A Bit of Color Management Frustration

[Kit-V]

With the assistance from Andrew Rodney & others on this forum, I have been trying to sort out a screen-to-print match issue. Namely, some of my prints had come back from the lab considerably darker than the on-screen image when viewed under D50 lighting. After several test prints based on different display calibration settings & soft proofing under the lab's ICC printer/paper profile, I felt that I had finally achieved a close match. However.....a test print of one image in particular (that my wife wanted to send to my daughter) came back from 2 different labs considerably darker. Tired of waiting for me to sort out this color management issue, she said: "Shoot the image, don't use a printer/paper profile, don't soft proof it & send it out of the camera to CostCo for printing". When the print came back, it was virtually a perfect match to the screen image. I was puzzled; but my wife was smirking. Your thought would be most appreciated. Thank you.

Kit

[arobinson7547]

Occam's razor

[digitaldog]

When the print came back, it was virtually a perfect match to the screen image. I was puzzled; but my wife was smirking. Your thought would be most appreciated. Thank you.

And you believe that if you send the same so called "test print" will come back the same way in a week, a month, a year? It may, it may not. When you test this, you'll know.
Color management requires consistency; that's what profiles profile.

[dgberg]

You are a photographer but do not print? Printing and photo mounting is most satisfying when you finally get the hang of it.
My photography hobby caused me to take up printing some 15 years ago. I loved it so much it is now my profession.
Doesn't quite pay as good as pushing jets around the sky but it is a great retirement job. Give it a try you may just fall in love with the process.

[deanwork]

What I have always done with my clients is provide an 8x10 proof to approve. If you have the ability to make such a proof yourself I would make it and send to the printer to match. I know I would appreciate that.

You are a photographer but do not print? Printing and photo mounting is most satisfying when you finally get the hang of it.
My photography hobby caused me to take up printing some 15 years ago. I loved it so much it is now my profession.
Doesn't quite pay as good as pushing jets around the sky but it is a great retirement job. Give it a try you may just fall in love with the process.

[Kit-V]

You are a photographer but do not print? Printing and photo mounting is most satisfying when you finally get the hang of it.
My photography hobby caused me to take up printing some 15 years ago. I loved it so much it is now my profession.
Doesn't quite pay as good as pushing jets around the sky but it is a great retirement job. Give it a try you may just fall in love with the process.

That is correct -- I do not print. However, to be able to control the entire capture-to-print process is indeed appealing for several reasons. But I admit that the monetary investment in printer, paper & ink is a deterrent. In addition, mounting the prints will require additional expenditures. I have no problem with working my way up the learning curve. I enjoy a challenge. So maybe it's just a matter of time. Thank you.

[mearussi]

Costco assumes that the average user does not have a calibrated monitor nor knows what a icc profile is. Therefore when a file is sent to Costco for printing their system automatically "corrects" it for the average user.

When I used to print at Costco I learned the hard way that their system has this default auto correct function which has to be deselected in order for you to use their icc profile correctly. If you didn't deselect this then your print will come out wrong.

The correct way to use Costco is:
1. download BOTH of their icc profiles, one for the smaller RA-4 wet prints (8x12 and smaller) and one for their inkjet prints 16" and larger.
2. turn off auto color (or whatever it's now called)

Doing this your prints may still be too dark but the color should be fairly close, then just make a few test prints and use them to adjust the brightness of your monitor.
 

[Kit-V]

Costco assumes that the average user does not have a calibrated monitor nor knows what a icc profile is. Therefore when a file is sent to Costco for printing their system automatically "corrects" it for the average user.

When I used to print at Costco I learned the hard way that their system has this default auto correct function which has to be deselected in order for you to use their icc profile correctly. If you didn't deselect this then your print will come out wrong.

The correct way to use Costco is:
1. download BOTH of their icc profiles, one for the smaller RA-4 wet prints (8x12 and smaller) and one for their inkjet prints 16" and larger.
2. turn off auto color (or whatever it's now called)

Doing this your prints may still be too dark but the color should be fairly close, then just make a few test prints and use them to adjust the brightness of your monitor.

Thank you for the heads-up. At this point, I'll likely stick with ProDPI for my printing needs. Although I do not have control over the printing process, I have been pleased with their printing, as well as their mounting. Also their tech support has been good whenever questions have arisen.

[Alan Goldhammer]

That is correct -- I do not print. However, to be able to control the entire capture-to-print process is indeed appealing for several reasons. But I admit that the monetary investment in printer, paper & ink is a deterrent. In addition, mounting the prints will require additional expenditures. I have no problem with working my way up the learning curve. I enjoy a challenge. So maybe it's just a matter of time. Thank you.

Printing is one thing and mounting for sales/display is quite another.  If you just want to display things at home THESE are what you should use.  They have the benefit of being easy to install and you can swap out prints in a minute if you want to change the display.  Getting involved in mat cutting and mounting is not for the faint of heart.

[Kit-V]

Printing is one thing and mounting for sales/display is quite another.  If you just want to display things at home THESE are what you should use.  They have the benefit of being easy to install and you can swap out prints in a minute if you want to change the display.  Getting involved in mat cutting and mounting is not for the faint of heart.

Interesting. I will check it out. Thank you.

[IPDOUGLAS]

I have found that if a print is darker than the screen then my monitor is too bright.  When I calibrate my monitor I use 6000 Kelvin (not 6500) as I prefer a slightly warmer rendition and a Luminance value of around 90 (not 120) since at 120 I get dark prints.   This works for me but the other aspect is how bright is the D50 lighting you are using to assess your prints?  Are they bright enough to match the monitor?   I am guessing your colours are good but (as you say) the image is too dark.  I find a luminance of 120 nearly burns my eyeballs outa my head!

[digitaldog]

The cd/m2 has no bearing on prints being dark.
Prints may appear darker or may lighter than a print depending on the cd/m2 values. AND how the print next to the viewing booth is setup.

[IPDOUGLAS]

Yes if the candelas per metre squared is low (when viewing) then a print which relies on reflected light WILL appear darker.  That is what I said so I do not understand why you felt the need to post?

Obviously the print may be too dark and a higher light level indeed will not fix that!

I would be interested what the recommended cd/m2 light level is recommended for ideal viewing conditions.  I must say I always found it odd that we are told to calibrate at 6500K then view at 5000K?

[digitaldog]

Yes if the candelas per metre squared is low (when viewing) then a print which relies on reflected light WILL appear darker.  That is what I said so I do not understand why you felt the need to post?

...a Luminance value of around 90 (not 120) since at 120 I get dark prints.

I would be interested what the recommended cd/m2 light level is recommended for ideal viewing conditions.

Silly to make recommendations when it depends as outlined already in the image. YMMV.

I must say I always found it odd that we are told to calibrate at 6500K then view at 5000K?

Not at all considering the numbers are all over the place.

http://digitaldog.net/files/22Thecolorofwhite.pdf