Why do my prints come out under-exposed?

[Kermit power]

I edit my pictures in Elements 8. They look fine on my main monitor, and also seem to look fine on any other monitor I view them on. When I print them, however, they generally seem to come out a good couple of stops underexposed.

Anyone know what the problem is, and whether I can sort it?

Here's an example....


Happy family by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr

Always looks fine on screen, but prints out terribly dark.

[Mike_CTR]

A tip I got given a while ago was that if I'm going to have any prints done, whack 'em up a stop or two first.

I can't offer you any help I'm afraid though

[Simpo Two]

Histogram.

You'd be amazed how many images look fine on the monitor but are up to 2 stops underexposed.

Can't say why this particular image is under, maybe aperture too small or ISO too low for the lighting?

[Kermit power]

Simpo Two said:

Histogram.

You'd be amazed how many images look fine on the monitor but are up to 2 stops underexposed.

Can't say why this particular image is under, maybe aperture too small or ISO too low for the lighting?

This may be so, but it doesn't change the fact that my monitor and my printer are showing a difference of 2 stops!

At the moment, I'm having to use trial and error to print shots out, see if they look OK, and then go back into the RAW editor to adjust the exposure if they don't, which surely can't be right?

[XG332]

Is the brightness on your screen turned up alot?

[Kermit power]

XG332 said:

Is the brightness on your screen turned up alot?

No, plus I've tried it on other screens through flickr, and it generally seems OK then as well.

You tell me! If I look at the photo I've attached above, it looks fine to me on my monitor, and anywhere between fine and maybe half a stop underexposed on my laptop, depending on viewing angle, but when I print it out the difference is staggering.

Does it look massively underexposed to others on their screens?

[ian in lancs]

Could be screen brightness but you seem to have ruled that out so that leaves printer calibration or more precisely monitor - printer - inks - paper calibration ie colormunki kit but that's expensive.

Also as a screen is backlit / transmitted light and a print is reflected light a print will always look different. Calibrated quality printer, decent inks and decent paper will most likely sort it. Has for me anyway.

Looking at the histogram it looks under exposed to me about a stop, probably metering, see below...

Edited by ian in lancs on Saturday 25th December 18:31

[ian in lancs]

This is your original image uploaded into Lightroom. You'll see from the historgram it doesn't reach to the RHS edge.

Below I have increased exposure a stop and now it does have a whole range of exposures and of course the picture is brighter.



Try printing this resulting file...



Resolution wont be there but try it for brightness.

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well! This one will take further lightening I've taken it to +1.1 stops. See what that prints like!

[ian in lancs]

PSE luminosity histogram is saying pretty much the same thing.



Going into levels and reducing the RHS slider on the input down to circa 200 has a similar result to LR although I prefer LR way of doing it.

Edited by ian in lancs on Saturday 25th December 18:50

[XG332]

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

[SamHH]

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

[Barbotage]

I get exactly the same problem with PSE 8 and my Epsom printer. Usually prints ok straight from the Organiser, but if I print from the editing workshop they all print out dark by around 2 stops. Not at my computer at the moment, but from memory if you select 'printer manages colour' in the printer preferences box and something like 'photo optimisation' in the colour management it works fine!
Pain in the arse, and it never seems to remember / save these settings and I invariably forget.
Will check the above details and amend if req.
Any top tips to get around this would be welcome.

[ian in lancs]

Barbotage said:

I get exactly the same problem with PSE 8 and my Epsom printer. Usually prints ok straight from the Organiser, but if I print from the editing workshop they all print out dark by around 2 stops. Not at my computer at the moment, but from memory if you select 'printer manages colour' in the printer preferences box and something like 'photo optimisation' in the colour management it works fine!
Pain in the arse, and it never seems to remember / save these settings and I invariably forget.
Will check the above details and amend if req.
Any top tips to get around this would be welcome.

Oh, yes you could be right I forgot about printer profiles. Mine are calibrated.

[XG332]

SamHH said:

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

#

Try explaining that to the dosey lot who run jessops.

[ian in lancs]

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

From a technical perspective a square crop works better for the original composition. In a square format the forefront face is right on the 1/3 line, actually the golden intersection, the faces are on a diagonal curve to the top RH corner and the girls leg balances the composition and intersects the bottom RH corner. In addition all the dead ground that adds nothing to the composition, the wall and carpet is eliminated making a far more engaging composition technically. In order to improve it the girls arms could have pointed to the upper corners (and not cut off) that is all.


A lot of great artists and photographers, Henri Cartier-Bresson for one have used square composition to great effect. The amount of rectangular pics I see that would be transformed if cropped square is amazing. I guess its because most cameras shoot that format. I always include square crops in commissioned work and they sell well as canvasses. £££ :-)

[ian in lancs]

XG332 said:

SamHH said:

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

#

Try explaining that to the dosey lot who run jessops.

Send them to me I'll print any shape they like up to 1m x 30m!

Edited by ian in lancs on Saturday 25th December 20:10

[XG332]

ian in lancs said:

XG332 said:

SamHH said:

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

#

Try explaining that to the dosey lot who run jessops.

Send them to me I'll print any shape they like up to 1m x 30m!

Edited by ian in lancs on Saturday 25th December 20:10

PM me your details if you want me to. Often its for people who buy frames then the photos for them.

[mcflurry]

SamHH said:

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

Photobox do 5" x 5" square prints for 20p a go

[Simpo Two]

Kermit power said:

This may be so, but it doesn't change the fact that my monitor and my printer are showing a difference of 2 stops!

Going from 'camera monitor' to 'print' is missing out so many calibration stages you've got almost no chance of it being right by luck. Variables are brightness setting of camera monitor, ambient light falling on it (learing to use the histogram removes both these variables at a stroke), gamma setting of your monitor when you edit, profile/settings of your printer, the paper and probably more.

Kermit power said:

At the moment, I'm having to use trial and error to print shots out, see if they look OK, and then go back into the RAW editor to adjust the exposure if they don't, which surely can't be right?

Try to get the exposure right when you take the image. Then calibrate your monitor - if it's too bright you can make images too dark and vice versa. I can't say why your image is underexposed but suggested some places to look for next time. Applying exposure compensation (EV) is a quick method I use a lot until the histogram is right. I also remove the entire variable called 'printer' by either supplying images in disk, or sending to Photobox etc. and let them worry about it.

Kermit power said:

If I look at the photo I've attached above, it looks fine to me on my monitor, and anywhere between fine and maybe half a stop underexposed on my laptop, depending on viewing angle, but when I print it out the difference is staggering.

Does it look massively underexposed to others on their screens?

Yes, significantly. Hence I think your screen is too bright, which might explain why your prints are dark. Try running Adobe Gamma (part of Photoshop if you have it) to at least get your monitor brightness right.

Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 25th December 21:13

[jimmy156]

XG332 said:

SamHH said:

XG332 said:

ian in lancs said:

while I'm sticking my oar in... I'd probably crop it square as well!

I hate this with a passion, its great until somebody comes into jessops expecting us to print a 4.5x4.5 print. I even had somebody wanting to print a 2x20 stupid cropped photo.

I do like interesting crops though.

Lots of places can print square photos. Maybe Jessops should too if they've got lots of customers who want it?

#

Try explaining that to the dosey lot who run jessops.

For me working at Snappy Snaps, its not the printing squares or odd sizes (we can do this) its when someone comes in with a panoramic crop from, say, a studio shoot and say "can i have this printed 8x6"

"well no... it wont fit, see its a different shape"

"But cant you just make it fit"

"No."

My other pet hate is when people will not understand/accept that just because they have bought/aquired a print, they do not have the copyright to it and no i cannot copy it for you I don't care if its just for a present and noone will know and if someone else said they would do it, taking it fking over to them and let them fking do it!

Sorry that turned into a bit of a rant!

Edited by jimmy156 on Saturday 25th December 23:27