A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Kiosk photos.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 23rd 18, 10:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Peter Jason
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 288
Default Kiosk photos.

Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?

  #2  
Old December 23rd 18, 11:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Kiosk photos.

In article , Peter Jason
wrote:

Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.


no surprise there. it's a kiosk, not a professional photo lab.

Are these just ink-jet prints


probably, but it could be dyesub.

& is it possible to
get a better quality?


probably. it depends why they are mediocre. if it's the printer, then
yes. if it's the photo, then no.
  #3  
Old December 24th 18, 12:21 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Kiosk photos.

On 12/23/2018 4:54 PM, Peter Jason wrote:
Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?


Depends on the kiosk. I have success with Costco, provided I use their
ICC profile.
Try using the correct ICC profile, or try using sRGB.

Also a lot of places do not clean the printers, or use cheap ink.


--
PeterN
  #4  
Old December 24th 18, 03:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ken Hart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 569
Default Kiosk photos.

On 12/23/18 4:54 PM, Peter Jason wrote:
Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?


It's possible that they are actual "wet" photos- depends on the
equipment used.

It may be possible to get better quality. First, you need to define what
you mean by "mediocre". If the business is regularly checking their
equipment and running test prints, then it's a matter of adjusting your
images to get the best results from their equipment.

If your prints from the kiosk are consistently too light or too dark, or
lean toward a particular color, then you need to compensate. Auto-adjust
can be fooled if the image has a preponderance of a particular color, or
is very light or very dark.

Are you certain that your own workflow is correct? Is your monitor
giving you exactly what the camera captures? Try photographing an 18%
gray card, then comparing the image on screen to the actual card for
starters.

I could explain how I calibrate my workflow, but since it involves film
and a darkroom, it won't apply to you. Except for the gray card.

--
Ken Hart

  #5  
Old December 24th 18, 04:10 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Kiosk photos.

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?


It's possible that they are actual "wet" photos- depends on the
equipment used.


it's not a 'wet photo'. kiosks are inkjet prints, possibly dye sub but
that's unlikely. even photo labs who print from film no longer use wet
photos for all sorts of reasons, including that digital is faster, less
expensive, offers a wider range of adjustments and produces higher
quality results.

It may be possible to get better quality. First, you need to define what
you mean by "mediocre". If the business is regularly checking their
equipment and running test prints, then it's a matter of adjusting your
images to get the best results from their equipment.


except that's a moving target.

If your prints from the kiosk are consistently too light or too dark, or
lean toward a particular color, then you need to compensate. Auto-adjust
can be fooled if the image has a preponderance of a particular color, or
is very light or very dark.


he said he disabled auto-adjust.

Are you certain that your own workflow is correct? Is your monitor
giving you exactly what the camera captures? Try photographing an 18%
gray card, then comparing the image on screen to the actual card for
starters.


that won't do anything, other than waste money.

the solution is a colour calibrated workflow, however, it will need the
profile for the kiosk, which is unlikely to be available.

another problem is the kiosk is unlikely to be maintained very well (or
at all) so even that won't necessarily solve the problem.

the best solution is to not use a kiosk at all, but rather an actual
lab who can provide the necessary information (i.e., profiles and/or
specific settings), or better yet, adjust to the customer's desires,
what a pro lab actually is for.

I could explain how I calibrate my workflow, but since it involves film
and a darkroom, it won't apply to you. Except for the gray card.


not even the grey card applies.
  #6  
Old December 24th 18, 05:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Carlos E.R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 278
Default Kiosk photos.

On 23/12/2018 22.54, Peter Jason wrote:
Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.


Mediocre in which sense? Grainy?

What density have your jpegs, or how may pixels they have and how many
centimetres have the print?

--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #7  
Old December 24th 18, 06:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ken Hart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 569
Default Kiosk photos.

On 12/24/18 10:10 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?


It's possible that they are actual "wet" photos- depends on the
equipment used.


it's not a 'wet photo'. kiosks are inkjet prints, possibly dye sub but
that's unlikely. even photo labs who print from film no longer use wet
photos for all sorts of reasons, including that digital is faster, less
expensive, offers a wider range of adjustments and produces higher
quality results.


By the term "wet photo" in this instance, I am referencing a photograph
printed by a light-jet type printer, which exposes light-sensitive
photograph paper, which is then processed through developer and
bleach-fix (and maybe stabilizer if it is washless).

Is "kiosk" a brand name for a particular photo printing company? Or if
it is a generic term (as I took it to be), then there are many "kiosks",
some of which use "wet" system processing.

There are one-hour type photo processing machines that scan film
negatives while they are still wet. At this point in the workflow, the
image is made digital. The image can be adjusted (with a wide range of
adjustments that are available for any digital image), and printed onto
light-sensitive photo paper. If a lab is developing film, they likely
have the capability to run wet printing. C-41 and RA-4 chemistry does
not have unique problems.


It may be possible to get better quality. First, you need to define what
you mean by "mediocre". If the business is regularly checking their
equipment and running test prints, then it's a matter of adjusting your
images to get the best results from their equipment.


except that's a moving target.


Why is it a moving target? If a photolab maintains their chemistry
within limits, and prints "Shirley" (a standardized color test negative)
to establish their baseline exposure on a regular basis, the "target" is
for practical purposes, stationary. I don't have a problem maintaining
color balance in my darkroom. In fact, it's fairly easy.

If your prints from the kiosk are consistently too light or too dark, or
lean toward a particular color, then you need to compensate. Auto-adjust
can be fooled if the image has a preponderance of a particular color, or
is very light or very dark.


he said he disabled auto-adjust.


I saw that. I mentioned auto-adjust to confirm that it may have been a
good idea to disable.

Are you certain that your own workflow is correct? Is your monitor
giving you exactly what the camera captures? Try photographing an 18%
gray card, then comparing the image on screen to the actual card for
starters.


that won't do anything, other than waste money.


But digital is less expensive, according to you. (I dispute the cost
issue.) The only expense in photographing a gray card and comparing it
to the screen image is the cost of a gray card. There are further
techniques, but this is just "for starters".

the solution is a colour calibrated workflow, however, it will need the
profile for the kiosk, which is unlikely to be available.


Or the profile might be readily available. Did you ask? Unless "kiosk"
is a brand name for a company whose policy is to not release their
profile(s).

another problem is the kiosk is unlikely to be maintained very well (or
at all) so even that won't necessarily solve the problem.


You know that for a fact? Some businesses are run quite well. It's a
good method for retaining customers.

the best solution is to not use a kiosk at all, but rather an actual
lab who can provide the necessary information (i.e., profiles and/or
specific settings), or better yet, adjust to the customer's desires,
what a pro lab actually is for.
I could explain how I calibrate my workflow, but since it involves film
and a darkroom, it won't apply to you. Except for the gray card.


not even the grey card applies.


A gray card is a starting point. It can show density and color balance
problems. (Contrast issues would usually need a step wedge.) It is a
starting point, hence my "for starters".

It might be a good idea for you to avoid speaking in absolutes. The real
world is not binary.



--
Ken Hart

  #8  
Old December 24th 18, 08:02 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Kiosk photos.

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

Before going to a photo kiosk I PShop all RAW
images, and crop to a 2:3 ratio. I save to jpeg.

The quality of the Kiosk prints are mediocre even
if I turn off the kiosk's offer to "sharpen" &
"auto-adjust" the images.

Are these just ink-jet prints & is it possible to
get a better quality?

It's possible that they are actual "wet" photos- depends on the
equipment used.


it's not a 'wet photo'. kiosks are inkjet prints, possibly dye sub but
that's unlikely. even photo labs who print from film no longer use wet
photos for all sorts of reasons, including that digital is faster, less
expensive, offers a wider range of adjustments and produces higher
quality results.


By the term "wet photo" in this instance, I am referencing a photograph
printed by a light-jet type printer, which exposes light-sensitive
photograph paper, which is then processed through developer and
bleach-fix (and maybe stabilizer if it is washless).


i know quite well what a wet photo is.

Is "kiosk" a brand name for a particular photo printing company? Or if
it is a generic term (as I took it to be),


generic term, commonly seen in drugstores such as walgreens, cvs, etc.
as well as walmart, costco, etc.

examples-
on the right, w/the gla
https://s3-media2.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/B02DOiO2WYy9Tkc5w7Ggew/o.jpg

older version:
https://media.gettyimages.com/photos...amily-photos-a
t-the-walgreens-photo-kiosk-monday-picture-id94862882

for a small photo lab or on-site use:
https://www.fujifilmusa.com/products...al_lab_solutio
ns/frontier_s_dx100/index.html

then there are many "kiosks",
some of which use "wet" system processing.


not the ones found in drugstores or many camera stores, for that matter.

There are one-hour type photo processing machines that scan film
negatives while they are still wet. At this point in the workflow, the
image is made digital. The image can be adjusted (with a wide range of
adjustments that are available for any digital image), and printed onto
light-sensitive photo paper. If a lab is developing film, they likely
have the capability to run wet printing. C-41 and RA-4 chemistry does
not have unique problems.


not relevant to digital.

It may be possible to get better quality. First, you need to define what
you mean by "mediocre". If the business is regularly checking their
equipment and running test prints, then it's a matter of adjusting your
images to get the best results from their equipment.


except that's a moving target.


Why is it a moving target? If a photolab maintains their chemistry
within limits, and prints "Shirley" (a standardized color test negative)
to establish their baseline exposure on a regular basis, the "target" is
for practical purposes, stationary. I don't have a problem maintaining
color balance in my darkroom. In fact, it's fairly easy.


you're assuming that a kiosk in a drugstore would be regularly tested
and calibrated.

that is not a good assumption. a rather bad one, in fact.

there's a reasonable chance it doesn't even work at all.

If your prints from the kiosk are consistently too light or too dark, or
lean toward a particular color, then you need to compensate. Auto-adjust
can be fooled if the image has a preponderance of a particular color, or
is very light or very dark.


he said he disabled auto-adjust.


I saw that. I mentioned auto-adjust to confirm that it may have been a
good idea to disable.


generally yes, particularly if one is doing their own adjustments.

however, auto-adjust often works quite well, so sometimes it's best to
just let technology do its thing.

Are you certain that your own workflow is correct? Is your monitor
giving you exactly what the camera captures? Try photographing an 18%
gray card, then comparing the image on screen to the actual card for
starters.


that won't do anything, other than waste money.


But digital is less expensive, according to you. (I dispute the cost
issue.) The only expense in photographing a gray card and comparing it
to the screen image is the cost of a gray card. There are further
techniques, but this is just "for starters".


taking a photo of a grey card and then printing it to hold next to the
screen does absolutely nothing for calibrating a digital workflow, thus
it's a complete waste of money.

printer calibration is done by printing a test chart with numerous
colour patches, which is then scanned and analyzed to generate a
printer profile. that can be done by the user (with the necessary
equipment) or sent to a service company who will then send back a
profile.

https://www.printocare.com/dashboard...-characterizat
ion-printer-with-iphoto.jpg

screen calibration is done with a puck and associated software that
shows various colours, measures the results and generates a profile.

https://www.lumenera.com/media/wysiwyg/images/assets/calibration.gif

the solution is a colour calibrated workflow, however, it will need the
profile for the kiosk, which is unlikely to be available.


Or the profile might be readily available. Did you ask? Unless "kiosk"
is a brand name for a company whose policy is to not release their
profile(s).


i'm not the one in search of profiles.

the point is that kiosks are mass market devices deployed in
drugstores, not photo labs, and it's unlikely that anyone at a
drugstore would know what that even means.

another problem is the kiosk is unlikely to be maintained very well (or
at all) so even that won't necessarily solve the problem.


You know that for a fact? Some businesses are run quite well. It's a
good method for retaining customers.


the chances that the kiosk in a drugstore is maintained is not very
high, other than replacing paper or ink when it runs out.

the best solution is to not use a kiosk at all, but rather an actual
lab who can provide the necessary information (i.e., profiles and/or
specific settings), or better yet, adjust to the customer's desires,
what a pro lab actually is for.
I could explain how I calibrate my workflow, but since it involves film
and a darkroom, it won't apply to you. Except for the gray card.


not even the grey card applies.


A gray card is a starting point. It can show density and color balance
problems. (Contrast issues would usually need a step wedge.) It is a
starting point, hence my "for starters".


it is of no use in a colour managed workflow.

It might be a good idea for you to avoid speaking in absolutes. The real
world is not binary.


nobody said it was.

it would be a good idea for you to try to learn about colour management
and digital workflows in general before making irrelevant suggestions.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak kiosk - Picture CD resolution ps56k Digital Photography 1 January 25th 09 12:36 AM
FA: Kodak Picturemaker Gen 2 8x10 Photo Kiosk Steven Endres Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 0 December 31st 07 10:04 PM
Kodak photo printing kiosk Tony Belding Digital Photography 8 January 6th 07 07:24 AM
Help! Photoshop jpg cropping in Kodak Kiosk alijsyed Digital Photography 6 August 17th 06 10:30 PM
Kodak Kiosk and Compact Flash Ron Hunter Digital Photography 19 September 15th 04 02:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.