Photo printing experience

Hi,

Just got back a load of photos from Kodak Gallery and must say I am VERY dissapointed. The subtle colors of Arizona cliffs that looked so nice on my screen have been mushed together and changed. I even got a picture back where yellow had been turned to green. Most noticeable was the sky however. Azure blue is now some shade of green/grey.

I admit I am being extra critical with this batch of photos - the first from my P880 - but I was not expecting such a marked difference which seems more than any printing experience I remember (this is not my first digital camera). I know that the printing process often adds contrast and that the monitors I have used (two CRTs and one LCD) are not calibrated, but the pics always look a lot nicer on screen.

Anyone aware of a way to get better results?

Thanks,

Stan

--

David Davies - Much same experience although not that drastic, also despite broadband the upload was so slow it kept time bombing out. I use a photobox and my ISP Supanet and their Fuji print much better and cheaper and quicker on delivery plus freebie pics. Have only paid for postage this last year on about 100 pics.

I am afraid that you are likely going to have to bite the bullet and get your monitor calibrated (I use the Spyder device on my laptop) and then get an expert to cailbrate the printing you do or have done. I have used Cathy's Profiles ( http://www.cathysprofiles.com ). One catch with her, unless she has changed her procedure: there is no telephone support and e-mail response can be slow. But ... my results have been much better than before.

I had her profile my HP Photosmart 7690 using the highest quality HP paper and the #59 gray cartridge and the results have been good by my standards and by the standards of those who have received my pictures. She has also profiled two local minilabs for me, one of whose profiles is fairly close to WalMart's equipment, but sometimes the WalMart machine seems to be off.

As you know, there is much controversy about estimating the life of prints. I print both on HP's best quality photo paper and also on Kodak Ultima, which seems to print well using the HP Premium Plus profile. Needless to say, since I bought the printer for the ink it uses, I only use the (outrageously expensive) genuine HP inks.

On occasion labs will update their equipment in which case you need to re-profile the lab.

One local lab uses Kodak paper and one uses Fuji. I had both profiled because there is controversy over which company's paper lasts longer (for myself, I think we shall have to wait and see).

here are two free monitor calibratiors
http://www.easyrgb.com/calibrate.php
http://www.hex2bit.com/products/index.asp
i print my own sometimes, never used a shop
use a HP with HP ink & Kodak Ultima paper
high gloss & mate, also go to one of the reviews
at DPreveiw & go to the bottom of the page &
look for the grayscale & try to get your monitor
to see all the differant shades of white to black

I got some enlargements from Kodak that were brilliant...

I vaguely remember one of the options from the Kodak website was to let them, 'enhance' or 'correct' or do some sort of special secret treatment to my pics. I declined and just ordered print as is... My computer has the EasyShare program loaded on it and it also has that 'enhancing' option, that destroys my picks. But if I decline to let Kodak enhance my pics, it prints brilliantly. Better than my other programs' print engines.

Don't know the whys of it all, but I bet that's what happened to you.
charlie

--
Is knowledge more important than imagination?

Thanks for links. So if this is the reason for the difference, then that is dissapointing since the pictures look much better on the monitors. I will give it a try.

I have not tried printing on my printer since I tried it years ago and found:
very slow

odd littel dots show up when the printer tries to create colors where it cannot quite manage so tries to 'dither' color by adding someting every tenth dot or so.

I cannot imagine a desktop printer being as good as a photo shop, but I know things have improved since I bought my HP printer 5 years ago.

Thanks to all for comments.

Stan

All of my Kodak prints from "The Gallery" have been better than what I've seen on my monitor (LCD). I have never been disappointed with my photos and have printed up to 8" X 10" and they are framed and on display in my living room
--
Simon
The More You Shoot, The Better You See.
I'd rather look at your photos than test your camera.
http://www.kodakgallery.com/sredd68spot