a perfect match between a print and the monitor screen version (b) is it a factor the the screen photo will always look brighter due to the light behind it?(c) how is it possible to know when the best possible result has been obtained?
(d) can one even be sure that the screen colours are accurate?

[Rick Baker]

I have found it hard to get the same thing I see on my screen on my printer. If you want to get the closest possible, you need to build a profile of your monitor and then build a profile of your printer and the paper/ink(the best would be with a spectrocolorimeter). You can view a preview of what your image "should" look like when printed in Adobe Photoshop by loading the printer profile for the ink/paper combo under the "View" menu and "Proof Colors." Also, your printer can't print every color you see on your screen, it's has a smaller color gamut.

Check out http://www.colorvision.com/

for more info

[BoySpot]

What color space were your pictures in? I read on Kodak's site that they only use sRGB. If you send them pictures in Adobe RGB, you will get a color shift.

[slin100]

A properly calibrated monitor and printer are not going to display the same image identically. A monitor operates on the principles of light transmission while a print is a reflective object. It is exceedingly hard to get a perfect match. As good as color models are, they are not perfect and don't take into account a great many aspects of the human visual system. Also, you have to take into account the viewing environment.

As Bruce Fraser states in Real World Color Management, the purpose of color management is not to achieve WYSIWYG, but to provide close visual matches.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

[colliewalker1]

Thanks to all for the very interesting replies.

I have checked my monitor Colour Management settings - the menu provides a huge selection of settings but only one Adobe version - Adobe IEC6 1966-2.1.

I have had Photoshop set to Adobe sRGB which from what I have read is now a universal standard , bearing out that is what Kodak Easyshare would be using.

So Photoshop has matched Kodak when I have had prints made by them - but the monitor hasn't matched PS: there seems no way that I can make all three compatible.

It is interesting to know that a perfect match of print to digital image is imposible anyway: comparing my prints to the corresponding screen images the difference is far from grotesque and on their own the prints look OK; it looks as though the only chance of improving them is to buy a new monitor - I wonder if the difference would be justified?:confused:

[Radtech1]

I have always found I get the best results working backwards. I calibrated my printer till the sample print was how I wanted it. THEN, I held the print to my moniter and tweaked the monitor to match the print!

In any event, keep in mind that you are looking at two different beasts, luminosity and reflected light. But going this route, I have a VERY CLOSE match.

Rad

[colliewalker1]

[QUOTE=Radtech1]I have always found I get the best results working backwards. I calibrated my printer till the sample print was how I wanted it. THEN, I held the print to my moniter and tweaked the monitor to match the print!

Thats what I call original thinking - I'll try it!

Many thanks .

[Tittelba]

Hi All,
I have a hardware calibrated monitor and use a printer profile specific to my printer and paper and my printed images look nearly identical to what I see on my monitor (at least by my eyes and others I've shown). I'm confident that any color corrections (even small) I make in PS will be accurately reproduced by my printer (Canon i9900). Some issues with sending images for print to an outside lab is that you may not be able to find out what color space they prefer (most likely sRGB) but many labs will make exposure and color corrections as well.

HTH,
Tom