digital processing question

[d56nut]

Hi,

After our trip to cozumel I went to walgreen's to have my digital pictures processed. I am really disappointed in the way they turned out. They don't look as good as they did on the camera and computer. Most of the pics are really blue/green and fake looking. Is there a better place to get the pics developed? I also went to ofoto and shutterfly to try their free deal so I'm hoping that the pics come to me with better quality. Any suggestions?

Michelle

 

[Gilligan]

I'm no expert at this as I rarely get prints made but here is what I have done on the few occassions I did get them. I used Costco so I doubt they were any better or worse than Walgreen's.
Keep in mind that what you see on your your monitor will not be the same on prints.
I prepare photos ahead of getting a print made.
Make all your adjustments in Photoshop or the like. Keep in mind you have to reduce the size of the original but increase the dpi at the same time. Do not keep it locked at 72dpi. I make the photos a little darker on my monitor as I already have experience with the prints being on the lighter side.
I pre-size the pics to what I want, such as 4X6 at 300 dpi. Remember, the digital pics are not compatible with standard print sizes unless you have that setting option on your camera before taking the pics. I never use that option anyway. Otherwise the store process will autocrop them.
I then save the finsihed pics in a TIFF format at 300 dpi. You can only do that if you have a high enough megapixel camera to start with. 3MP or more should easily handle that.
I then burn them on a CD ROM and take them in for prints.
Tiff makes a better print quality than JPEG. TIFF is a memory hog and is not a wise choice for a camera setting. But that doesn't matter when you are putting them on a CD ROM from Photoshop.
I hope this helps. I am sure someone else will post that uses the print option regularly.

 

[Gilligan]

d56nut I took the liberty of taking one of your Cozumel photos into Photoshop. I assume this one was taken w/o a strobe. I used the "mandrake process" on it. I then used "Auto Levels" followed by some more brightness and contrast adjustments.

I don't know what software program you use for adjusting your photos but you need something more than what came with the camera. Photoshop Elements and Paint Shop Pro are other choices as Photoshop is expensive.

 

[d56nut]

Oh wow! Thanks so much Gilligan!!! Now I'm happily fixing the majority of my pics. I took 3 that I fixed over to walgreen's just now and reprinted them....amazing difference! Thanks again!

Michelle

 

[ScubaK-Dawg]

Gilligan, I checked out the link you send to process photos. I too am also a beginning photographer. This is what I came up with for one of my pics (before and after). Any recommendations on what I can do better???

 

[MarkH]

I get alot of print film developed and printed and I often have the same problem. You may say: "what does this have to do with me? I shoot digital and he shoots print film?" Well most photofinishing places around the world use basically the same system to print both. Everywhere I've been in several countries scan my negatives, view the results on a computer screen and "fix" the colour balance, contrast, exposure, etc depending on the particular operator's preferences. I often get digital "artifacts" in my prints from negatives. I'm pretty sure they do the same to your digital files. I've had several prints made from digital files myself and every time they turn out wildly different. Now I always ask them to make "no corrections" every time I get prints done. It makes me want to switch to slide film. At least then the picture you take is the picture you get. The only problem is that I can get negatives developed in half an hour, while slide film takes 2 to 4 weeks around here.

 

[cdiver2]

I get alot of print film developed and printed and I often have the same problem. You may say: "what does this have to do with me? I shoot digital and he shoots print film?" Well most photofinishing places around the world use basically the same system to print both. Everywhere I've been in several countries scan my negatives, view the results on a computer screen and "fix" the colour balance, contrast, exposure, etc depending on the particular operator's preferences. I often get digital "artifacts" in my prints from negatives. I'm pretty sure they do the same to your digital files. I've had several prints made from digital files myself and every time they turn out wildly different. Now I always ask them to make "no corrections" every time I get prints done. It makes me want to switch to slide film. At least then the picture you take is the picture you get. The only problem is that I can get negatives developed in half an hour, while slide film takes 2 to 4 weeks around here.

Go to a photo lab not the local drug store, they will usualy do it within one day.

 

[Gilligan]

ScubaK-Dawg I'm far from being an expert on Photoshop. It looks like you did a good job on your before-after photo. You may want to adjust the sharpness. In Photoshop 7.0 it is under Filter>Sharpen>Unsharp Mask.
You can also use the "Clone Stamp Tool" to get rid of the backscatter and/or particulate matter.