Hoping this will solve a big, big aggravation of mine, namely that what I get back from print lab is not quite right compared to my monitor. Since I went with Bryan's review and appreciated it, I made sure to go through the TDP site so he gets the support of the merchant.
Who is your print lab?
We have been using Walgreen's. Just this week I ordered a photobook from Shutterfly. I don't have it yet. That is what made me worry; did I blow $50 on an album with bad prints?
I see Shutterfly has a process for generally synching your monitor to their printing. I don't thing Walgreen's does.
This is sort of off the topic just a bit, but what are some of the print labs that do well?
I found that Walgreen's prints are muddy and dark, even when I tell them to turn off the auto correct.
Walmart does a much better job, but they still are a bit darker than what my monitor shows (Spyder calibrated). The histograms look good, but I ran an experiment where I increased the brightness by +50 (photoshop), then sent both prints to Walmart. The brightness enhanced photo looked much better, but the histogram showed blown highlights (I just ignored that, and sent the prints in anyway).
I've just ordered some prints from Shuttterfly, and sent two sets: one without added brightness, one with it. I also told them to turn off their "vivid" correction.
I'll see what happens.
Anyway, back to my question: who does a good job of printing?
I've been impressed with prints from adoramapix and mpix. Snapfish is ok, and typically very cheap. I've also had good luck with Kits/Ritz/Wolfe camera (whatever name they are going by in your part of the country). I don't really care for the prints I get from Walgreens or CVS.
I don't print a lot, and in fact only lately have I ordered many at all. On my photo book I checked "yes" the box in Lightroom about "sharpening for prints" for the first time. Hopefully that makes things better rather than worse. Also wonder exactly what the Shutterfly "vivid" will do to me. I didin't even see an option for "added brightness".
I think we've hit the nail on the head here. First of all, Walgreen's applies an auto-correction routine to images sent to its lab. They generally do not tell you about this. Typically speaking, their correction routine will bump up contrast significantly and change the overall color of your images. If you want the prints closer to what you're seeing at home, you need to ask them to turn off all auto corrections or auto enhancements when doing the prints.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Stephen
To see what kind of a difference it makes, try walking into the Walgreen's and asking for 1 image to be processed both ways--auto correct on and auto correct off. The difference will probably be very noticeable.
If the images are processed without corrections (as-is), then there's another reason why they appear dark compared to the monitor. Keep in mind that your monitor is back-lit. Everything image seems brighter on a back-lit screen than the same image viewed on a flat, reflective surface. At least that's what I've always attributed it to...
Personally, I use AdoramaPix. I'm a huge fan of their Kodak Metallic paper. I've always been very satisfied with prints done through them.Quote:
Originally Posted by shutterdown
Scott, that added brightness....I put that on the photo before I send it to Shutterfly, or whoever. It's not a option with Shutterfly. But, if you click on each photo (while in Shutterfly) it will allow you to edit the photo, and then it will let you choose to shut off their auto-correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Stephen
Well, my very first Shutterfly order arrived today. Interestingly, the images that I bumped up the brightness on? They looked washed out, just like on my monitor.
The ones I left alone? They looked great. Color, contrast, highlights where they were supposed to be.
As I mentioned, I purposely turned off the "vivid" correction on all images.
Shutterfly is now on my top list. Next up, Adoramapix. I'll run the same experiment.
Sounds good, but I believe you had already calibrated your monitor? I hope my photo book arrives from Shutterfly looking OK (neither muddy nor over-saturated) for my Dad's 80th birthday.Quote:
Originally Posted by shutterdown
Very interesting information Sean; thanks. I lived in Texas until 3 years ago, and had the same trouble with Walgreen's there, straight out-of-camera. I had one particular super shot with my baby daughter looking through a green country fence that was amazing, but Walgreens turned it black, even after I complained and sent it back twice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Setters
Sometimes you'll get a new lab processor that doesn't know that auto-enhancements are being applied. In that case, they only know how to push a button to print the image or minimal machine maintenance (replacing cartridges). In that case, they would be unable to help you without the proper training.
Yes, it was calibrated, but the Walgreen's photos were just like yours: dark, unacceptable. And, that was with me standing in front of the lab guy, telling him to shut off the auto correct. Maybe it's as Sean says, and they aren't trained on how to use it. Don't know if that's what happened in my case, but they have been consistently bad from Walgreen's. Walmart was better, but still too dark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Stephen
On a related note: What about the Lightroom tick-box for "add sharpness for printing" when you export your doctored-up RAW image to JPG for prints? Anyone use that?
I had never used it before, and I noticed my glossy prints were looking un-sharp. Lightroom seems to anticipate this problem, and offers a choice of even more sharpening for glossy prints than for regular.
Well, I ran the experiment with Adoramapix. Great results from them (I usually print matte or lustre). These prints also mimicked my monitor. Good color and contrast.Quote:
Originally Posted by shutterdown
When I placed the order, I had them turn off the auto-correction.