Lack of vibrancy in photos

Hi
I have a MX925 which while I am overalll very pleased with The Photos that iprint while of good quality seem to lack a bit of "punch/ vibrancy" . they just seem to lack something ? what am I doing wrong ? .
I use adobe Photoshop elements 6
I appreciate this is a vague question but i would appreciate sme general advice on setting for the printer
I usually set it to
Glossy photo. High quality ,
Photoshop manage colours ,
Printer profile I use one that I I had set for me ie an ICC profile adjusted to my ink Foto rite , paper 7day shop .com 270grm glossy .
Rendering st to Perceptual
What am i missing ?
Thanks in advance for any advice given
Mike

Hi Me again i should have added that i am using Windows & Home Premium I have also tried printing photos set to plain paper while using glossy the result being a lttle lighter but still lacking vibrancy / Punch for a better word
Mike

Similar Messages

Re lack of vibrancy ?/punch in photos

Hi all I have asked this question a while back but got no replies so am hoping for better luck this time .My printed photoslack vibrancy it is as if their is a VERY THIN veil in front of them I do stress this is slight but it seems to stop the photos having any punch/ vibrancy . My set up is as folowsCannon MX925.useing adobe elements 13 software.Windows 7 home premiumI am useing a refillable ink system supplied by "City ink express" and their foto-rite inks .Paper is & day shop .com glossy paper. I have had a ICC profile done useing the above inks and paper . Things I have already triedall sorts of different settings in photoshop elements 13 and also elements 6Differnt papers ie Epson , HP, Tdk etc etcthe only slight improvement I can get is with the printer set to matt paper when actually useing Gloss. I have also tried downloading test photos which while reasonable they still have a slight veil / lack of clarity /punch What am I missing ?What more can I try ?HELP PLEASE.Mike

Hi Me again i should have added that i am using Windows & Home Premium I have also tried printing photos set to plain paper while using glossy the result being a lttle lighter but still lacking vibrancy / Punch for a better word
Mike

Lack of Contrast in Photos with Color Proof ON

Hello, I never really worked with digital images inside Illustrator, so now that i have to prepare one for printing, I'm struggling with the following problem:
All colors in CMYK;
Document Color Mode - CMYK;
and here we see that Color Proof results in significant lack of contrast:
I tried to convert the photo between CMYK and RGB - results are the same.
The strangest thing is that Color Proof in Photoshop (with same profiles) doesn't show this problem; only Illustrator does.
I also tried to convert the whole work into RGB, and even though Color Proof worked fine, printed image was still dusky.
What am i doing wrong?
Please advice.
Thanks,
Maximus

What am i doing wrong?
Basically, harboring unrealistic expectations when looking at a glowing RGB additive monitor or composite desktop printer to "proof" subtractive process color. Approximation is all you are going to get. It's pretty dang good approximation these days, but true accuracy is a pipedream. Monitors glow. Ink on paper doesn't. Monitors don't have every tiny dot of color surrounded by color diluting white. Ink-on-paper does.
And your eyes constantly adjust when viewing either. So even if you achieve colorimetric accuracy, that doesn't mean you achieve pleasing color. What you're looking for is an entirely different thing.
...huge lack of contrast...
But increase in detail. Look at your two images in post number 4. Look closely. Note the additional detail in the shadow regions (the gym equipment) of the version on the right. That difference is what the "preview" is effectively trying to simulate.
As a matter of course, any colorimetric conversion from RGB to CMYK is going to tend to "dull" (desaturate) and "flatten" (lower contrast). The preview is actually doing a decent job of simulating that. That's what it's supposed to do. (But it's still just an approximation, because you're still converting it back to RGB in order to display it on your monitor.)
Don't think of the preivew as a look at the unavoidable end of how "accurately" the process is going to retain the "good color" of your image. Think of it as a depiction of how the limitations of the process will affect your image as it currently is; think of it as an invaluable clue of what you might need to do to the image toward the goal of achieving a better final reproduction.
I do realize that in perfect world i could simply ask printing office for their printer's profile and make adjustments based on that profile...
And all you would accomplish by that is a measure of device calibration, not of what your image needs, which is color correction.
All the painstaking "color management" (calibration), and tedious conversion profiles, etc., etc. in the world don't know didly about what's important in any given image.
You think the left image in post 4 is "better" because the contrast is greater in the model. But calibration software thinks that image is "worse" because it is less "accurate" in that it contains fewer discrete colors than the process can deliver overall.
(By the way, your mentioning of switching between color modes is a bit unnerving. I hope you're not switching between RGB and CMYK repeatedly in willy-nilly, back-and-forth fashion. If you are, you are irreparably degrading your color as you go.)
Everything in preparing images for CMYK offset repro is a balancing act. One balancing act is that which exists between contrast and detail. Gains in one require sacrifices in the other. Calibration software can't do that for you. It's a value judgement call; and it's different for every image.
So you learn to put the contrast where you need it within the image. You do this by adjusting curves in your raster imaging program. That, in a nutshell, is what your image needs in order for the colorimetric conversion to CMYK to retain some of the contrast and saturation you want to retain in the right half of the image.
....but local companies are far from being perfect and most of the time they don't even know how their printers work...anyway, it's a really sad story.
Just as sad as the even more common story of prima donna designers who want to sweat blood over their erudite artistic sensitivity to ill-defined "good color" and blame printers for failing to maintain it through hair-splitting colorimetric "accuracy," because they think it beneath them (or too painful) to roll up their sleeves and buckle down to learning practical color repro theory. (Not beating you up here; we've all been guilty of this at some point.)
...it became principle for me to understand why this is happening.
Yes. If you expect to produce truly "good" color, it's up to you to understand the principles and processes involved (and their limitations) in order to intelligently tweak those limitations to advantage. It doesn't happen overnight. It's not something you achieve in one image and thereafter have a formulaic solution for every image thereafter. It cones with study, continual practice, and ongoing experience. It's not a one-size-fits-all something which someone can step you through with a bunch of specific settings in an online forum thread.
As a good start: Acquire a copy of Professional Photoshop by Dan Margulis. Any edition will do. (There were five or six--get as many as you can find.) Read it. Read it again. And again. Then keep it as an onshelf reference. And use the principles of color correction (as opposed to mere color calibration) it teaches in every image you prepare for offset printing. You'll get better at it as you go, but you'll never achieve a single set of adjustments or settings that work for every image.
JET

Lack of settings for photo slideshows

I've got to the stage of extreme frustration now trying to change the way that Front Row displays photos from iPhoto events (basically any photos in iPhoto).
When I use the remote to envoke Front Row, select photos and select an event, Front row uses Ken Burns and a cube transition set to about 1 second delay. Frankly the whole experience makes me a little sea sick. I've looked at the settings accessed by the remote but there's nothing there. I've applied some slideshow settings to the event and played it in iPhoto and it works fine...it just doesn't uses these settings when the event is played in Front Row.
However, if I set up an actual slideshow in iPhoto the settings are carried over to Front Row.
This is extremely frustrating as it means that I can't simply trawl through my photo collection at random, sans Ken Burns, cube settings and a general feeling of nausea . I have to set up a bespoke slideshow each time I want to view photos in Front Row. Clearly the settings can be carried over, it just seems that Apple haven't got around to providing access to custom settings for Events....or am I missing something.
Any thoughts?
Regards Mr B

I'm running iLife '09 and I have noticed that with photos/Events...
However, if I create an Album, I can assign custom music, themes or no theme like Ken Burns, the duration of the photo and several other settings.
Try creating an album with all the settings you prefer and then open up Front Row.
Mine works just fine for albums.

Frantic-Photo's not in Iphoto but in iphoto library folder

Yes, i did something very stupid, but i went into my iphoto folder through my hardrive, and to "clean up" that folder, i dumped all the stray files into a simgle folder. Then i checked iphoto and there was nothing there. Nearly passing out, i went back to the iphoto files through my hardrive and all the files were still there, so i tried to dump them all back into the intial iphoto library folder. I checked iphoto again, and still there was nothing there. So i am stuck, i havn't lost my photo's but i can't see them in photo. If there is a way to get them back, and maybe maintain my filing system in iphoto itself that would be great.
Thanks
R

Hi, I have a similar problem to Richard's.
Last night I unwrapped my brand new Lacie external drive and thought, how difficult could it be? I installed it and then immediately backed up my iphoto and imusic libraries and other documents. Then I set about getting rid of files on my Powerbook, which was running out of room.
After first carefully checking ot make sure that iphoto could read the photos on the Lacie drive, I 'noticed' that in my Finder window, I had a pictures file in the sidebar, as well as in my user directory. It seemed to be the exact same file, with the exact same amount of data. I thought it was a duplicate! So I trashed -- not only that, I 'secure' trashed -- the extra pictures file in my user directory, along with other files. I had about 18,000 files chugging through the trash. After about 1,000 files were gone I got cold feet and stopped the trash operation. That's when I retried iphoto, only this time there were no pictures in the library. I tried to get iphoto to point to the backup files on the Lacie, and it would still not show any photos.
The good news is, I know the photos are there. I can see individual files on the Lacie. The bad news is, I think i've really screwed up my finder window on my Powerbook-- the pictures file no longer exists. I made it again, and put it in my user directory, but these new file folders are lacking the cute little photo icon (ditto for itunes, but i figure i'll solve the iphoto problem first).
So: now I have a new pictures file in my user directory on my powerbook; I have copied all the items from the Lacie backup picture file into the picture file on my powerbook. And iphoto still can't see the photos. A few times iphoto has asked me to choose the library -- i've tried pointing to the backup library on the Lacie, but it won't read it -- says there is some sort of problem. (I am thinking maybe it is because I included an apostrophe in the Lacie Drive's name? I'm afraid to rename the Lacie Drive because I don't know how to do it without wiping the backup.)
In the meantime I'm trying to import photos from the old library. It is chugging away. 9,000 photos total. Problem is, my iphoto library was heavily edited. (I had deleted bad shots and had only about 5k shots). Will I now have to re-delete bad shots, re-crop, and add in all new comments? That would kill me.
Thanks for any help.

ICloud Photo Library Beta

Quick question about iCloud Photo Library Beta - seems great to have everything synced but what happens if eg my kid (or someone malicious) gets hold of my iPhone and starts deleting photographs there so that they're also deleted on all other devices? I get that they're kept for 30 days but what if I don't realize for over 30 days that they're gone - is there any way to recover them after that time? I'd be especially worried once I put my desktop into that system too, exposing even photos I've edited there. Or what am I missing? Thanks

Very Good Point, Best synchronisation systems have a document version history FOREVER say wuala for example, you can delete what you want in your history whenever you want and you have a cursor to get back in time, buts its very expensive and lacks automatic uploading for photos and videos. Nothing yet perfect.
With amateur systems like all cheap clouds, you need to have local or cloud backup like time machine, carbon copy or likes, just in case...
Second weakness point is that you definitly does not want you full Library on all your computers and devices, and nothing seems to be planned to solve this problem.

Just bought a 8500a, when printing a photo on HP Premium Plus paper, the prints come out not glossy

Just bought a 8500a, when printing a photo on HP Premium Plus paper, the prints come out flat,not glossy.
On my old HPL7680 a photo w/same paper come out glossy & shiny. This maybe what should be expected w/8500A and is not a problem w/the printer. The 8500A is set to advanced photo paper, best quality. I worked w/HP tech support and was told to send back to the Amazon where I bought it for replacement. But if this is not really a defective printer than it doesn't make sense to send it back. I also purchased a HP C510 Photosmart and the quality on photos is excellent, so I have solved my photo printing problems per say. Has anyone else noticed lack luster, non shiny photos coming from the 8500A?
My thought process was that if the L7680 printed a shiny, glossy photo, then the 8500A should too. But this may not be what I should expect...
IS MY 8500A DEFECTIVE OR JUST WHAT SHOULD BE EXPECTED FROM AN OFFICEJET PRINTER AS OPPOSED TO A PHOTOSMART PRINTER.
thx Jim

The Officejet 8500 uses pigmented inks which have different characteristics than dye based inks. HP Premium Plus paper is not really very suitable with pigmented inks, a better choice would be HP Advanced Photo paper.
Bob Headrick, HP Expert
I am not an employee of HP, I am a volunteer posting here on my own time.
If your problem is solved please click the "Accept as Solution" button ------------V
If my answer was helpful please click the "Thumbs Up" to say "Thank You"--V

Exported slideshows are faded

using LR5 Win7/64
when i export the pictures alone, they are fine, but when exported in a slideshow they look dull and faded. The black appears about 70% gray (just guessing) and the colors lack any vibrance. Repeat: i have no trouble with the pictures when i export them individually. The preview looks beautiful: black black and snappy colors.
i am not seeing any options on export except as pdf or video, and i've tried changing the resolution to the highest to no avail.
it's embarrassing, because i gave them as gifts to my neighbor's family. They were shots of their mother's beautiful flower-garden on the day she passed. So i'm really needing help!

i can't, because slideshows are humungous, but i can link you to it on vimeo, if that's ok?
i am curious as to whether my monitor needs calibrating. It's so hard to know. But on the slideshow preview and individual published photos, the colors are bright and the blacks are black. In the slideshow they are faded. It may be subtle if you don't have the black blacks to compare to. Which argues against the problem being my monitor. Maybe it's in LR conversion to mp4?
thank you so much!
here's the link: https://vimeo.com/70149591

How good are the Yoda 10 and 8 as a budget priced tablet?

I have a Nexus 7 which I love It has such a sharp screen and is very fast
But want something bigger
Don't know a thing about the Yogas
Are they any good? Would use for videos emailing photos etc
Got to have a clear screen a sd card slot and maybe the otg cable facility to connect to memory stick or tv
Thanks
If you have one but wouldn't recommend is thre another better?
Only want to spend £200

I'm quite impressed with my Yoga 10 - it's stable, pretty quick and does what I need it to.
I'd say for your needs though, there'd be one thing holding it back - the screen. In short, it's pretty lacklustre.
The resolution isn't all that high given what some flagship devices have; the colours appear a little washed out (to my eyes at least) and there is a noticeable yellow tint to the overall display.
I negate the yellow tint with an app called Screen Adjuster (basically allows you to specify a colour filter to put 'over' the screen), and it doesn't really cause me any problems and I don't tend to notice it. If you're going to be watching a lot of video however then finding the right 'balance' for the colour filter could annoy you, and the lack of vibrancy will certainly take something away from the whole experience.
Other than that, it's a more than capable device IMO. The battery life is fairly marathon-esque - I can usually go about 2 or 3 days with my usage (heavy web use, some image editing, downloading) until I need to charge.
People give MediaTek (the guys who make the processor) a lot of grief, but I personally find this MediaTek chip to be a lot more stable than the Tegra 3 in my old Transformer Prime.
The much-talked about multi-mode stuff? Mostly just marketing, but the kickstand at the back does come in handy if you're typing a long email or web post, or if you want to use the tablet as a kind of radio (I have Spotify on mine, I stand it up on my desk when I'm working and I can glance over at it to see what's playing etc).
So in summary, I think the display may be the dealbreaker for you. My suggestion would be to buy one from PC World/Currys etc, basically somewhere that'll give you a no-fuss return policy and try it out for a week. If you don't like it, you generally get either a 14 day or 28 day return period.
Either that or up your budget and grab a Nexus 10.

Why do images appear different in Photoshop after being processed in Adobe Camera Raw?

I would assume that the screen image would appear the same in each application.

Probably you are using different color profiles in the two applications, eg: you are using Adobe RGB (1998) in photoshop and sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in Camera Raw, this causes differences in color and in some cases large differences, such as lack of vibrance and saturation.
check the profiles you are using:
Camera Raw:
just check the blue text under the image, to change it just left clik with the mouse, a windows will apear.
Photoshop:
In Photoshop just press Alt+Shift+K or follow de above image.
Sorry, but, my Photoshop language is Portuguese.

Aperture 2.0 - first impressions are very good!!

I downloaded and installed the trial. My hobby is underwater photography so I need an application that provides flexibility with expose. I have imported photos and I am very impressed with how they have turned out. Aperture 2.0 is the best I have used to this point and that includes LightRoom, Photoshop Elements, Bibble, and several others.
Several improvements I have noticed in the first hour:
1)much faster in all aspects. Faster generating previews, updates moving around in the application. I didn't get the spinning beach ball at all.
2) Repair and Clone - this is much better than the patch. This is something useful in underwater photography as it helps to eliminate minimal backscatter.
3)Recovery
4)Definition
5)Vibrancy
6)Photos of RAW files look very clean
There are other items as well, but I will leave it at this.

Yep, so far so good.
I really liked the adjustments being on the right, but I'm sure I'll get used to it on the left.
The added screen-space is handy when not in FS mode.
RAW D70 files look cleaner and less noisier.
Repair/Clone tool is pretty sweet!
Feels pretty snappy when adjusting. Crop/Straighten work well together and don't lag.
Highlights/Shadows still slows things down if checked, but not a big deal for me, as I do things in a certain order.
Anyway, lookin' good. Cheers.

Invoice staying in SBWP after being processed.

Hi SAP Gurus,
Can you help provide me with a transaction code to help delete an invoice that has been processed in sbwp BUT STILL SHOWING?
usually when an invoice is processed in SBWP it doesnt suppose to stay.
Thanks
B

Probably you are using different color profiles in the two applications, eg: you are using Adobe RGB (1998) in photoshop and sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in Camera Raw, this causes differences in color and in some cases large differences, such as lack of vibrance and saturation.
check the profiles you are using:
Camera Raw:
just check the blue text under the image, to change it just left clik with the mouse, a windows will apear.
Photoshop:
In Photoshop just press Alt+Shift+K or follow de above image.
Sorry, but, my Photoshop language is Portuguese.

Huge lack of functionality - Please write about what is lacking in Photos.

Is it just me or are we missing functionality in Photos?
Photos cannot be used professionally as it is currently - As I see it, the program is only 80% finished
Please write about what is lacking in Photos.
1)
Shared Albums, sort order.
Optional sort order of "Shared Albums". It should be possible to select for example alphabetical sorting - Now is sort order creation time and this is useless.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
2)
All Photos, sort order.
Optional sorting order of the All Photos. It must be possible to choose alphabetical sorting - Now it's random and this is useless.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
3)
Shared Smart Album
Ability to create a Smart Album in Shared Album.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
4)
Make an Album Shared
It should be possible to select an album and do the Shared.
(This applies to OSX)
5)
Batch Rename (file rename)
Ability to perform Batch Rename + serial number.
(This applies to OSX)
6)
Geo tag
Edit Geo tags on one or more images simultaneously - this is needed when importing images from a SLR camera without GPS.
(This applies to OSX)
7)
Change Title
Ability to edit the title of many images simultaneously.
(This applies to OSX)
8)
Edit metadata
Ability to edit all metadata of many images simultaneously.
(This applies to OSX)
9)
Edit - Crop
"Crop" must remember selected aspects. It must be possible to choose a default Aspect.
(This applies to OSX)
10)
Sync, Faces
Sync Faces to other devices – another MAC, IPhone or IPad.
(This applies to OSX an IOS)

Lars Coling wrote:
Is it just me or are we missing functionality in Photos?
Photos cannot be used professionally as it is currently - As I see it, the program is only 80% finished
Please write about what is lacking in Photos.
1)
Shared Albums, sort order.
Optional sort order of "Shared Albums". It should be possible to select for example alphabetical sorting - Now is sort order creation time and this is useless.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
2)
All Photos, sort order.
Optional sorting order of the All Photos. It must be possible to choose alphabetical sorting - Now it's random and this is useless.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
3)
Shared Smart Album
Ability to create a Smart Album in Shared Album.
(This applies to OSX and IOS)
4)
Make an Album Shared
It should be possible to select an album and do the Shared.
(This applies to OSX)
5)
Batch Rename (file rename)
Ability to perform Batch Rename + serial number.
(This applies to OSX)
6)
Geo tag
Edit Geo tags on one or more images simultaneously - this is needed when importing images from a SLR camera without GPS.
(This applies to OSX)
7)
Change Title
Ability to edit the title of many images simultaneously.
(This applies to OSX)
8)
Edit metadata
Ability to edit all metadata of many images simultaneously.
(This applies to OSX)
9)
Edit - Crop
"Crop" must remember selected aspects. It must be possible to choose a default Aspect.
(This applies to OSX)
10)
Sync, Faces
Sync Faces to other devices – another MAC, IPhone or IPad.
(This applies to OSX an IOS)
Send feedback here:
https://www.apple.com/feedback/photos.html
This link wasn't available a few days ago.

Imported photos from iPhone lack all edits.

My imported Photos from my iPhone6+ lack all the edits I did in Snapseed, even when I created a copy of the image instead of modifying the original.

Your problem with the native app was a known limitation of iPhoto.
I assumed it was going to be fixed with this app, but I guess I was wrong.
Until this gets fixed I'm going to have to find an alternative means of importing photos.
Maybe they are trying to force everyone to use the iCloud stream, but I don't want to pay money to increase my storage limit to hold all my photos.

Why doesn't Lightroom organise videos/photos lacking "date taken" by "date modified" instead of "date created"?

This still seems to be a problem with Lightroom 5. This post is one of the top results after trying to Google this problem, and it's for LR3. I can't understand why something so fundamental to video (and some photo) organisation has been overlooked for so long.
I've been trying to import and organise all my old photos and videos by date with LR5. They've been backed up and copied many times over the years, most recently to an external drive last week. So every file has a "date created" of last week. But "date modified" remains the original recorded date.
This doesn't matter for photos with a proper EXIF "date taken" - but LR5 looks at the "date created" for videos, making it completely useless for organising them into date-based folders. It puts videos I recorded in 2010 (as per "date modified") into a 2014-12 folder. Why.
It's not just a video problem - some photos I took with devices that didn't record EXIF "date taken" are also filed into folders from this month, even though the "date modified" on them is correct as being from 5 years ago.
How can I rely on LR5 for importing and date-based organisation when it relies on files (lacking "date taken") having never been copied or backed up?

Hello,
I use exiftool to modify the Creation and Modification time of the files. After that I use LR "Ajust time" feature to set the time of the movies in LR to the file creation time (last point). This works fine for me.
For MOV (Quicktime):
exiftool "-FileModifyDate<TrackCreateDate" "-FileCreateDate<TrackCreateDate"
For AVI:
exiftool "-FileModifyDate<DateTimeOriginal" "-FileCreateDate<DateTimeOriginal" *.avi
Depnding on your camera (and container format mov, avi) you may also ajust the time zone, e.g.
exiftool -FileModifyDate+=1 -FileCreateDate+=1 -if "$CameraModelName =~ /EOS 600D/i" *.mov
Which time in the container (MOV, AVI) you use as source, depends on your workflow. I edit my mov files before import. Therfore "CreateDate" is the time when I edited the file. Quicktime and (some) avi file contain a time when the containing stream was created. I use this vaule as source.
exiftool <filename> gives you detailed information about all available times.

Lack of vibrancy in photos

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for