As you did not have any printer profile to match against you can only guess what the printing provider did, or not and with what.
What you do need to get a reasonable control over the workflow is to ask the supplier for their color profile of the printer with the specific paper they will output it to.
Then you could do a soft proofing and see what the final photo on paper will look like - or at least for closer then the guesswork you was facing this time.
True. The original is from a cellphone (iPhone I guess). The low original pixel rate makes some softness in the output but no change in color. We must have a color space or - profile conflict - but where?
stuck
(Canon, PL7+FP7+VP3 on Win 10 + GTX 1050ti)
5
IIRC I had such problems with some cheap papers, but I’ve stopped printing myself few years ago. It turned out to be more economical in terms of place, money, and time, to find a good print provider. Thanks to my friend I have a discount there, but still it’s not cheap. I use sRGB TIFFs generated from raws.
Let more experienced speak…
Stenis
(Sten-Åke Sändh (Sony, Win 11, PL 6, CO 16, PM Plus 6, XnView))
9
Photolab is useless to use to verify ICC-profile. I suggest you download a good viewer (there are a few) that can identify the used ICC. I use to use XnView and the screen capture below is from XnView. It is free to use for unprofessional use.
… but for printing you have to use the ICC for the paper that is going to be used for the printing when softproofing before sending it to your printshop.
Stenis
(Sten-Åke Sändh (Sony, Win 11, PL 6, CO 16, PM Plus 6, XnView))
10
You have to ask the printshop for the paper and profile they intend to use and use that one for softproof. Most likely you will find that you have to add som “black” or contrast in order to counter what the softproof will indicate with the profile you use.
If you don´t it will be hit and miss and very much like dropping your picture file into a black hole. It is very important that everyone outsourcing printing are using calibrated/profiled monitors and in your case you have to calibrate for sRGB.
When your monitor is set you use that to portprocess the picture to your liking. If you also want to use your picture on the Internet you also have to save it with an sRGB ICC.
Cases like this have always convinced me it is worth it to print by myself to have control over the whole process. I hope you will find a process that works for you.
It looks like printer operator error, maybe paper profile mismatch or incorrect contrast settings.
Soft-proofing is important if you print yourself and imho it should be done using the printer driver with the target paper profile and contrast/sharpness adjustments done there. Neither CaptureNX nor old Lightroom were good at that. I used some Canon printer and various Ilford papers, for which you could download profiles for specific printer/paper combinations.
Not to mention soft proofing and icc profiles, there’s still something missing here if you really want to get as close result possible on your screen as on your paper : ambiant light of the room in which you process (monitor) and see your images (print).
It acts in two ways :
what you see on screen differ when light changes.
what you see on paper too.
And not with the same amount.
There are calibrated lights to use in the room you work, and to check prints you’ve done. Color and intensity matters.
And do not forget to calibrate your monitor regularly (factory calibration even if good does not last forever). For best results you should calibrate once a month and target the right white point.
Not to mention even calibrated lights wear out. So it’s a delicate balance to maintain.
It is right that ambient light affects the image on paper and screen. In this case, the quality difference is far more that what can be explained with that. We also studied the image in different illuminations and found it always washed out.
My Eizo monitor is calibrated with Color Munki once a month.
Today I visited another provider to make a new copy of the same file for comparison. On his screen the image looked wash out but the print was not so. Instead, the print was clear in high lights but dull in the shadow areas. It was not like the one on the screen.
Then I displayed the image also on my non-calibrated Huawei tablet and compared all images side by side. As light I used my bi-color photo light and scanned through several color temperatures.
Result: Always 4 quite different images! The tablet was closest to the main screen and no was-out but cooler. The two prints were different compared to each others and far from the screens no matter what K was used for illumination. Only the first print is washed-out.
As a conclusion it seems that these screens are likely to be closer to each other but there seems to be little guarantee that prints will come out the way the image is seen on the monitor.
Regardless who owns the printer, using the the printer color profile and soft proofing seems to be important. This will, however not help if the printer is out of calibration or the profile is not corresponding to reality. Some providers supply their profiles and some do not even know what a color profile is.
I got a lot of good advice from this forum and I thank you all for taking part. I am glad to be a part of this forum! Let´s take good photos!
Now I have good and final news to the original issue.
I had a good conversation with my print provider and they had their equipment checked and found to be ok. The reason for the wash-out image is that the printer software of the provider has an optional function to automatically “improve” the images (for standard “household” photographers). This function had accidentally been ticked on when printing for me.
A new print was made for me without the box ticked on. Then the image came out much like it is seen on my screen at home with only minor lack of contrast. Obviously it is not possible to achieve much better fidelity without further more complex arrangements.
I once more thank all of you for your kind assistance and hope this finding also could help some others in the future.
1 Like
Stenis
(Sten-Åke Sändh (Sony, Win 11, PL 6, CO 16, PM Plus 6, XnView))
17
Isn´t that funny?
“The reason for the wash-out image is that the printer software of the provider has an optional function to automatically “IMPROVE” the images (for standard “household” photographers). This function had accidentally been ticked on when printing for me.”
Seems to be a very fuzzy condition this “standard household photographers” in that “professional” printing software
Serious photographers are the smaller part of the customers. Every day shooters will not pay for professional editing so the print service offers them a free improvement. Just remember to un-tick that when your pictures are printed.
The difference between simple and professional printers services is their equipment and used materials and the availability of icc profiles. But both shouldn’t change the image.
.
