Snapfish skin tones
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Could be used in a Nikon ad...except for the Camera
Next: Poor Sony. Mini review versus full reviews for warmed over Canon and Nikon APS cameras
From: D.M. Procida on 15 Apr 2010 13:35 I've just had some photos back from Snapfish (in the UK), and I'm quite disappointed with the colour rendition. In most of the pictures - which were taken with three different cameras of different brands, over a period of several years - skin tones are really horrible. People look like they are made out of plastic, like shop dummies. Is this normal, or have I just been unlucky (or hypercritical)? Daniele
From: John McWilliams on 15 Apr 2010 18:35 D.M. Procida wrote: > I've just had some photos back from Snapfish (in the UK), and I'm quite > disappointed with the colour rendition. > > In most of the pictures - which were taken with three different cameras > of different brands, over a period of several years - skin tones are > really horrible. People look like they are made out of plastic, like > shop dummies. > > Is this normal, or have I just been unlucky (or hypercritical)? Doesn't sound normal. However, specifics are needed, as to camera and media type, and examples. If you post them on a web site and link to it here in response, we'll have a place to start. -- john mcwilliams
From: me on 15 Apr 2010 19:12 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:35:19 +0100, real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote: >I've just had some photos back from Snapfish (in the UK), and I'm quite >disappointed with the colour rendition. > >In most of the pictures - which were taken with three different cameras >of different brands, over a period of several years - skin tones are >really horrible. People look like they are made out of plastic, like >shop dummies. > >Is this normal, or have I just been unlucky (or hypercritical)? Did you specify that they NOT optimize the photos, ie not try to correct them?
From: Bruce on 15 Apr 2010 19:27 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:35:19 +0100, real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote: >I've just had some photos back from Snapfish (in the UK), and I'm quite >disappointed with the colour rendition. > >In most of the pictures - which were taken with three different cameras >of different brands, over a period of several years - skin tones are >really horrible. People look like they are made out of plastic, like >shop dummies. > >Is this normal, or have I just been unlucky (or hypercritical)? You need to obtain a printer profile from Snapfish UK and use it to calibrate your monitor. Once you have done that, the resulting prints from Snapfish will more accurately reproduce what you see on your monitor. If Snapfish UK doesn't offer that service, I would be surprised, but it might explain the problem. If they don't provide a profile, you should choose another print lab that does, such as Peak Imaging: http://www.peak-imaging.com/htmls/monitor_calibration.html Snapfish is cheap. You usually get what you pay for, but you usually don't get what you didn't pay for. If you want better results, use a better lab. But don't expect Snapfish prices.
From: Ray Fischer on 16 Apr 2010 00:54
D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: >I've just had some photos back from Snapfish (in the UK), and I'm quite >disappointed with the colour rendition. > >In most of the pictures - which were taken with three different cameras >of different brands, over a period of several years - skin tones are >really horrible. People look like they are made out of plastic, like >shop dummies. > >Is this normal, or have I just been unlucky (or hypercritical)? Dunno. Pretty much every lab screws up on occasion. And pretty much every reputable lab will try to make it right when they do screw up. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net |