DSCL - Still not getting the results I am after :(

unclened

unclened

Messages
4,009
Edit My Images
No
I am really struggling to get an acceptable result from DSCL. I am sure the problem is at my end, but I just can't see how to fix the problem.

My prints are still slightly darker overall and the red areas appear duller and muted, closer to a shade of pink. The blacks arent as rich and deep either.

I have deleted all my previous spyder3 pro calibrations, removed the proprietary ATI Catalyst graphics manager software from my Dell Studio Laptop and recalibrated the screen. So in theory what I sent to DSCL and received in print should look more like my screen, now that it has been recalibrated, but its still not as close as I would like.

Do other users of DSCL find there is some degree of difference between screen and print?

I think one way of addressing the issue could be to ask if any of the other togs on here would be kind enough to a post a print out to me and then send me a digital copy, so I can compare how it looks on my screen to the print. I will ofcourse pay for P&P and a little ontop for the time and effort spent in helping me out. :help:
 
IMG_5780.jpg


This image in particular was clipped around the shirt area from a reddish/purple to a pink colour.
 
tiler65 said:
are you using their profiles?
Click to expand...

yep, i edit in LR, export to sRGB for web and client dvd and export to DSCL paper profiles for files that I send to them for printing.
 
I'd agree with that, it's very pink. Not red/purple.
 
scottthehat said:
that shirt is pink, as for dscl, there always spot on for me, have you got adobe gamma
Click to expand...

I dont think I have adobe gamma. I checked my task manager and there isnt any adobe gamma process running.

I spoke to DSCL and they asked me to calibrate using their test image and print. I wouldnt mind giving that a go. Does anyone know how to do that in Win7? Are there any manual sliders that can be found?
 
scottthehat said:
also can i ask whats going on with the backround on left side.
Click to expand...

not specifically looking for c&c on the image, lol, but I left the background as it was because I took the portrait in a tiny corridor next a window. That area is the corner. I could correct it, but I opted not to as its not intended to be a studio portrait of any sort.
 
also does that picture look underexposed to anyone? because I when I look at the DSCL test print and compare with the screen, I need to reduce my display brightness to get a similar look to the print, which would imply my previous stuff was all underexposed? :shrug:
 
calibrating using spyder 3 pro
 
Rutherfordium said:
Doesn't look underexposed to me, but obviously I don't know how bright you wanted it. The background isn't quite white to my eyes anyway. The shirt is as pink as pink can be though! :)
Click to expand...

see, this is what makes me think that the problem extends further than me :cautious:

The background wasn't intended to be pure white, its a white painted wall, so i think your comment holds true for it not being 100% white.
 
Perhaps the reason you can't get good colour from it is the file is overexposed - and has little information in the red channel - on the shirt it's at 255 in the red for most of it - so will have no detail in the red.

If you go into channels and select the red you'll see - and it's badly clipped on the skin too - only saved by his darker skin tones...

Once a colour is out of range like that no profile will ever help!

Download a good testchart like this - and compare the values on the skintone on it with your file and you'll quickly see....
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/

Keep a test file like this open and compare - you'll quickly see!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you upload an original somewhere and then maybe some of the guys might be able to download it and look it and see what they end up with and how.
Its does look a little weird the picture. I am as colour blind as can be but even i know that shirt is way over saturated to the point of being very pink.
 
Have you used the spyder 3 to adjust your luminance setting? It only shows up when you pick the options for RGB sliders on your monitor with the Spyder 3 pro - but you can still set it - it should be around 120 as I remember, most laptops are way too bright by default. Until I did this myself I had problems getting good results from loxley, dscl etc.
 
I have to agree with Dave, (snapping Sam), on this, your image is all over the shop.
 
snappingsam said:
Perhaps the reason you can't get good colour from it is the file is overexposed - and has little information in the red channel - on the shirt it's at 255 in the red for most of it - so will have no detail in the red.

If you go into channels and select the red you'll see - and it's badly clipped on the skin too - only saved by his darker skin tones...

Once a colour is out of range like that no profile will ever help!

Download a good testchart like this - and compare the values on the skintone on it with your file and you'll quickly see....
http://www.samsphotolab.com/roesbitsandbobs/PDI_Target-DCP-small.jpg

Keep a test file like this open and compare - you'll quickly see!
Click to expand...

I checked in LR2 and I can't see any highlight clipping other than a bit of the white area near his head. What is making you say its overexposed? (I am not challenging your opinion, just would like to see it for myself). Also if it was overexposed, the print should come out brighter rather than darker?

Also how I can I see in LR2 that the red channel is clipping? I checked the sliders and I haven't lifted the reds under saturation or luminance at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CraigF said:
Can you upload an original somewhere and then maybe some of the guys might be able to download it and look it and see what they end up with and how.
Its does look a little weird the picture. I am as colour blind as can be but even i know that shirt is way over saturated to the point of being very pink.
Click to expand...

Brilliant idea!! (y)

This is a link to the original RAW file

http://www.woofiles.com/dl-205763-5uzGSLfX-Original.CR2

and the

edited RAW

http://www.woofiles.com/dl-205764-zrgqwMJL-Edited.CR2
 
Jchaplin said:
Have you used the spyder 3 to adjust your luminance setting? It only shows up when you pick the options for RGB sliders on your monitor with the Spyder 3 pro - but you can still set it - it should be around 120 as I remember, most laptops are way too bright by default. Until I did this myself I had problems getting good results from loxley, dscl etc.
Click to expand...

I've set my luminance level in the same manner.
 
tiler65 said:
I have to agree with Dave, (snapping Sam), on this, your image is all over the shop.
Click to expand...

fair enough, would you mind having a go with the original raw that I attached in an earlier post, so show me the error of my ways. It would be immensely helpful to know what I am doing wrong.
 
Get a print from Sam's and see if it's still the same.
 
Dman said:
Get a print from Sam's and see if it's still the same.
Click to expand...

yeah, i am going to try sam's, loxley and few others to compare.

I just want to get these magical prints from DSCL that others get :(
 
Hmmm...
Really strange. Downloaded Raw and heres what i get after ACR. Only ACR though.
I assume this is pretty much how it should be.
If so, then ermm..it seems to be user error at the actual taking the picture stage either that or your camera is doing some weird **** in camera.

Original.jpg
 
Last edited:
the original RAW looks :puke: but definitely not like that
 
Forgot to add, any light on that type of material is a pain as it saturates it to a nice shiny pink.
 
CraigF said:
Explain please.
Whats different?
Latest ACR and Abode CS5.
Click to expand...

Now I am not too sure whether its the calibration at my end, but that came up as quite dark. The original raw in LR looks brighter and had an warm orange look to it. (heres a print screen - http://h.imagehost.org/view/0113/print_screen). Also I don't have any presets utilised at the import stage and the camera calibration is just adobe standard.
 
Last edited:
My ACR gives me totally different settings to those m8.
Ok, here is my theory.
You have tried to blow the background and it hasn't really worked out.
 
I think you need to establish whether your ACR and LR are up to date.
If they are then this is simply a PP job.
Is this what it should be like? If not then i am lost.
Its as rough as a badgers on the sleeves i know but i dont have the eyes for this tonight.

Original3.jpg
 
Oh ffs, the shirt has gone lighter for some reason.. :thinking:
 
web.jpg


I just took your dark file and pulled the midtone to the left - then I've dropped the skintones and greyscale from the test file we use

Download and look at in Photoshop - and use the information palette - particulary in the skin tones - and compare to the portraits at bottom - remember they are kids so skintones won't be as swarthy...
 
CraigF said:
I think you need to establish whether your ACR and LR are up to date.
If they are then this is simply a PP job.
Is this what it should be like? If not then i am lost.
Its as rough as a badgers on the sleeves i know but i dont have the eyes for this tonight.

Original3.jpg
Click to expand...

no hes not worried about the backround as its not a studio shot,
 
snappingsam said:
web.jpg


I just took your dark file and pulled the midtone to the left - then I've dropped the skintones and greyscale from the test file we use

Download and look at in Photoshop - and use the information palette - particulary in the skin tones - and compare to the portraits at bottom - remember they are kids so skintones won't be as swarthy...
Click to expand...

if you took the original in your post, would that mean that my camera isn't capturing the skintones correctly?
 
if you took the original in your post, would that mean that my camera isn't capturing the skintones correctly?
Click to expand...

I took it from the post at 8.30 - the second one - as the first one was well overexposed - and as you should be aware, it's impossible to create data once it's lost!

I\d say "scottthehat" has done a nicer conversion for the skintone - the one I'v done is muddy in comparison... however, I just did a quick one to show where the values should be...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top