Prints too dark

[AndrewKulin]

I have found my prints are coming out too dark, to the point where to reasonably match the luminance on the screen I need to add an adjustment layer for brightness of between + 25 to +50.  My screen is profiled and my Photoshop (CS5) colour space is Pro Photo.  Images are soft-proofed using profile for the Printer/Paper.  When sending to print (through Photoshop) I have Photoshop managing colours (and colour management disabled in the printer driver), the printer/paper profile is set for the correct paper/printer, relative or perceptual rendering (photo specific).  I don't believe any of my settings while sending to print are incorrect

Monitor: Dell 2405 FPW
Screen is calibrated using Eye-One Match 2 (6500K, Gamma 2.2, target brightness 90 cd/m2)
Printer:  Epson 3880
Paper: Ilford Galerie Gold (using Ilford profile for the 3880)

One further comment, the previous time I calibrated my monitor (about 8 weeks ago (and these dark prints were noted even shortly after calibrating so it not an issue of an aged profile)) it was difficult to get it calibrated.  I had to reduce my RGB to very low values (19-20-28 where previously all values were closer to 50-ish values), and further noted that if I tried using one of the canned temperature settings like 9300, 6500 then I could no longer later adjust my blue setting.  Caused me to think my 5 year old monitor might need replacing.

Today I decided to recalibrate and noticed that my initial luminance was 61 cd/m2 not the 90 I had achieved on the previous calibration.  As I have kids, I cannot discount that this was not "tweaked" by one of them at some point.  I reset my luminance to 90 cd/m2, and only needed a minor adjustment to the previous RGB settings (19-20-30).  I haven't had time today to do any prints.

But if my luminance was 60 instead of 90, the screen would be less bright, so the luminance of a photo seen on screen would be darker on screen, but brighter in the profiled space, right?  So if this was the cause, would I not expect then that my prints would come out brighter, not darker?

Any thoughts/advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

[Mark D Segal]

Andrew,

From what you describe it sounds to me as if you are doing everything right. In fact if your display were at true 90, this is quite dim - not necessarily a bad thing - and it would induce you to brighten the image, which means the file numbers are at the brighter levels you set, which means the print should come out brighter than had the display been = say - at a much brighter 140, in which case you would have been incited to tone down the file numbers and you would get darker prints. From all you describe, it sounds very much to me as if you have a display problem. If you could borrow another decent quality display meant for photography, which is newer and you know to be working properly, I suggest you install it, calibrate and profile it and see what happens.

[Sven W]

How about your viewing light?

My checklist for evaluating prints:
• Correct calibrated (good) monitor (I also check with the Udac analysis tool)
• All settings in the driver checked
• The best profile for the paper and printer
• A well known testimage to print
• A good viewing light (Solux or GTI/Just) close to the monitor, matching the whitepoint
and brightness of the monitor
• Softproofing in PS activated

/Sven

[digitaldog]

Any thoughts/advice would be appreciated.

Did you read this:http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml

[sm906]

Screen is calibrated using Eye-One Match 2 (6500K, Gamma 2.2, target brightness 90 cd/m2)
Thanks

Andrew,

naturally there are many parameters that can affect the "my prints are too dark" effect. Some of the possible reasons why it may be so with your prints have already been pointed out.

Another one that may be the reason for your current problem is colorimeter itself. Question is: How old is your Gretag?

A colorimeter has a limited lifetime. And when it comes to an end either the colors or the brightness/luminance the colorimeter measures gets wrong; or both. It's a good idea to check the accuracy of the colorimeter with a (calibrated) spectrophotometer such as the I1 Pro time by time. Usually at least the larger photo stores offer them for rent, such as Calumet here in Germany.
Doing this accuracy check I realized that my 5 year old Eye-One Match 2 had died in terms of accuracy. Therefore my display colors were much to cold (due to much too much blue in the mix) and a much too bright monitor because the Gretag measured too less of the existing luminance. And, my prints were too dark.

The dangerous thing is, that the loss of accuracy is a creeping effect and does not appear from day to the other.

Thomas

[Sven W]

Doing this accuracy check I realized that my 5 year old Eye-One Match 2 had died in terms of accuracy. Therefore my display colors were much to cold (due to much too much blue in the mix) and a much too bright monitor because the Gretag measured too less of the existing luminance. And, my prints were too dark.

The dangerous thing is, that the loss of accuracy is a creeping effect and does not appear from day to the other.

Thomas

My friend Stefan Ohlsson wrote about this problem in a thread here.
He mentions an example of DeltaE 30 for an EyeOne Display. That's pretty scary......
/S

[Mark D Segal]

I agree with these observations. It's definitely a variable worth checking, as I think I too may have been a victim several months ago of a colorimeter more than five years old.

[Aristoc]

Ok you have not had a single consistant answer so far. And i have to add my two cents which is inconsistant with all others.  I have the 2209 WA and spyder 3 pro to calibrate.
What has raside my eyebrows is the 19-20-30 ! This does not seem correct. You should not be trying to adjust your llumninace with the RGB settings at all !!! By the way I also calibrate to 95 luminace ( you mentioned 90) because I work in a dim room.

I have read a ton about calibrating and I believe that when  you first calibrate, you need to start with the default settings. Don't the default settings of the RGB start with 100/100/100 ?

If they do, then y ou are way off. Start a NEW cal. with the default settings of 100/100/100.

(as an aside: By the way , another poster issued a dark print topic a little while ago and wondered why he couldn't see ANY detail in the shadows. He had settings of 50/50/50. )

Once you set to the default of 100/100/100, the set  your brightness and contrast. You have not mentioned what you set those to ?  My monitors defaults were 75 and 75. What are your's ?

IT was suggested, that to get in the luminace value that you are talking about, 90, that  you need to reduce y our brightness control to about 5-10. I did it at 10. Then adjust the contrast, instead of the brightness to reach the luminance of 90 that you want.

Finally , it was already asked of you but what kind of lighting are you viewing the print at? OBvioulsy , since you are using a 90 luminace, you are working in a dim room, and no matter what, you are alway sgoing to notivce a slightly darker print when yourr room is so dark because the monitor is always al ittle bit brighter.

So finallyly, give it a try with the settings I suggested, starting at the defaults.

[Mark D Segal]

Ok you have not had a single consistant answer so far. And i have to add my two cents which is inconsistant with all others.  I have the 2209 WA and spyder 3 pro to calibrate.
What has raside my eyebrows is the 19-20-30 ! This does not seem correct. By the way I also calibrate to 95 luminace ( you mentioned 90) because I work in a dim room.

I have read a ton about calibrating and I believe that when  you first calibrate, you need to start with the default settings. Don't the default settings of the RGB start with 100/100/100 ?

If they do, then y ou are way off. Start a NEW cal. with the default settings of 100/100/100.

(as an aside: By the way , another poster issued a dark print topic a little while ago and wondered why he couldn't see ANY detail in the shadows. He had settings of 50/50/50. )

Once you set to the default of 100/100/100, the set  your brightness and contrast. You have not mentioned what you set those to ?  My monitors defaults were 75 and 75. What are your's ?

IT was suggested, that to get in the luminace value that you are talking about, 90, that  you need to reduce y our brightness control to about 5-10. I did it at 10. Then adjust the contrast, instead of the brightness to reach the luminance of 90 that you want.

Finally , it was already asked of you but what kind of lighting are you viewing the print at? OBvioulsy , since you are using a 90 luminace, you are working in a dim room, and no matter what, you are alway sgoing to notivce a slightly darker print when yourr room is so dark because the monitor is always al ittle bit brighter.

So finallyly, give it a try with the settings I suggested, starting at the defaults.

There is no such thing as default settings of 100/100/100. In fact, default settings are totally meaningless in this context. Use whatever values deliver the correct results.

There are three main parameters you need to be concerned about when calibrating a display: white balance measured in degrees K, or Dxx (D65 or D50 are the usual choices); gamma - the choice usually being L* or 2.2 and brightness - measured in cd/mm^2.  If you have access to it, try L* for gamma - it is often recommended as a compromise between 1.8 and 2.2. If you don't, use 2.2. Then for brightness, experiment with the value until you get a profile rendering a display image which matches the brightness of your test print. It is usually preferable to work in a rather dimly lit environment to minimize distractions. In these conditions, I would recommend starting from 80 cd/mm^2, working upward in increments of 10. But don't go to the trouble until you've verified the integrity of both the display and the colorimeter.

[Aristoc]

Mark

What the heck are you talking about ? OF course there are default RGB settings for these monitors. Maybe not yours. THe defaults on these dells is usually 100/100/100 for the R/G/B channels.

[Mark D Segal]

Mark

What the heck are you talking about ? OF course there are default RGB settings for these monitors. Maybe not yours. THe defaults on these dells is usually 100/100/100 for the R/G/B channels.

Totally and completely meaningless and irrelevant.

[digitaldog]

Totally and completely meaningless and irrelevant.

Yup, I totally agree.

Again, any values, display settings or settings for a calibration product (D65, 100cd/m2 etc) are meaningless until the display and print match. When they match, the numbers provided are correct. Those numbers may be totally different for another user.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I used to do a sanity test using a simulated color checker, like this one: http://www.brucelindbloom.com/downloads/ColorCheckerCalculator.tif.zip

Print it and compare with a real color checker. If there are major deviations you have problems in your printing setup if not the problems are in your viewing environment.

Best regards
Erik

I have found my prints are coming out too dark, to the point where to reasonably match the luminance on the screen I need to add an adjustment layer for brightness of between + 25 to +50.  My screen is profiled and my Photoshop (CS5) colour space is Pro Photo.  Images are soft-proofed using profile for the Printer/Paper.  When sending to print (through Photoshop) I have Photoshop managing colours (and colour management disabled in the printer driver), the printer/paper profile is set for the correct paper/printer, relative or perceptual rendering (photo specific).  I don't believe any of my settings while sending to print are incorrect

Monitor: Dell 2405 FPW
Screen is calibrated using Eye-One Match 2 (6500K, Gamma 2.2, target brightness 90 cd/m2)
Printer:  Epson 3880
Paper: Ilford Galerie Gold (using Ilford profile for the 3880)

One further comment, the previous time I calibrated my monitor (about 8 weeks ago (and these dark prints were noted even shortly after calibrating so it not an issue of an aged profile)) it was difficult to get it calibrated.  I had to reduce my RGB to very low values (19-20-28 where previously all values were closer to 50-ish values), and further noted that if I tried using one of the canned temperature settings like 9300, 6500 then I could no longer later adjust my blue setting.  Caused me to think my 5 year old monitor might need replacing.

Today I decided to recalibrate and noticed that my initial luminance was 61 cd/m2 not the 90 I had achieved on the previous calibration.  As I have kids, I cannot discount that this was not "tweaked" by one of them at some point.  I reset my luminance to 90 cd/m2, and only needed a minor adjustment to the previous RGB settings (19-20-30).  I haven't had time today to do any prints.

But if my luminance was 60 instead of 90, the screen would be less bright, so the luminance of a photo seen on screen would be darker on screen, but brighter in the profiled space, right?  So if this was the cause, would I not expect then that my prints would come out brighter, not darker?

Any thoughts/advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

[Aristoc]

The OP said he was using the RGB sliders in the monitor settings to adjust his luminance. Not the right thing to do at all and that is where basic calibration comes into play. Just because Mark and Digitaldog doesn't mean that they are right.

[tho_mas]

The OP said he was using the RGB sliders in the monitor settings to adjust his luminance. Not the right thing to do at all and that is where basic calibration comes into play.  Just because Mark and Digitaldog are in bed together doesn't mean that they are right.

Absolutely correct and absolutely relevant!
If you start your calibration with the color chanels each running at for instance 50% only you are working with a limited gamut and of course you will get serious banding (as you de facto reduce the bit depth of the color chanels - assumed it's an 8bit display and the color chanels are reduced to 50% they won't resolve 256 tonal values anymore but only 256:2 = 128).
A reset to 100% in each color chanel is mandatory prior to a software based calibration of the graphic card's LUT (any hardware calibration software does this automatically). To match the desired white point only 2 color chanels needs to be altered... if the display has a generic white point of, say, 6800K and you want to get it to a target of 5500K you only have to reduce the blue and green chanel (for instance to 89% red blue and 94% green or whatever ... fictitious numbers here). Red will remain at 100% in this case.

[BobShram]

Hi,

I used to do a sanity test using a simulated color checker, like this one: http://www.brucelindbloom.com/downloads/ColorCheckerCalculator.tif.zip

Print it and compare with a real color checker. If there are major deviations you have problems in your printing setup if not the problems are in your viewing environment.

Best regards
Erik

I have been following this thread with interest as I have a problem with dark prints on my Epson 4880/PSCS4/Vista64bit setup. I apologise for hitting this thread for my problem but not sure how to start new thread with this quote. I am printing now for other photographers and have had to move all my equipment to a different location. This is when things went wrong and the dark prints started. I have to admit not to understand all that is being said about calibration. I printed off this chart and found that the framework of the chart is the same as the darkest black in the lower right box, so I think I'm right to say that my problem is with my print setup? Any help or pointers would be most greatfully recieved. Sorry again for butting in on this thread Andrew. Bob.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Don't be sorry! Just ask.

If you have a color checker you should compare the patches with the color checker. The "black" patch shouldn't be black, it's about 20,0,0 in LAB.

Are you using printer profiles?

Best regards
Erik

I have been following this thread with interest as I have a problem with dark prints on my Epson 4880/PSCS4/Vista64bit setup. I apologise for hitting this thread for my problem but not sure how to start new thread with this quote. I am printing now for other photographers and have had to move all my equipment to a different location. This is when things went wrong and the dark prints started. I have to admit not to understand all that is being said about calibration. I printed off this chart and found that the framework of the chart is the same as the darkest black in the lower right box, so I think I'm right to say that my problem is with my print setup? Any help or pointers would be most greatfully recieved. Sorry again for butting in on this thread Andrew. Bob.

[BobShram]

I don't have a color checker and at the moment I am realy only using Epson Premium Luster (260) and using that setting in the preferences panel. When printing the checker the black square is a very dark black as is the framework around it which on the screen is a lot lighter, overal all the colors on the checker are a lot darker. I think a good move would be to get myself a color checker and understand it. Thanks Bob.

[tho_mas]

I don't have a color checker and at the moment I am realy only using Epson Premium Luster (260) and using that setting in the preferences panel. When printing the checker the black square is a very dark black as is the framework around it which on the screen is a lot lighter, overal all the colors on the checker are a lot darker. I think a good move would be to get myself a color checker and understand it. Thanks Bob.

this indicates that you are either viewing your images without appropriate softproof settings or that your monitor is either adjusted too bright or too contrasty (or both).
Did you read Andrew's article on the subject?
linked above in post #3 > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml
it's by far the best article on that subject that can be found on the internet IMO (well, at least that I know of ...).
It only has one drawback (or better: it doesn't adress one particular issue ...) ... what if your profiles are not approriate for the workflow outlined in the article?
In this case I'd take a look at this approach: http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Printer_to_Match_my_Screen#SOFT_PROOFING
The latter is in much better suited if the papers you are using contain optical brightening agents (as in this case the simulation of paper color simply doesn't work and above all the Lab values in the info palette show more or less nonsense...).
Both of the workflows will be fine - it depends on the profiles you are using.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Ideally the screen brightness should be adjusted so paper white is about as bright as a white (255,255,255) patch on your monitor. Doing a soft proof would than adjust blacks to give you an estimation of what the print would look like.

Other possible problems/solution:

1) You need to disable color management in the printer driver if you want to use color profiles
2) Choose Photoshop (Lightroom) manages colors
3) Use the right settings for your paper/ink
4) Don't use version 4 profiles on the Mac
5) When softprofing use a white or bright background on your screen (if you don't use a black passepartout in a black room)

What you really want to avoid is double color management, both in the printer and in Photoshop/Lightroom.

The advise from tho_mas is a good one!

Best regards
Erik

I don't have a color checker and at the moment I am realy only using Epson Premium Luster (260) and using that setting in the preferences panel. When printing the checker the black square is a very dark black as is the framework around it which on the screen is a lot lighter, overal all the colors on the checker are a lot darker. I think a good move would be to get myself a color checker and understand it. Thanks Bob.