Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 28 Oct 2008 (Tuesday) 22:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Does this look dark to you??

 
kab8715
Senior Member
Avatar
321 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Oct 28, 2008 22:15 |  #1

Hello! I would appreciate some thoughts on this shot. I recently bought a spyder calibrator and on my screen I thought it looked pretty good.
I sent a few prints off to the local drug store for a quick print just because I wanted to share some of my vacation photos with a friend but they all printed pretty dark. I'm assuming its probably just because they are quick cheap drug store prints...
But I wanted to make sure that I got my calibration right! Thanks for your help!!


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Kim ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 178
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Oct 28, 2008 22:19 |  #2

You may have it right but their print machine may be making adjustments that are unwanted...

Tell them to print it as is...


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gooble
Goldmember
Avatar
3,149 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Mesa,AZ
     
Oct 29, 2008 00:16 |  #3

Looks like you used a polarizer due to the gradiant blue in the sky. It may be just a tad dark but not bad.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SwingBopper
Goldmember
Avatar
2,664 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Japan
     
Oct 29, 2008 04:02 |  #4

gooble wrote in post #6581855 (external link)
Looks like you used a polarizer due to the gradiant blue in the sky. It may be just a tad dark but not bad.

Yes it looks a bit dark. I'd brighten a tad and straighten a little (rotate left so the angled sides are about the same angle).


EOS 5D II, 40D, Sony R1, Olympus 1030, Canon S5-IS.
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." A. Hamilton

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kab8715
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
321 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Oct 29, 2008 07:56 |  #5

gooble wrote in post #6581855 (external link)
Looks like you used a polarizer due to the gradiant blue in the sky. It may be just a tad dark but not bad.

I think I only had the UV filter on.

SwingBopper wrote in post #6582479 (external link)
Yes it looks a bit dark. I'd brighten a tad and straighten a little (rotate left so the angled sides are about the same angle).

Thanks. I did notice after I printed it that it needed straightened a little. I must have overlooked that one. At least I remembered to edit the ones with the water in them so it didn't look like the water was pouring out the side. haha :)

Thanks for your comments.


Kim ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Flo
Gimmie Some Lovin
Avatar
44,987 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Nanaimo,B.C.
     
Oct 29, 2008 10:17 as a reply to  @ kab8715's post |  #6

I find I always have to tweak the brightness on my photos when I print them out, otherwise they show darker than planned. Duplicate the photo a few times and make adjustments if you have to.


you're a great friend, but if Zombies chase us, I am tripping you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timrocks311
Senior Member
289 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2008
Location: PA
     
Oct 29, 2008 11:30 |  #7

i just had a thread about drug store photos. i was trying to print some of mine for a class and they all came out dark when i went to CVS, RiteAid, Walgreens, etc. i finally went to Ritz Camera and printed them there and they came out a lot better.


70D | 18-35 Art | 50 f/1.4 | 85 f/1.8 | 100L
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 01, 2008 10:05 |  #8

Yes it is under exposed by about a full stop. Even though you might have a calibrated monitor, that doesn't mean you don't need to monitor the histogram as you process your files. Here is a simple lighting shadows with PSE 5 which essentially increases the brightness of the whole image.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kab8715
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
321 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Nov 01, 2008 20:50 |  #9

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #6602943 (external link)
Yes it is under exposed by about a full stop. Even though you might have a calibrated monitor, that doesn't mean you don't need to monitor the histogram as you process your files. Here is a simple lighting shadows with PSE 5 which essentially increases the brightness of the whole image.

Thanks for taking the time to do that. I really didn't think it looked dark but when you compare the 2 I do see what your saying.
I tend to get overwhelmed with all the technical stuff :( one of these days everything will come together and it will all make sense to me! hahaha


Kim ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Cream of the Crop, R.I.P.
Avatar
75,941 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2611
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Nov 01, 2008 22:10 |  #10

The one in post #8 looks much better.

Even though you might have a calibrated monitor, that doesn't mean you don't need to monitor the histogram as you process your files.

Good tip on the histogram. Keep in mind that everyone online may not see the same thing that you do, as some browsers are color managed:
Firefox 3 "Enable Color Management" Trick.


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Walczak ­ Photo
Goldmember
1,034 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Nov 02, 2008 08:09 |  #11

As the others have said, yea...it was a bit dark as HappySnapper's re-work of the shot proves. In regards to having the shot printed at a drug store (or anywhere else for that matter), the thing to remember here is that not everyone uses the same color profiles and most processing equipment of that nature will always do "additional adjustments" to your images. Especially places like CVS, RiteAid, etc., are setup for people who just take their prints in "as is" either on a CD-ROM or often right off their memory card with little or no processing done to them what so ever and most of the time the prints come out "ok". These systems are designed for the mass public and not photographers who actually know what they're doing. Remember, for every person who owns a camera and knows how to process their own shots, there are hundreds and hundreds of people who simply have no clue what so ever and these are the people that most of these places cater too. However when you've already done adjustments to your images...well...it's kind of like making spaghetti sauce. If you've already added all the spices and the sauce tastes "perfect" and someone comes along and adds the spices all over again and things get over-saturated, the sauce just doesn't taste right!

Another thing to remember is that in most of these places, those adjustments are "automatic"...they're done by a machine using general parameters and such and in most cases, the technician never even looks at the images (and most of those technicians wouldn't know how to properly correct an image anyways). If you want to see the results of this, use a program such as Photoshop...manually adjust an image to where you think it's right and then reprocess a duplicate of the image with PS's "Auto adjustments" (auto levels, auto contrast, auto saturation, etc) and then compare the differences. In some cases the auto adjustments will look "ok" but in other cases, it will look drastically different from the work you did manually. I know it seems like a lot to digest, but if you are serious about your images looking their best, you will almost always get better results if you learn to do these adjustments yourself and again tell the lab "no extra adjustments".

I also wanted to address timrocks311's comments about Ritz. This same thing applies... When I first started doing prints, I too had gone to Ritz and got decent prints, but over the course of time they kept "upgrading" their kiosks and every time they did, my pictures got worse and worse (-and- the b@stards kept charging me for thier mistakes!). Basically what had happened was that every time they upgraded, they changed their color profiles...without telling anyone of course. A lot of people argue that you should use Adobe RGB for processing your pictures on your computer but in situations such as this, that's going to cause additional problems with your prints because many, if not most place don't use Adobe RGB. As such, I always use sRGB on everything from my camera to my monitor, Photoshop, printer and I -ONLY- have my prints done at places that use this color profile...that way what I see on the camera and my monitor is what I get back in my prints.

As others have said, it's also well worth learning how to read and understand your histogram. The human eyes can be fooled...if you are adjusting something like the brightness/exposure of an image and you are doing it in a brightly lit room versus a dimly lit room, your eyes could very well give you two different results. The histogram though never lies...as long as you understand how to read it :D.

If you've gone thru the trouble of getting your monitor calibrated, it's worth asking the place that does your prints (where ever you choose to go) what profiles they use for printing...and make sure that everything is consistent thru your work flow. Also, if you are going to process your own shots, make sure you tell them...and tell them EVERY TIME to turn off the automatic processing.

Just my $.02 worth,
Jim


"It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. " - Ansel Adams
Walczak Photography - www.walczakphoto.izfre​e.com (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Cream of the Crop, R.I.P.
Avatar
75,941 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2611
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Nov 02, 2008 09:00 |  #12

When I first started doing prints, I too had gone to Ritz and got decent prints, but over the course of time they kept "upgrading" their kiosks and every time they did, my pictures got worse and worse (-and- the b@stards kept charging me for thier mistakes!).

I had the same experience with them. In my area, Costco rocks & has auto adjustments turned off! See Post #10 & #18.
Costco & Sam's Club Digital Prints

Anyone ever have print quality issues with small shops ?

Printing at Costco


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
8,134 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 899
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Nov 02, 2008 10:22 |  #13

I will second photosGuy recommendation of Costco... I love their processing.

As to the image, a simple gamma adjustment will bring your whites back up without impacting the nice mood of the background.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Walczak ­ Photo
Goldmember
1,034 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Nov 04, 2008 10:17 |  #14

PhotosGuy wrote in post #6608278 (external link)
I had the same experience with them. In my area, Costco rocks & has auto adjustments turned off! See Post #10 & #18.
Costco & Sam's Club Digital Prints

Anyone ever have print quality issues with small shops ?

Printing at Costco


I've never tried Costco if for no other reason they won't even let me walk in the door without a membership card...and I never could see spending money to save a few pennies ("Yea, spend $25 for membership so you can save $.15 on dish detergent"...right). I do most of my "other" shopping at places such as Aldi, Save-a-Lot and Mor For Less anyways, so even if places like Costco didn't charge for membership, I'm still saving a lot more money in any case.

As far as my prints go, after the terrible fiasco that I went thru with Ritz I've actually been getting (most of) my stuff done for the last couple of years at a local camera shop called "Dodd Camera". I've spoken with their lab tech a number of times so I know how their equipment works, what profiles their equipment uses, they keep my updated on any changes to their equipment and more over, they know what -I- expect. To me this is important...building a relationship with the folks who do your prints and it certainly means I get fewer surprises when I get my prints back. It's really the next best thing to printing them yourself :D.

Peace,
Jim


"It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. " - Ansel Adams
Walczak Photography - www.walczakphoto.izfre​e.com (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,615 views & 0 likes for this thread, 10 members have posted to it.
Does this look dark to you??
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mihai Bucur
1025 guests, 178 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.