I tried making prints. The first thing I noticed was that the prints were
much darker than the screen image. I decreased the screen brightness from
about 50-60% to 25%, then tried letting PS control the colors, rather than
allowing the Epson R800 to do its thing. Finally started over with the RAW
image on the reduced-brightness monitor, and finally got one that I think
may be acceptable. The print is still darker than the screen image, but I
don't feel that I can use the screen for general purposes if I reduce the
brightness any further. I also reduced the room lighting.
Any suggestions, other than to try to do a precise calibration on an
inexpensive Dell monitor?
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Early Autumn
> Both of you should agree with yourselves rather than with Chuck or
> Moose. Actually, I think something that's about half way between the
> two might be the best thing.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Jim Nichols wrote:
>> Thanks for the nice feedback, Ken. I will try to use those suggestions
>> when
>> I make a print that my wife has requested.
>>
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:46 AM
>> Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Early Autumn
>>
>>
>>>> I prefer the original. I find the brighter highlights to be distracting
>>>> from the overall image.
>>> What a pickle I'm in on this one. Should I agree with Moose or Chuck?
>>>
>>> Jim's original version was instantly a hit with me and I visualized a
>>> 16x20 of it hanging on my wall. Absent Moose's version I was
>>> completely enthralled with it. But then I looked at Moose's version.
>>> Nice and snappy and removes that veil. In doing an A-B comparison,
>>> Moose's version is definitely better, however, the original is what I
>>> would want to live with.
>>>
>>> I was stewing on this (for a few seconds, so don't crucify me for not
>>> thinking this all the way through) and have concluded that the picture
>>> is one that lets you calmly explore. The way the twisties hold the
>>> leaf in place adds mystery and intrigue. The tonal pallet doesn't draw
>>> away from the patters to explore. With the brighter, snappier version,
>>> I feel that the eyeflow is being dictated too harshly and forces the
>>> eye away from the little patterns. Inotherwords, the original version
>>> invites further exploration, Moose's version defines the exploration.
>>> The relationship with the background seems more comfortable in the
>>> original.
>>>
>>> Both are very good, though, and without the A-B comparision, I'd
>>> probably be happy with either one.
>>>
>>> My only problem is the lower-right needs a little editing and the top
>>> needs to be cropped to match the spacing of the bottom.
>>>
>>> AG
>>> --
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|