Better photo prints - Best screen settings for prints/editing. Getting the prints you want
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- The right screen calibration and brightness settings are essential for making great prints. Keith looks at what screen and editing settings he uses, and why they matter.
Why might you decide to change the defaults 'dark look' of your editing software.
For more about Keith's articles and videos, see the main index of printing info at:
www.northlight...
The Sirui lighting in the video is covered at:
www.northlight...
-----------------
If you'd like to make a small donation, I have a Kofi page:
"Buy me a coffee" ko-fi.com/keit...
-----------------
My articles and videos are always free to access.
Any help with running this channel is gratefully received.
-----------------
I also have some affiliate links which earn me a commission if used.
US Amazon photo/print gear: amzn.to/3l9vJC6
B&H Photo: www.bhphotovid...
Adorama: www.adorama.co... 
Кино
![3 steps when printing your photos. What's so difficult? Really - I'd like to know [AMA request]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UgCn63JZK7Y/mqdefault.jpg)
As usual the best and clearest explanation on RUclips, Many Thanks
Thanks - glad it's of interest!
Astrophotography is mostly what I do. I use dedicated astrophotography cameras. I have not in 3 years of RUclips videos and in the two paid for how to process astrophotography images in Pixinsight no one ever mentions you prints come back from the printer too dark or slightly different color because your screen is too bright and you need to calibrate your monitor.
I wonder why but finding your channel is huge . Another great video.
Thanks.
Astro images are very different from a colour management POV, since they are essentially synthetic (albeit based on 'real' photons!)
My experience is not as large as I'd like [mainly doe to living in a big city] but astro software gives the impression of being much more 'engineering' driven and not looking at the same issues as when dealing with earth based photography in good light.
That said the printing issues are very similar, so all the steps to take to get better prints should be applicable.
hey Keith, happy xmas and New year, thanks for all the great videos and time
Thanks - and all the best yourself!
I knew most of that but you described it very clearly. I love printing and my 27" Eizo screen is se to 80cdm2 and the print brightness is spot on. I really look forward to your videos since disovering you a couple of months ago.
Thanks - glad it was of interest!
Now to have a break for a few days ;-)
Hi Kieth, l finally got my new Epson EcoTank 8550, I'm really chuffed with it, l was daunted at 1st, l managed to set it up, everything was really good, much better than the lower cost printers, done some practice prints, now l need to learn a lot lot more xx
Excellent - have fun!
@@KeithCooper yes l will thank you you've helped
Another excellent video Keith full of useful advice. Thank you and Happy Christmas. Dave (UK)
Thanks - Happy Christmas too!
Thanks Keith this comes in very handy as I just bought a Datacolor Spyder to calibrate my screen. I was quite surprised by the difference of my MacBook default setting before and after the calibration process. Your videos are very useful for tuning my screen and printing process!
Thanks!
Great advice as per usual Keith and very clearly articulated and already set up for printing, I will now have a better understanding of the various lighting considerations.
Merry Christmas
Glad to help! All the best for Xmas!
Excellent discussion!
Thanks
Thanks Keith, very helpful !
Thanks
Thanks again as usual, and happy holidays :)
Happy Christmas from here too!
Really just great Chanel...
Just found it... 🙏🤗🙏👍😊👍
Thanks
Hi Keith, I respect your knowledge and appreciate all you have said here. So here is my one follow up question. I really do not see a strong similarity between the Macro Print that appears on the right side of your computer and the same shot shown on your large computer screen. This all comes near the end of the video where you conclude how much alike these two shots appear. So for me I approve of all the work you did to set up such a reliable editing process. But I'm not seeing it on my computer. Thanks for your channel. je
But... From where I'm sitting, they actually do look rather closer in tonality than on the video. I suspect the lighting on the big print could be raised a bit.
That said, I'm always astounded anything looks good on YT videos - I still personally dislike the medium ;-)
However, even this match is vastly more than I'd normally expect between an image on a screen (not soft proofed) and a print, given the differences in tonal ranges.
@@KeithCooper thanks for your understanding of my comment Keith, and for your explanation which makes perfect sense. I appreciate your quick reply!! Are you using an inkjet printer and if so what sizes can you do?
That print was made when testing the Epson P7500 [24"width]
The big printer at the edge of the table is an Epson P5000 [17" width]
@@KeithCooper thanks Keith!! I really appreciate your sharing of information!! The print is photo and print are beautiful!!
Another great Video Kieth. In this and some other videos you mention jointly purchasing equipment for a camera club. Would there be any issues with software licenses eg for the screen calibrator?
Thanks
Who knows? - it's not been a concern with any I've come across in clubs... ;-)
I'm quite happy in suggesting it, since I know of examples where people have borrowed a profiling system, used it and decided to get their own.
Following your advise I calibrated my Mac Studio monitor which required dialing down the brightness: A lot. Not so good for watching youtube or surfing the web so my second monitor is much brighter; easier for those entertaining things. :)
Yes, that's one way round it ;-)
Thanks (as always) for your helpful advice--this is an area where I've been experimenting but I prefer a systematic approach to things over which I have at least some control. I also edit on a Benq (PD3200U, which is supposedly factory-calibrated, and I hope that's sufficient) but its brightness control is expressed in percentage, which is currently set to 50, and I can't find any reference in the manual for adjusting color temperature in °K. I use sRGB mode for editing (I avoid Darkroom and certainly Low Blue Light). I don't have a hood, but I keep the shades closed. Although the blades are thick/opaque, there's always some light leakage as there are small gaps even when they're closed, so even with north-facing windows, the ambient level changes. I always have all of the room lights off when editing but there's obviously going to be some inconsistency with the perceived brightness of the image depending on the ambient light, but I don't want to keep adjusting the monitor based on that (especially on a partly cloudy day where the levels frequently change)!
I also hadn't thought about changing settings based on what program(s) I'm using and hope that doesn't make a huge difference, as I often bounce back-and-forth between DxO PhotoLab 6 Elite (which offers their new Wide Gamut color space), Topaz (Photo AI or any of its individual components), various Nik plug-ins, and occasionally other programs (such as FlmPack or PaintShop Pro). I always use as close to a neutral grey background as the program supports (although Topaz seems to only offer a rather dark gray and I can't find any way to change that). In any case, it would obviously be impractical to keep changing the monitor to optimize it for each program. Every time I think I've got things reasonably figured out, you keep reminding me how many variables there are and how "haphazard" (lazy?) my process apparently is compared to yours! The learning curve never ends...
I'd prefer to have a "scientifically accurate" set-up, but my prints generally appear very close to what I see on screen, so I'm inclined to adopt an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" attitude, as long as the prints look good. In the interest of consistent results, the last step in my process is to always print from Epson Print Layout (and the curiously-named "Darker" default setting where applicable).
Thanks
As you say - if it works well!
A good video explaining why my prints turn out dark and sometimes a bit "dull" in color 7 out of 10 times
You are talking about lighting and what color temperature the lamps should have.
So what temperature Lumens/watts do you recommend when editing images?
I understand that it is difficult to answer as colors and other things in the room matter, but I was thinking in general terms
Kind regards, Alf
Thanks
The LEDs and lighting in the video are there to look good for video ;-)
In my office [for work] I use normal room lighting, but at a level where there's no direct light on the screen and the area around my screen is slightly dimmer than the screen. I want a comfortable work environment, not a print lab ;-)
If that sounds rather imprecise, then yes it is ;-) I've never been one for grey walls, desks and Solux lamps.
All too often that stuff just seems like it's as much done to impress others as for practical use - there, did I really say that?... Yes, heresy ;-)
@@KeithCooper as I suspected that ordinary everyday light is enough and as you mention that it is not directly aimed at the screen
Another great video Keith - could you explain sometime the best colour space to process images with - Adobe v Prophoto.
It depends... There is no such thing as a general 'best' ;-)
See here for a discussion of some aspects of this.
www.northlight-images.co.uk/a-photo-print-of-some-bright-red-flowers/
When I'm writing articles and creating images to cut into the videos I'm using sRGB...
When doing B&W printing I start in Prophoto...
I have the advantage of being able to black out my room. The windows have solid shutters on them [as usual in France] so I guess I must start blacked out and work out a small lamp that gives me a sight of my keyboard etc.without influencing the view of the screen. Would you recommend total darkness in a room for editing?
In general I'd recommend low light levels in the room, but not fully dark, due to glare issues.
I'd light the room so that when facing the screen, it's the brightest thing I can see, and if I turn round and walk round the room, it's light enough not to walk into furniture... ;-)
@@KeithCooper Thanks for you Mach2 speed reply, Keith! Got an idea now on what to do. A variation on the Philips TV 'Ambilight' on the wall at the far end of the room.
Hi Keith, just found your channel and finding it VERY informative and helpful! Does it matter what colour temp your room lighting is? Secondly, I know this set up is for print but what about sharing images online, how should the monitor be calibrated for that please?
The videos are shot in ~4000K lighting, with those two monitors calibrated to 4000K - all a "fix" to make prints look like the screens...
I have my monitors set up to ~6500K or D65 for actual work [at the other end of the office]
Room lights normally are just warmish white LED lamps - main thing is to avoid glare
That's so helpful thank you very much Keith! I'm an electrician so I know about colour temp etc. So does it matter if the room lighting is down lights, wall lights, floor lamps? Or am I making a mountain out of a mole hill!
I subscribed to your channel btw. Thanks.
@@MrPhillipgraham The lighting in my own office is very mixed - nothing special [other than when I'm doing the videos]
A monitor hood and avoiding bright lights in your view when looking at the screen make fare more difference than lots of specially set up lighting.
@@KeithCooper Sorry Keith me again. What brightness should I set my monitor to when sharing images online, FB, Instagram etc? I mean when editing the images? And colour temperature of 6500k right?
Thank you. That was very informative. I get so frustrated when my prints come back too dark. The calibration helped. What do you think about soft proofing? Is that effective?
Soft proofing is massively oversold as a fix it simply isn't. A favourite of people selling their training videos... ;-)
It's something that can genuinely be of use if carefully set up, but that's what very few people do.
It's widely used as a crutch to support not truly understanding the difference between prints and screens ;-)
See this for my take...
ruclips.net/video/b72c4tf_NLA/видео.html
Hope it helps!
In a similar vein-
Does the paint color of your walls, yours seem to be a bit of a gray mud, make a difference?
Mine are currently a bright green apple in color.
Yes, bright colours will affect your colour perception...
Mine are 'magnolia' :-)
@@KeithCooper
Thanks for your response.
I am new to 'proper' printing and learning about the many 'minor' issues that can make a big difference.
I appreciate the value of your posts and home website.
Great video, as always, Keith. One little question, somewhere recently, I was told to use a white background for editing . I was using medium gray, so I guess I'll I'll switch back to gray. I edit mostly B&W, but color too. Thanks, Ken.
Yes I get asked about white - it will encourage you to edit differently, which might help with some poorly set up systems.
My own view is that grey minimises distractions which may unduly influence tonality [for print]
I'd be curious to know where this suggestion originates and the rationale behind it...
@@KeithCooper Thanks Keith, I have a well color managed system. I use Datacolor products. I had been using medium gray for years, before going to white . So what is your suggested color ? I'm always looking to improve my editing and printing process .
I generally pick a mid grey and try and avoid distraction on the same screen [or bright stuff on the 2nd screen off to the right]
I don't think the precise shade makes much difference, but black/white would affect my editing [in ways I'd likely not necessarily notice until I printed]
@@KeithCooper Great, thanks Keith. I'm lucky enough to have my editing and printing area, in my finished basement . A few small windows, so lighting is constant. Nothing refecting off monitor. However, my screen brightness was at 127, and just recalibrated, lowering to 120. Prints as close as it gets. Thanks so much. Ken
@@KeithCooper Thanks for the video. As a consequence, I did some test prints to check out your points. To get them to match, I had to turn down my monitor even further than it was already turned down (to level 5 out of possible 100, previously 19, not a high end monitor). I also compared it the the photos I've mounted in frames with standard white mattings. For me, the on-screen image looks closer to the mounted image if I also use a white background rather than a grey background. Presumably it helps to match the mattings.
Really thanks for the tips as I was previously using the standard black background and was often disappointed when compared to the print. On my little testing the new system works much better. 👍
thought you might be interested in this - i just bought a new BenQ SW321C monitor. i had an older BenQ that started giving me problems and my prints always came out too dark. so here is what i did. i calibrated my new SW321C with the new palette master element software and my i one display pro measuring device and set the parameters in the software for D50 and 5000 temp. after calibration i turned the brightness and contrast down to 0 using the screen button controls on the lower right of the screen. prints seemed to be a little warm. i them changed the color temp. to 6500k and now my prints are almost perfectly matched to my screen. my printer is an epson sure color P800. i hope this info may be useful to somebody.
Not sure why this works, but if it does, then that's a result ;-)
Great explanation! I have one question though: would it be a good idea to have a separate monitor profile set to around 5000-5500K and use that profile when preparing files for print? That way one could use the standard 6500K profile for everyday things and not have to compromise.
Yes, a good suggestion...
However, in practice I've found switching more trouble than it was worth, and that in fact I was able to print just fine from a 6500K monitor
Ideally you need a monitor with two calibrations - I can do this with the BenQ monitors I use, but [currently] I still have to manually switch display profiles on my Mac as well.
@@KeithCooper Thanks for the reply!
Great video. What do you recommend as the best 17 inch wide printer on the market right now?
P5000
As ever, definitions and relevance of the term 'best' may vary... ;-)
Thank you. What do you think of P900?
www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-sc-p900-printer-review/
Another reason for the popularity of dark mode and black backgrounds on mobile devices/laptops is to increase battery life.
Thanks - absolutely never occurred to me!
Guess you can tell how much I use such devices ;-)
Then again none of them could ever be seen as optimal for colour critical editing ;-)
Do you have any videos showing your editing process? I'm having trouble in that part of the process.
Only a few more general examples in the making of some prints
There is a full index of all videos I've done at
www.northlight-images.co.uk/keith-cooper-photography-videos-index/
What aspects of editing are you having difficulties with?
Keith, thank you for the informative video. I have an inexpensive Eizo sRGB screen with shade, Colormunki Smile and attempted some calibration/profiling with DisplayCal. I work on scanned color negatives. I have found that editing for web (verification on phone, iPad etc) is indeed nicer at 6500K. If I want to order prints, based on your information, I should calibrate the warmed up monitor to 80-90cd brightness, 5500-6000K temperature, minimize ambient light and adapt eyes for a while before editing? I'm asking because I edited a few photos last night at D50 and today, with daytime D65 profile they look pretty dim and yellow, so I'm getting confused. Appreciate your insight.
Personally I find editing at D50 quite tricky - it also depends on the colour management of your system and editing software. Anything connected with phones/tablets is a complete lottery from a colour management process so 6500/sRGB is a good way to go ;-)
For print 6000K seems a good compromise, but...
However, I also don't have any significant experience of print labs, so it's not something I've investigated in detail.
Perhaps this question is alrwady answered in the video, but why not use a white background when editing, since the paper one's usually print on, is white !?
Ah - it's because it's about the surround for the picture when editing and the fact that print contrast [dynamic range] is usually much lower than the screen.
Ideally the editing screen should not be brighter/darker than the picture - hence a mid grey
A temporary white or black screen can be helpful in appreciating image contrast (if soft proofing for example) but the main principle is for it not to 'get in the way'
@@KeithCooper Ok, got it. Thanx for taking your time to sort this out.
Sincearly;
Mr. T.
No trouble - I genuinely appreciate questions!
Hi I read somewhere that files types also have an impact on the print. Something about banding.
But before spending money printing different files types and paper types using the same photo let me ask this.
Is there a preferred file type to use when saving photos from Photohop? Also does color or black/white photos benefit from being saved in different files types.
I saved the same photo, landscape picture during a medium sunny day with hills and trees as well as fields and sky, sky is about 20% of the picture.
Using Epson SC-P900 printer and printed one copy on fine art paper with the corresponding ICC profile from a PNG file type and like the out come if this print.
Anyway, I saved the same picture in four files as stated below but cannot see any difference what so ever on my monitor, calibrated Benq SW321C using in Epson print software. Also they all have the same amount of PPI using the same paper size
Saved as below,
Jpeg 20 MB second bets quality
Jpeg 44 MB best quality
PNG 80 MB
TIFF 300 MB
Thanks in advance
Jürgen
As with most such things - the true answer is 'it depends'
I save files with layers as.psd [or .psb] files - the key is to work in 16bit if you want to do anything much with the files. Some people use tiffs, but I rarely bother unless I'm using some other software which needs them.
I don't use png files for anything but graphics in my web articles
Saving as a full/high quality jpeg and printing it is usually OK, as long as you don't do any more editing before printing it.
If I'm in Photoshop, I'd use EPL directly from the automate menu...
@@KeithCooperthanks a lot for your response. I’ll continue with jpg files.
I calibrated my monitor (acer B227U) with my Spyder x Elite, in a pitch dark room. It doesn't really make sense to do so, because when i did the test print, its impossible to compare the printout to the monitor. since you have to turn the light on and that skews the photo and makes the screen look very warm. I might have to run it again.
There's no real need to calibrate in darkness - just keep bright light off the screen
Calibrate at 100 or 120 at anywhere from 5500K to 6500K and that will do for most things
I've never used the bit of the datacolor software which suggests settings or measures ambient light
@@KeithCooper I was wondering about that, when the software asks you about your calibration settings, (gamma, white point and brightness) what am i actually choosing here? Im not sure what the values of those are referring to, is it a value that should be in the documentation of the monitor, or is it just what i prefer? Should i just go with recommended?
100 at 6000K is good for many, gamma is always 2.2
Nothing to do with the monitor specs
@@KeithCooper ah ok, thanks Keith, Ill try again later today
what about the color temperature of the paper?
Paper doesn't have a colour temperature as such...
The colour of the paper [as found in the specs] can definitely influence how a print looks, but taking care in viewing lighting is a good step.
Relying on soft proofing to get a feel for this can be problematic since it is very dependent on the quality of the profile creation process.
In general this is one of those aspects where a good test print of a test image can help characterise a paper - actual measurements don't come into it for my own print making
Keith, I'm looking to print black and white negatives for silver and salt printing. I currently have a Epson R2880. Are the current line of Epsons better for digital negatives?
Thank you.
I'm afraid you'll have to check with a specialist group on that - it's not something I can test
I'd suggest: groups.io/g/QuadToneRIP
@@KeithCooper Thank you for the reply. Yes, I guess you're right, it's a bit niche.