Thanks Joel for your opinion. I suppose that you have confirmed what
I suspected - that it is at the limits of the printer in that
particular area. In addition, as I mentioned to Giles in an off-List
message, the glossy Ilford paper might have exacerbated the
limitations of the shadow detail, because of either the scanner or
the original negative.
Another thing worth mentioning is that my monitor is set to a lower
Gamma than normal Windows Gamma. I use a Mac (normal Gamma 1.8), but
I have set the Gamma to 2.0 to be halfway between the 2 system
standards. I think that what I have just written is correct, but I
am willing to be put right if not.
I was given a book called "Perfect Exposure" for Christmas; I hope to
learn enough from that to make better exposures, ones that will have
less testing shadows as John L was kind enough to confirm.
Cheers
Chris
At 10:35 -0600 27/1/02, Joel Wilcox wrote:
At 06:28 AM 1/27/2002 +0000, you wrote:
I should be grateful for some advice.
I used the photo at
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk/comment/Photo_Comment.html
as the cover for a Christmas card recently and it gave me some
problems. The shadow areas, particularly around the baby's head
came out with a different reflectivity from the remainder of the
photo. In addition, the print showed coloured grain around the
baby's forehead (and in other areas).
Chris,
In my system, this sort of image loses so much detail in the shadows
on my monitor that I can't be sure of what the printed image will
show, particularly in the shadows. (This is not a criticism of the
photo, but of my monitor, and perhaps all monitors.) The inkjet
print in my experience always shows a little more shadow detail than
the monitor, but it doesn't mean you will always like what you see.
It often requires pulling the curve a little to deepen the shadow to
get the right effect in the print. This is not what you want to
hear concerning this image, however, I think.
If the shadowy skin textures are grainy with a lot of red, this
could also be scanner noise. This kind of noise will also be
exacerbated by sharpening.
Another factor may be the crossing over from CMY ink to K (black) to
get the proper shadow tones. In effect, the Epson print algorithm
combine the three color inks to print darks until it starts to
incorporate black. The transition is incredibly cunning and
effective, but this kind of image may be right on the crossover
point.
I don't think there is anything wrong with your printer or print resolution.
Joel W.
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, England.
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
... a nascent photo library.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|