Display vs. print quality

TomaS · November 4, 2006

I have read the section on 'getting great prints' and think I understand the issues. I will not get into crappy monitors, AdobeRGB, or people that are color blind here. :wink

Here is my dillema. I have a decent, calibrated, LCD monitor. I can post-process my images to get them to look like I think is best for them to display on the web (Smugmug galleries or wherever). But the prints of these images are not optimal using 'True' color. I can soft-proof to see a close aproximation using ICC profile so I know what to expect, but these print corrected images are not optimal for displays.

Here are my options:

1. Upload images for best monitor display, use 'Auto' color and hope they come out as I would like.
2. Soft proof for EZprints and use 'True' color option, accepting the fact that will not look as good I would like on peoples' monitors.
3. Use option #1, delay ship until I can color correct for printing and use 'True' color to print.

Am I over complicating this?

BTW - most of my images are nature / landscape stuff.

Andy · November 4, 2006

Hi Tom,

I'll be happy to do two things:

1) review a recent order and give you my thoughts
2) review a small gallery of 5 - 6 shots that you think are properly finished for print at True Color, and let you know what I think will happen. Then, we'll order them (on us) and have a look, together!

How's that?

TomaS · November 6, 2006

Hello Andy,

Thanks for the quick reply and (as usual) generous offer to help. But before we go to printing, I would like to say that I do not think my images need special attention. Maybe I need to restate my question. I am just curious as to:

What is the main purpose of implementing proof-delayed shipping? Was it to resolve these kind of color/tonal quality issues? If so, I will just use it. It is a another great example of why I am very pleased with SmugMug services.

Also, do you (or other pros) use soft-proofing and true color for prints, or are satisfied with Auto color and the simpler workflow that implies?

Thanks again,
Tomas

Andy · November 6, 2006

TomaS wrote:

Hello Andy,

Thanks for the quick reply and (as usual) generous offer to help. But before we go to printing, I would like to say that I do not think my images need special attention. Maybe I need to restate my question. I am just curious as to:

What is the main purpose of implementing proof-delayed shipping? Was it to resolve these kind of color/tonal quality issues? If so, I will just use it. It is a another great example of why I am very pleased with SmugMug services.

It can be used for any photos, any type of ordering. But it's most useful when you have a zillion photos from an event or portrait sitting, or something like that.... you upload compressed proofs, and then upon order, you do the color corrections and any photoshop work.

Also, do you (or other pros) use soft-proofing and true color for prints, or are satisfied with Auto color and the simpler workflow that implies?

Thanks again,
Tomas

The answer is, "it depends..." On what?

On whether or not you have a great workflow, and produce images that will print well. We can help with that, I'm happy to review a sample gallery.

The biggest reason we get returns on True Color prints is "too-dark" - why? Monitors get brighter and brighter, but prints stay the same. Our Auto:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/too-red
is not your father's auto color

and really helps improve the image, color, contrast, and exposure. We get nearly zero returns on it.

I do recommend soft-proofing every so often, to ensure that what you are producing will match what's going to happen at the lab:
http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1123524

TomaS · November 22, 2006

Hi Andy,

I have been too distracted to get together a gallery until now to check print quality. I have set my galleries to 'True' but think that be a mistake, based on your feedback and my workflow. So I have finally put together a 'private' gallery using copies from my main galleries for you to evaluate.

I really appreciate your taking the time AND value your opinion on whether these should use 'true' or 'auto' color for prints.

http://tomsprophoto.smugmug.com/gallery/2160782

Have a great Thanksgiving!

Andy wrote:

Hi Tom,

I'll be happy to do two things:

1) review a recent order and give you my thoughts
2) review a small gallery of 5 - 6 shots that you think are properly finished for print at True Color, and let you know what I think will happen. Then, we'll order them (on us) and have a look, together!

How's that?

Andy · November 24, 2006

TomaS wrote:

Hi Andy,

I have been too distracted to get together a gallery until now to check print quality. I have set my galleries to 'True' but think that be a mistake, based on your feedback and my workflow. So I have finally put together a 'private' gallery using copies from my main galleries for you to evaluate.

I really appreciate your taking the time AND value your opinion on whether these should use 'true' or 'auto' color for prints.

http://tomsprophoto.smugmug.com/gallery/2160782

Have a great Thanksgiving!

Hi, I processed three of your shots as the lab would with our Auto. Take a look in your gallery and you tell me

TomaS · November 25, 2006

THANKS Andy!

If what I am seeing is a close aproximation of what the prints would look like, I think I will stick with 'true' color. For example, the subtle color of the sky in the Shiprock image is totally washed out in the 'auto' print image.

I need order a batch of prints for framing soon, and will try 4x6's first to see if I need to tweak the brightness/tone on any before doing larger prints.

Do you think that is a good plan?

Andy wrote:

Hi, I processed three of your shots as the lab would with our Auto. Take a look in your gallery and you tell me

Display vs. print quality

Comments