Bad printing from Ofoto?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

passante@mac.com wrote:
> Printed a calendar for Christmas. Most of the photos were shot with my
> Fuji S2. Good shots, well exposed and not retouched in Photoshop.
> Many of the calendar prints were dark.
>
> This was Ofoto's response:
>
> "Different systems display color and brightness in different ways. This
> distinction is most obvious in the difference between graphics displayed
> on Mac vs. Windows platforms (the same image will appear much brighter
> on a Mac than on a Windows platform). However, discrepancies also exist
> between different brands and types of monitors on the same platform.
> ...We suggest that you adjust your monitor so your onscreen image more
> closely resembles your print from Ofoto. "
>
> This would make sense if I adjusted the brightness or levels in
> Photoshop and were disappointed with the results but for photos straight
> from the camera??
>
> What am I missing here.


Tell us the procedure you used to prepare the photos. Also, what color
space did you use in the camera (sRGB or aRGB)?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo wrote:
> passante@mac.com wrote:
>
>> Printed a calendar for Christmas. Most of the photos were shot with
>> my Fuji S2. Good shots, well exposed and not retouched in
>> Photoshop. Many of the calendar prints were dark.
>> This was Ofoto's response:
>>
>> "Different systems display color and brightness in different ways.
>> This distinction is most obvious in the difference between graphics
>> displayed
>> on Mac vs. Windows platforms (the same image will appear much brighter
>> on a Mac than on a Windows platform). However, discrepancies also
>> exist between different brands and types of monitors on the same
>> platform.
>> ...We suggest that you adjust your monitor so your onscreen image more
>> closely resembles your print from Ofoto. "
>>
>> This would make sense if I adjusted the brightness or levels in
>> Photoshop and were disappointed with the results but for photos
>> straight from the camera??
>>
>> What am I missing here.
>
>
>
> Tell us the procedure you used to prepare the photos. Also, what color
> space did you use in the camera (sRGB or aRGB)?


Tell me your OS and equipment as well. LCD on your camera is usually
brighter than the actual photo is. Finally, Ofoto can only handle sRGB
JPEGs..

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:wIUAd.7079$qf5.6604@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> <passante@mac.com> wrote in message
> newsassante-067D69.07463730122004@news.verizon.net...
>> Printed a calendar for Christmas. Most of the photos were shot with my
>> Fuji S2. Good shots, well exposed and not retouched in Photoshop.
>> Many of the calendar prints were dark.
>>
>
> Does OFOTO have a downloadable color profile? Apparently your monitor was
> not displaying the images the same as OFOTO was printing them. You can
> probably expect to have similar results whenever you send images to them
> in
> the future, unless you can adjust things on your end.

I had a problem with Ofoto as well. I restored a bunch of old prints to
digital and sent them off. They all came out great except for one
black-and-white original that was overexposed. The prints they sent back
were almost entirely BLACK, with a ghostly gray fringe of the original
faces. It was like they printed it in negative after removing almost all
detail. Very odd.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:yXUAd.7135$qf5.755@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cynicor" <j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
> news:lJudna8VcYLLhUncRVn-rw@speakeasy.net...
>>
>> "Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:wIUAd.7079$qf5.6604@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> >
>> > <passante@mac.com> wrote in message
>> > newsassante-067D69.07463730122004@news.verizon.net...
>> >> Printed a calendar for Christmas. Most of the photos were shot with
>> >> my
>> >> Fuji S2. Good shots, well exposed and not retouched in Photoshop.
>> >> Many of the calendar prints were dark.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Does OFOTO have a downloadable color profile? Apparently your monitor
> was
>> > not displaying the images the same as OFOTO was printing them. You can
>> > probably expect to have similar results whenever you send images to
>> > them
>> > in
>> > the future, unless you can adjust things on your end.
>>
>> I had a problem with Ofoto as well. I restored a bunch of old prints to
>> digital and sent them off. They all came out great except for one
>> black-and-white original that was overexposed. The prints they sent back
>> were almost entirely BLACK, with a ghostly gray fringe of the original
>> faces. It was like they printed it in negative after removing almost all
>> detail. Very odd.
>>
>>
>
> That would suggest that the problem was on their end, not yours. Had your
> monitor been off, wouldn't all the photos have come back looking bad?

It wasn't even "off", it was reversed. All white turned to black. They were
just a couple of 5x7s, so I took them to a local camera shop (Berger Bros,
http://www.berger-bros.com) and did it right away on their photo kiosk.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<denis@boisclair.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1104420230.541142.298190@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> The results from Ofoto were very disappointing for you and I hope that
> the other members'suggestions will help you to find the cause of the
> problem.
>
> I 'discovered' Ofoto only recently - I have had two batches of 7x5
> prints from the and they were excellent.
> Denis Boisclair
> Cheshire, England
>

I've always had excellent results from OFOTO, but they recently introduced
Kodak's PerfectTouch system, and they now tweak the images before they print
them. That is great for amateurs' photos, but I am not thrilled at the
thought of OFOTO'S equipment trying to second-guess my intentions on images
that I carefully edited prior to uploading to them for printing.

I am looking at two alternative labs: www.adorama.com (the camera people)
and iPrints from Dale Labs www.dalelabs.com. I'm going to upload a few test
images to all three and see how they look when they are returned.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
>
> Also try Shutterfly - http://www.shutterfly.com
> Their automatic image enhancement is gentile and you're also given the
> option to turn it off.

Esp. good if you want automatic Semetic enhancement.

--
John McWilliams

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

they also have color profiles on their weside

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

frimets wrote:
> HI all
>
>
> i am using www.adoramapix.com with great results
>
>
> They use Kodak royal paper and ship very fast
>
>
> by the way they now have an incredible sale 11x14 photo prints only
> $1.99 ends any day
>
>
> Did anyone use dotphoto.com??
>
>
> Happy holidays

Gee. I just realized the OP's email address - @MAC.COM.

Yes, if you use iPhoto to check the exposure, you'd be way off. Your
photos are possibly slightly underexposed. Many dSLRs do that to prevent
the highlight from being blown out. If you use Photoshop, the picture
should look pretty close to the prints. If you use LCD (iMac), your
picture may appear brighter than it actually is. If you use iBook, etc.
The screen is not reliable to do critical photo works, color would be
off too.