Brighten image before printing

cargo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,645
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all.

I was just wondering what would be the correct way to add a touch of brightening to an image before sending off to be printed. I don't get much printed but often find they come back a touch darker than expected not so much as to say they are bad prints.
So I am talking about images that look great on monitor eg: any on my Flickr link if you need to check on the sort of images I mean. I guess I see a differance as obviously the screen as a light behind it. So I am sort of asking the best way to brighten the entire file eg : all tones equally.
I use pshop.

Gaz
 
An obvious question, but is your monitor calibrated?
 
Hmm.
Not too sure what you are asking.
Most people say their prints are too dark, usually because they are using an uncalibrated monitor.
Your Flickr images all look pretty normal to me, on a calibrated monitor.

What do you use for screen calibration?
Are you sending the files to the printers in the correct colour space (sRGB)?
I use DS Clolour Labs, and they have profiles for the papers that they use, so you profile your image file before you send it to them.
All my prints come back just as I saw them on my monitor.
 
Hmm.
Not too sure what you are asking.
Most people say their prints are too dark, usually because they are using an uncalibrated monitor.
Your Flickr images all look pretty normal to me, on a calibrated monitor.

What do you use for screen calibration?
Are you sending the files to the printers in the correct colour space (sRGB)?
I use DS Clolour Labs, and they have profiles for the papers that they use, so you profile your image file before you send it to them.
All my prints come back just as I saw them on my monitor.
Hi There Brian. I am most probably being super picky they just look a tad duller and admit my monitor is un calibrated. Colour space is correct. I too use the same printing company and have used there profile and also sent just as is straight from photoshop and to be honest to my eyes there is no apperant difference on that front.
Thanks for the reply :-)

Gaz
 
My monitor is calibrated and i have no idea why I suffered from the same in the early days of having my prints done at DSCL, they all came out a tad darker than the same image printed from two other company's.
But because DSCL is a user friendly system I just brightened mine a tad in curves in P/Shop. That worked extremely well.

Having said that, it would be a good idea to get your system calibrated.
 
My monitor is calibrated and i have no idea why I suffered from the same in the early days of having my prints done at DSCL, they all came out a tad darker than the same image printed from two other company's.
But because DSCL is a user friendly system I just brightened mine a tad in curves in P/Shop. That worked extremely well.

Having said that, it would be a good idea to get your system calibrated.
Cheers Tony. Like I say I don't have much printed and off memory was most likely about this time last year. Will get some more done after Christmas. Thanks for the info.

Gaz
 
Hi all.

I was just wondering what would be the correct way to add a touch of brightening to an image before sending off to be printed.

Calibrate your screen and you'll need to do precisely nothing.

Calibrate to 100cd/m2, gamma 2.2 and D65 with a quality system and use sensible room lighting.... sorted. If the print comes back wrong, it's THEIR fault, not yours.
 
Calibrate your screen and you'll need to do precisely nothing.

Calibrate to 100cd/m2, gamma 2.2 and D65 with a quality system and use sensible room lighting.... sorted. If the print comes back wrong, it's THEIR fault, not yours.
Thank you sir ;-) Which is a system you would recommend ?

Gaz
 
Must say that when I used to use a cheap Huey calibration tool results were a little hit and miss but since using a x-rite Display Pro they're perfect every time. Only thing i do add is a little extra to the shadows after adding the dscl profile it does take out a little contrast in the bottom end.
 
Calibrate your screen and you'll need to do precisely nothing.

Calibrate to 100cd/m2, gamma 2.2 and D65 with a quality system and use sensible room lighting.... sorted. If the print comes back wrong, it's THEIR fault, not yours.
Using a Spyder 3, it recommends a setting of 120cd/m2 on a Dell 2209WA. Would you suggest using the recommended 120 or your 100? I always calibrate in a room with blackout curtains drawn and only room lights on so the light level is always consistent, or am I showing my lack of understanding of the subject.
 
Thank you sir ;-) Which is a system you would recommend ?

Gaz


Either the X-Rite i1 Display Pro is probably the best at the moment. The X-RiteColor Munki is probably the best value. There are two color munki versions: The Color Munki Photo calibrates both screens and printers and it actually quite expensive, and the Color Munki Display just for monitors is excellent value.


Using a Spyder 3, it recommends a setting of 120cd/m2 on a Dell 2209WA. Would you suggest using the recommended 120 or your 100? I always calibrate in a room with blackout curtains drawn and only room lights on so the light level is always consistent, or am I showing my lack of understanding of the subject.

There's is no universal standard. Room lighting plays a large part. I find 120cd/m2 a little too bright for subdued lighting, but if I was in a bright room I'd probably calibrate to 120.

No.. you're attempts to be consistent with lighting are exactly what you should be doing. How bright is the room lighting though? If it's the equivalent of a 100 watt old style bulb in a ceiling fitting, or around 15 watts compact fluorescent, then maybe 120 is right. More importantly, what colour is the room light? It should match your screen's white point, so if you calibrate to D65, then you should have a 6500K daylight light source. If you calibrate to D50, then you should have a 5000K light source. The only reason I calibrate to D65 is the availability of 6500K lighting. There's no point calibrating to D65 and then using normal domestic warm white lamps, as these are around 3000K and despite your screen being calibrated, you'll still probably be adjusting your work to be warmer than should be, as your D65 will appear quite cold under warm domestic lighting.

So.. 80cd/m2 for very dim or no room lighting (working in a dark room), 100cd/m2 for subdued lighting (desk lamp only for e.g), and 120cd/m2 for normal bright room lighting would be my recommendations.

Use a lightsource that matches your calibrated white point. My advice is D65 calibration, and then grab one of these, and so long as you don't have stupid colour walls, you'll not be far off :)
 
Last edited:
Using a Spyder 3, it recommends a setting of 120cd/m2 on a Dell 2209WA. Would you suggest using the recommended 120 or your 100? I always calibrate in a room with blackout curtains drawn and only room lights on so the light level is always consistent, or am I showing my lack of understanding of the subject.

I have the Spyder3 Elite and the same 2209WA :) I set mine to 100 as 120 was too bright.....but I pp in a dark room with minimal ambient light.

I thought the Sypder information said that that level was intended for such almost dark room. Not sure but if you have more light in the room you likely need 120 to 150 ??? IMO whatever light level you should avoid it illuminating the face of the screen.

Your comment about consistency though is key :)
 
Last edited:
Thank you David and Box Brownie. That's very informative and has shown my lack of knowledge really. My study is lit by 4 x 50w dichloric lamps, and now I have looked them up it seems they have a temperature of 2700. From what you say, 120 is probably correct, but I'm off to check what temperature I have been calibrating at.
Cheers for taking the time to reply (y)
 
Thank you David and Box Brownie. That's very informative and has shown my lack of knowledge really. My study is lit by 4 x 50w dichloric lamps, and now I have looked them up it seems they have a temperature of 2700. From what you say, 120 is probably correct, but I'm off to check what temperature I have been calibrating at.
Cheers for taking the time to reply (y)

As far as understand it the colour temp of the ambient lighting will not be relevant in regard to the brightness setting as the calibrator is colour temp blind in respect the impact of the ambient light on the calibration process.

However it may likely affect your perception of the colours you see on the screen during the pp sessions and as such more so when you get your prints back to examine them!

In regard to viewing/examining prints. I have a hobby light that uses a lamp that is 6500k I.e. the same colour temp as the screen but I do recall reading that others would also check that they look 'right' lit by lamps of 5500k as that light is more common in galleries and domestic situations. On this latter I would welcome further feedback :)
 
As far as understand it the colour temp of the ambient lighting will not be relevant in regard to the brightness setting as the calibrator is colour temp blind in respect the impact of the ambient light on the calibration process.

I know. Never said it was.

However it may likely affect your perception of the colours you see on the screen during the pp sessions and as such more so when you get your prints back to examine them!

Not may be likely.. but almost certainly will.

In regard to viewing/examining prints. I have a hobby light that uses a lamp that is 6500k I.e. the same colour temp as the screen but I do recall reading that others would also check that they look 'right' lit by lamps of 5500k as that light is more common in galleries and domestic situations. On this latter I would welcome further feedback :)

Most print booths are D50, yes. That's not because it's closer to the lighting in galleries. I've been in thousands of galleries, and I've never seen any with D50 or even D65 lighting. D50 lighting historically was chosen because it more closely matched the colour of paper bases, but it's no longer regarded as essential... just one of those legacy things that persist. In fact, most professional print booths can be bought in D50 or D65. Ideally, D50 should be used for proofing prints, but there's no technical reason that makes a great deal of sense, especially when the same international and European standards also apply to D65 and so many paper bases use optical brightners and are sometimes a very cool white. It's far more important to be consistent throughout the whole workflow.

The colour of your room lighting hugely affects your colour acuity. For example... I don't have black out blinds in this room here, as I rarely have time to edit during the day. As a result, when I am in here during the day doing other stuff, the apparent "colour" of my monitor shifts greatly depending on the outside colour temp. At sunset when the sky is very warm, the screen looks blue/green despite being perfectly calibrated. On extremely cloudy days at twilight when the colour temp soars, then it starts to look very warm/yellow. If I tried to edit a picture under these conditions, I'd almost certainly be dialling such colour casts out. At sunset for example, as the screen looks blue/green, my images that I try to visually balance would end up being red/magenta in bias. So, if you calibrate to D65, then have normal 3200K domestic lighting, your screen will appear to be very cold. As a result, you'll over compensate and produce very warm prints.

You need the room lighting and calibrated white point to match. That's NOT to say however, that you should calibrate the screen to 3200K and just use normal lighting. That's just too low, and will never be perceived as neutral... just as your domestic lighting is never perceived as daylight. You're always aware that it's warm/yellow. There's only a narrow section of visible kelvin temp scale we can "normalise" ... between 5000 and 8000K. Anything lower than that will always be perceived as warm/yellow no matter how long we sit in that room at night, and conversely, anything above that limit will always seem cold. Within those limits it's possible for the brain to normalise the lighting so it just appears neutral. The closer to the centre of those limits you are, the easier it is for the brain to do this, as that is closer to the temp of actual daylight, which hovers around 5500 to 6500k most days at mid day. Actual daylight (meaning the light being emitted from the sun is 5780K, but our world is not lit ONLY by the sun, and when factoring in a blue sky, the added diffuse light being scattered raises this temp to between 6 and 6500K depending upon the sun's position. This is why there's always some debate as to what constitutes daylight.... 5500K or 6500K. Daylight is highly variable though... daylight from a north facing window (Northlight) is closer to 10,000K on a clear day.

Calibrating your screen is only one aspect of good practice. Controlling the room lighting is another, and if you print.... decent media calibration and finally print proofing is the final part. So if you don't print yourself, you're still responsible for two of those things: Screen calibration and room lighting.

Monitor calibrated to D65.... a 6500K room light... and a means of blocking out daylight during the day will ensure pretty consistent results.


Those pro-lite lamps I've linked to are not only cheap, but pretty consistently good as well. Colour temp is as advertised (Yes I've measured it) and they start instantly, and don't take ages to warm up like most (except when very cold)
 
Last edited:
@David ~ oops using my HTC reading the thread I missed your expanded reply when I followed up to Trev.

Many thanks for your detailed insight, though I do not print at home but methinks a D65 lamp in the room light would be a good idea although as you mention care needed to be sure about "reflected/bounced" light......no wacky colours but mixed surfaces in my cave!

FWIW I work in printing related (not photographic) industries and am very conscious of the way colours and shades look under different lighting conditions & the lack of appreciation of this by some folk who should know more about it such designers and specifiers! NB it hot stamping foils I sell B2B :)
 
Last edited:
I use the ColorMunki Display calibrator, set to 120cd/m2, and as I said, my prints come back from DSCL looking just like they do on my (Dell U2412M) screen.
 
David

so what do you recommend for a laptop which is used in a number of different places - 100cd/m2, gamma 2.2 and D65?
 
Thanks everyone for your replies, you guys have gone all techie on me and parted my hair a bit :-(
@ BrianG I too have that monitor (seems we have a bit in common here). So at some point if I was to Colourmunki my display would it be as simple as using your settings above ?
All this being said surley if I was to send the same print off to different companys they would all differ in some way ? Only ask as my Daughter just sent prints off at Christmas for a prezzie and they are ok but way different from the same photos I had done earlier in the year from the same files, granted they were not from fancy printing labs. Eg: one being Photobox and other being Max Spielmanns.
Or can we not compare with mass high street printers?

Gaz
 
Thank you David for your long and detailed explanation, and please forgive me Gary for crashing into your thread. The info given has/will prove useful and has given me a better understanding of the process, I am going to calibrate again with a better understanding (y)
 
Thank you David for your long and detailed explanation, and please forgive me Gary for crashing into your thread. The info given has/will prove useful and has given me a better understanding of the process, I am going to calibrate again with a better understanding (y)
No problem at all, it's all good info.

Gaz
 
Hi
My monitor is calibrated regularly and they come back a tad darker from DSCL, colour cast is spot on though (I use the profile from DSCL). What I do (in LR) is lighten the shadows just for printed images.
johnyT
 
Hi
My monitor is calibrated regularly and they come back a tad darker from DSCL, colour cast is spot on though (I use the profile from DSCL). What I do (in LR) is lighten the shadows just for printed images.
johnyT
Thanks JohnyT.
This backs up my findings. I do think I remember lightening a tad last time I had some printed. You are correct it was the backgrounds in these last images that were darker than on my pc. Eg: the shadow areas.

Thanks Again.

Gaz
 
I use the ColorMunki Display calibrator, set to 120cd/m2, and as I said, my prints come back from DSCL looking just like they do on my (Dell U2412M) screen.

That's not because you're using 120cd/m2 though.. it's because 120cd/m2 is correct for your light levels.. whatever they may be. I suspect reasonable though.

I'm glad everything's working for you. It's good when it all goes as it should.
 
Thanks JohnyT.
This backs up my findings. I do think I remember lightening a tad last time I had some printed. You are correct it was the backgrounds in these last images that were darker than on my pc. Eg: the shadow areas.

Thanks Again.

Gaz

I wonder would doing a softproof in LR and making the required(?) adjustments to the image file to get the out of gamut tones corrected have made the final print better in the darker areas that you have found needed overall lightening to compensate???
 
Hi
I use softproof when I'm going to get the images printed, it changes the image (slightly) but the prints are still too dark in the shadow areas in images from DSCL. i am also using a (regularly) calibrated Eizo monitor so I'm pretty sure it's not that.
There is an option in the Print module in LR that you can alter the brightness on for printing yourself, or saving to Jpeg. Only trouble is that with the save to Jpeg option it puts a border on every image that for some reason is always there even with the 'no border' option checked. I think it's because it's sort of putting the image on a 'white piece of paper', if that makes any sense.
JohnyT
 
I wonder would doing a softproof in LR and making the required(?) adjustments to the image file to get the out of gamut tones corrected have made the final print better in the darker areas that you have found needed overall lightening to compensate???


That's another colour management issue all together :) Having a calibrated workflow is essential, but it still requires knowledge and skill to get things right. Your images should be in the correct profile for the printer, and the images should be soft proofed in that profile to ensure nothing is out of gamut.
 
Thanks everyone for your replies, you guys have gone all techie on me and parted my hair a bit :-(
@ BrianG I too have that monitor (seems we have a bit in common here). So at some point if I was to Colourmunki my display would it be as simple as using your settings above ?
All this being said surley if I was to send the same print off to different companys they would all differ in some way ? Only ask as my Daughter just sent prints off at Christmas for a prezzie and they are ok but way different from the same photos I had done earlier in the year from the same files, granted they were not from fancy printing labs. Eg: one being Photobox and other being Max Spielmanns.
Or can we not compare with mass high street printers?

Gaz
I would strongly recommend profiling your monitor, since it removes one of the variables from the workflow.
The main reason I use 120mcd/m2 brightness is because I generally work in a fairly bright environment, but even if I'm working in the evening under artificial light, I don't find any significant variation in results.
Most calibrators have the option of varying the display brightness according to ambient light level, but I understand this is not a good thing and I do not have it enabled.
I chose the ColorMunki Display after reading the review on this site, which also contains a wealth of information regarding profiling and colour management for printing.

I've not used any of the "High Street" print services, which mostly seem happy with a file provided it is sRGB, but without a print profile I cannot see how you can guarantee any consistency of results, although for most people the results are probably "good enough."
Maybe a case of trying a few and finding one that produces results that you like, but even then there's probably no guarantee of consistency.
 
Hi Brian. Many thanks for taking the time to give such a comprehensive reply. I will indeed have a few experiments regarding prints. I have had the odd photo printed at Max speilmans, only 8x6_7x5 the sort you just get out of them machines while you wait and to be fare they have been very good. Was a surprise really. That said the prices for anything bigger is silly money compared to Dscl. Plus you can't get lustre paper.
Do you choose pro corrected when ordering? I do so was wondering what the diferance is if you chose the other option ?
Guess I should try one and see.

Gaz
 
interesting that so many others had darkness issues with DSCL.

i always had to pop a bit of exposure bump to get prints to match, after that they were spot on. never bothered to work out why though, dont print much these days.
 
It's worth remembering too that a lab print will always have considerably less tonal range than the image projected by a screen. From time to time I've edited images with this in mind. For example, I will wring more from some darker tones because I know they will fill in quite badly on the colour machine print. I try to get more detail in selected highlights because much of it will also be compressed in the print.
 
Colour calibration is one thing, but dynamic range is another. Paper will always have lower dynamic range than computer screen. Therefore before sending the file to a printer I always use in Photoshop the Levels adjustment layer. In the 'Output Levels' scale you just need to change 0 to something between 1-10, and 255 value to something between 245-254. The real numbers you need to check by doing a test print. And it makes sense only if the printer is kept calibrated.
Picture prepared in this way will look dull on a screen, but it should be what you are looking for on a print.
 
Colour calibration is one thing, but dynamic range is another. Paper will always have lower dynamic range than computer screen. Therefore before sending the file to a printer I always use in Photoshop the Levels adjustment layer. In the 'Output Levels' scale you just need to change 0 to something between 1-10, and 255 value to something between 245-254. The real numbers you need to check by doing a test print. And it makes sense only if the printer is kept calibrated.
Picture prepared in this way will look dull on a screen, but it should be what you are looking for on a print.

A calibrated workflow should need nothing changing... because that's the whole point of doing so. What's on my screen comes out of my printer without adjusting anything.
 
A calibrated workflow should need nothing changing... because that's the whole point of doing so. What's on my screen comes out of my printer without adjusting anything.
That is correct if you're using your printer.
But cargo sends those to be printed by someone else. Probably one not caring about calibrating the printer. As he says at the beginning:
I don't get much printed but often find they come back a touch darker than expected
And in such situation, when the printer cares a little about calibration (but is cheap), my method usually gave quite satisfactory results. Especially, when there is no way I can influence how the printer is calibrated.
 
Thank you I will give that a try next time out.

Gaz
 
No problem. But as everyone say, your screen has to be calibrated before anything else. Otherwise it makes no sense anyhow.
 
No problem. But as everyone say, your screen has to be calibrated before anything else. Otherwise it makes no sense anyhow.
Was thinking last night about this. I'm not a photographer and only take photos for my own pleasure so not to keen on spending lots to calibrate as the photos back from Dscl are not a million miles out.That said I will calibrate if I really really have to.
Could I not just get the photo I have had printed from Dscl out next to the monitor and the image on screen in photoshop then adjust the brightness of my screen down to match the print in my hand?
On my Monitor (Dell) U2412M Digital it as a brightness slider and contrast slider would you just alter the brightness they are both @ 75 % ? Or is there a problem doing it this way ?

Gaz
 
Your eyes are the last tool you would like to use to calibrate your screen. It's like measuring your kitchen to have new furniture fitted. You can approximate that the wall has 5 meters, but I am sure you would use a measuring tape to send the exact dimensions to the store. One inch seems a little when compared to 5 meters, but it's unbearable when the tabletop is too short.
On the other hand, pictures are not a tabletop. If you're quite happy with what you get already, you can just brighten a little the images with Levels or Curves before sending them to Dscl.
Like you said, it's about your pleasure, how you feel, not how exact are your prints or what we here think about it.
 
Cool I like your explanation. You have got a feel for how I think. I am a self employed Plasterer and that analogy is spot on.

Many thanks for your time.

Gaz
 
Back
Top