Why are the photos i print much darker than the monitor image?

why are the photos i print much darker than the monitor image?

Please read this post then provide some details.  What printer model? What operating system? What program are you printing from?
Some programs such as Photoshop give the option to print to CMYK or sRGB color spaces.  Even though the printer uses CMYK inks the driver is expecting sRGB data.  If CMYK is selected the prints will be much too dark.
Another thing to check is the media type.  If you are printing on plain paper and have seelcted Photo paper the prints have too much ink.
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

Similar Messages

  • External projection much darker than the source

    I am using a mini displayport to vga adapter and the external image is much darker than the source running on my mbp. this is going into a mixer then out to a projector. I also have an old pre intel powerbook that is doing the same thing(into a mixer and out to a projector) with s-video , with no problems at all.
    this is a recent problem with the mbp,6 months ago it worked fine.
    could it be the new os? if so how do i get back to the one i need?

    I am having the same problem with my brand new MacBook Pro connecting to a video projector with a Mini-display to VGA connector. Many of the pictures are darker
    than they should be. In PowerPoint I had to go to those darker slides and lighten them up (brightness up and contrast down). Now they are tolerable, but they still look better on the Mac screen than the projected image. Have tried three different projectors and find the same result. Projected colors are quite a bit different also. Puzzeled in Pennsylvania

  • Images seem to print much darker than they appear on screen?

    I have been using iPhoto to create cards and then I later save them as .pdf files so I can take them to another mac connected to an Epson 1400 printer and print them. Prior to making the cards in iPhoto, I do basic levels and auto color adjustments in Photoshop. Some of the cards that I am printing seem to be so much darker than the way they appear on screen. I understand that there is a differene between what is presented on a display and the way something may print, but the difference is so drastic. Is this something to do with iPhoto?
    Thanks.

    rick.pearl
    Because every maker of computer, software and printer have a different definition of the various colors Apple and others got together to agree definitions that would work together. So if you assign a color space to an image - sRGB, say - then any software or hardware that respect the color space will be using the same meaning for 'green' or 'blue'.
    In iPhoto Preferences -> Advanced, check the box for Embed Color Sync Profile, and this will embed a profile on every pic you add from now on.
    As to the one's already in, Old Toad has kindly created an Automator action that will add an sRGB profile to pics already in iPhoto. You can downlaod it from here.
    http://homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSharing.woa/wa/default?user=toad.hall&tem platefn=FileSharing7.html&xmlfn=TKDocument.7.xml&sitefn=RootSite.xml&aff=consume r&cty=US&lang=en#
    Regards
    TD
    as to the points: most everything I do is pointless

  • Is the Mountain Lion so much better than the Snow Leopard that make it worth buying?

    Is the Mountain Lion so much better than the Snow Leopard that I'm currently using and worth the money to buy it?  Is it more or less confusing to operate?

    OS X 10.7-18.0+ will NOT run any current PPC based programs your running.
    http://roaringapps.com/apps:table
    If you have a MacPro like your signature says (the tower, not the laptop) then it's not going to have much of a performance loss as say the MacBook Pro's will.
    Older, less powerful Mac's have performance losses with the newer OS X Lions, it might be best to stick with 10.6.8 on a older machine until it drops, then spend the money on all new software on a newer machine instead.
    One guy was here today and had a 2007 Intel Core 2 Duo and it was struggling to run OS X Mountain Lion, Chrome and Photoshop.
    It just didn't have the hardware horsepower for all that bloatware.
    My advice if it's not a top end iMac or MacPro, then 2010 is the cut-off point, those 2010 machines and earlier are likely better off on 10.6.8 max.
    It all depends upon one's perception of performance really.

  • Print much darker than displayed photo

    recently upgraaded to latest Mac system. Using Canon Pixma Pro 9000 printer. When printing image, final print very much darker than displayed on screen!  Using LR 4

    Have a look at this video: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/getting-started-with-adobe-photoshop-lightroom-4/lightroom-4-pri nt-the-perfect-image/

  • Why is the sparse bundle so much smaller than the backed up computer...can I be confident all files are backed up?

    Hey gang,
    iphoto folder became big so I have moved it to an external drive. I made sure the external disk is not excluded from timemachine backup in tm preferences. Backup seemed to take forever (it actually said "preparing for backup" the whole time with a spinning progress bar) ie 24 hours and still the same pogress bar.
    i stopped the process as i had no confidence anything was actually happening
    When i open up time machine, an earlier version of my imac is there, but the external drive is kind of greyed and i cannot access it.
    When  I check the sparse bundle size, it is under 200 gb, when my imac is around 600 gb, 900 with the external drive.
    Why is the sparse bundle so small relative to the imac? are there hidden data files outside of the sparse bundle? when checking the preferences, it states total included is 921 gb...yet that is not reflected in the sparse bundle size.
    I want to be sure iphoto is actually backed up before deleting it from my imac.
    thanks anyone!

    marten berkman wrote:
    I am wondering whether the "processing" progress bar was due to the time capsule freeing up space for the additional data on the new external drive. When I cancelled it, available space on the tc incresed from 200 to 500 gb.
    Yes, quite possibly.  Especially on Leopard and Snow Leopard, that process on network backups is excruciatingly repetitive and slow.    It's improved greatly in Lion and later, but still isn't exactly quick.
    The backup complete, i checked the contents of the backed up version of the external drive, and the iphoto folder was the same size as original, so I have confidence that iphoto is backed up. Now I could delete the iphoto from the imac, freeing up tons of space.
    Yay! 
    Still curious why the imac sparsebundle is only 160gb, while my macbook pro sparsebundle is about 700 gb...as though they are inversely named from the computers they back up.
    Oh, I didn't realize you had two Macs backing-up to the TC.  Which one is the external HD connected to? 
    Unless you've specifically excluded things, after the initial backup, the sparse bundle should be nearly the size of the data it's backing-up (TM does exclude some things like system work files, most caches and logs, and trash, so the backups are a few GBs smaller).  As you do more backups, of course, it will grow.
    So please clarify how much data is on each drive, Mac, and sparse bundle.
    Also, the 2tb time capsule has 258 gb of 1.8 tb available....am I to suppose that there is hidden backup data not in the sparse bundles?
    Sparse bundles are odd critters.  They don't automatically shrink when things are deleted from them.  Instead, the vacated space is used for new files until it's full, then it begins to grow again.  Time Machine will "compact" them when necessary, to reclaim the empty space, but doesn't take the time to do it unless it's out of room.
    You can do that manually if you want, per the pink box in Time Machine - Frequently Asked Question #12. 
    Message was edited by: Pondini

  • Why are my photos using so much memory?

    I typically upload my photos from my iPhone 6 to iPhoto after a few months, then delete them all when prompted to do so on iPhoto. I then copy some photos I want to keep on my phone, and go on about my day. However, I noticed how much space photos are taking up on my phone: 2.2 gigs! I only have 99 photos and 1 video on my phone, so how is this possible and what can I do to free up space?

    I deleted all my photos and it still says my photos are taking up space with the Photo Library under the Photos & Camera tab.

  • Why is the print out darker than the colors on the screen?

    This is happening in both Photoshop and Illustrator.  My prints of my work come out darker and grayer than the bright colors on the monitor.  I am on a Mac OSX 10.6.8. 
    When I adjust the Color Settings from the Edit drop-down in both programs to "Monitor Color" that still doesn't help.  And a dialogue box tells me to fix the problem in Bridge.
    Can I fix this problem in Bridge or is this more smoke n' mirrors?
    Thanks!

    notverybright,
    You may have a quick look at Gamut here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut
    Color management - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    CMYK color model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model#Physical_principles_for_the_choice_of_red.2C_ green.2C_and_blue

  • Why is the saved JPG file much bigger than the original JPG file??

    I used Image Processor in Bridge CS5 to open a jpeg, apply sharpening action and save as  a jpeg.  The bit size, color space and pixel dimensions are identical. However, when I save at Quality 12 I get a Jpeg file that is nearly DOUBLE the size of the original jpeg  Only if I drop it to Quality 10 do I get a file that approximates, but doesn't equal, the original jpeg. 
    1) Isn't 12 the same as saying 100% and as such the file size should be the about the same?
    2) why would it increase so much?  Example about 6 mb to about 12mb???
    Does this sound right? I am sure I am doing the steps and setting the parameters correctly. The action simply applies unsharp mask:
    I can set the quality to 10 and get an approximate equivalent file size...but I want the higher quality of a 100%/12 setting.
    WHAT AM I MISSING???
    Thanks  - Kevin

    WHAT AM I MISSING???
    The simple fact that JPEG is always a fully re-compressing format. Your newly created files bear no relationship to the original ones - no binary data structures are retained; the compression algorithm is always applied fresh upon the fully decoded original image and if you use different settings, the result is different. Moreover, since the initial compression artifacts become "valid pixels" once decoded, the successive compression has no way of knowing that they actually are "bad pixels" and those fine disturbances agfain result in different compression patterns. That is, after alll, why consecutive saves to JPEG will always degrade quality even at the best settings...
    Mylenium

  • Why are tv programs so dear on itunes than the dvd???

    Hi all,
    For xmas i asked for a itunes voucher because i wanted to buy "the ricky gervis show2 so i could watch it on my iphone at work as i do sleepover's. I went onto itunes the download and it was £22.99 for the series!!! its only a £10 on dvd ???? why is it priced so high on itunes??? feel like ive wasted a present on a friggin itunes card now as im no way payin £10 more just to have it on my phone 

    You would have to ask the makers of the show.
    They decide what they charge.

  • Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

    I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
    The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
    It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
    Can you please help me figure out what to do?
    Alexa

    The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
    BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
    The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
    Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
    So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
    Thanks for your help!
    Alexa

  • Why are my photos now appearing in very low resolution?

    What happened to my sharp and clear photos? Why are my photos now very low resolution with a progress image appearing as a circle on the photo and filling in 1/4 of the circle.  Why are the photos very low resolution copies that look like crap? Where are the good sharp photos I took?

    Latest iOS on iPad Air in photos. It appears server was slow. Progress bar circle now filling in complete circle and resolution is good.  Why do I have to download my photos from iCloud i have plenty of memory space on my ipad ?  Same with movies and music I purchased.  I bought extra physical
    memory when I purchased my iPad so I could view my stuff regardless of whether I had a wifi connection...apparently not.

  • Lightroom displays files and exports files darker than the original or from Photoshop

    Hello all.
    I would first like to preface this by stating I am not technically minded, and I know nothing (or very little) of ICC profiles etc.
    Though assume someone will attempt to tell me to do something with them in a really technical way which I won't understand, please treat me like a 4 year child in this regard.
    I am using Lightroom 5.6 on a Mac running 10.9.4 I have CS6 Photoshop and have a Spyder 3pro calibration device and have linked all of the Adobe programs to the output of the calibration to "hopefully" ensure quality control.
    I recently have been scanning analogue film and importing this into Lightroom 5. I have noticed that the file imported always looks darker than the original.
    When I have exported from Lightroom them they look like crap.
    There are no import additional settings as they are all turned off. I did that when I installed LR.
    I have also noticed than whenever I imported a Raw file for some reason the original file would look great for a second then when clicked on would also change to something less appealing. But I digress.
    So in attempt to show what is happening. I have created some images to illustrate my problem.
    Also it does not matter if I turn the soft proofing on or off.
    Lightroom Softproof on
    Lightroom Softproof off
    Lightroom vs Photoshop Histogram - Very similar
    Left: File opened from Lightroom as the Original      Right: Original Photoshop File
    Left: File opened from an Export from Lightroom      Right: Original Photoshop File
    Any clues as this is very annoying and at the moment makes Lightroom 5 unusable.

    Can you put one of your scans somewhere, like www.dropbox.com, and post a public download/share link to it?   I'd like to try one of the scans on my computer, though, to see if it does the same thing.  You can crop an original down to something smaller that includes sky and trees like your screenshots show.
    I am guessing there is a gamma problem or a profile problem somewhere.  What Profile do the scans have embedded in them from the scanner?  You can turn on the three Ask checkboxes in your color-settings and see what it says when you open an original in Photoshop.
    My guess is that LR is using a default profile that doesn't match what Photoshop is using, but perhaps there is a gamma issue, too.
    Have you tried opening one of the originals in the Camera Raw plug-in, perhaps from Bridge or just from PS / File / Open.  You may have to set your PS Camera Raw settings to prefer ACR for TIFs.  ACR and LR should be about the same in file handling so it'd be interesting to see if that is the case.

  • H264 encoded playback file is much darker than original .avi

    Hi -
    I am trying to encode a large .avi file as H264 and everything goes well, but the playback is MUCH darker than the original .avi file is. I have done this before with a black and white video and had no problem, but this one is not working.
    The avi is created in Sony vegas Pro and i found some online info suggesting that this is a known problem in earlier versions of Premiere, and that there is an edit that cna be made to the Prem60.ini file. However, I am running Premiere Pro 4.0 and can't even find an .ini file in the folder now.
    This is encoding from NTSC 720 x 480 23.957 fps, to H264 NTSC DV Widescreen High Quality.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Thank you for the reply!
    Actually, When I export the avi project into Adobe Media Encoder, it gives me the following settings and they have been great until this file:
    Export Settings:
    Format: H.264
    Preset: NTCH DV Widescreen High Quality
    The summary info is NTSC, 720x480, 29.97 fps, LOWER
    I have used these same settings before and the qulity has been outstanding.
    I did read online that there was a problem in premier 6.0 with Premiere working better with the Microsoft codec rather than the Soney vegas Pro codec and that to solve teh proble you can edit th ePrem60.ini file to tell the program to ignore the Sony codec and default to the MS one, but that's for an older version and I cant even find an ini file for Premiere Pro...
    I would really appreciate any help I can get on this -

  • Why are my photos not as sharp when I import them into Facebook from the Aperture Projects file, compared to when I 'share' them with Facebook within the Aperture programme? There is a noticeable difference and has been spoiling my photos for some time.

    Hi all, I take wildlife photos (mostly birds) as a hobby, and have become frustrated with the quality of my photos recently when shared online, particularly Facebook.
    I started blaming my camera ( a Canon 7D) as I changed it a few months ago from a Canon 550D, and I soon noticed that the images were not as good. Then I realised it was when I started using Aperture.
    I started by using the 'share' option within Aperture but I soon realised that then I have no control over the creation of an album, and the photos start appearing on facebook before I have finished uploading them and given them captions. Plus if I subsequently move them or export them to my back up drive then they disappear from Facebook!
    So I started creating albums within Facebook and then importing the photos from the aperture projects file on my computer. Because they are imported I can then delete or move the aperture file and the photos stay on facebook. Otherwise my macbook was becoming completely full.
    However to test my theory I have today uploaded the same photo edited in Aperture stored in the same projects folder using the two different methods described above, and there is a very distinct difference between the quality of the two images. The shared ones are very much sharper than the imported ones.
    I am a computer novice and don't know how to check what the quality settings are, or how to adjust anything to improve the way the photos go into facebook. I do have a manual but I just cant understand it :-(
    I have tried a free sample of Lightroom 5 and my photos  look amazing, there is such a difference, but I don't want to give up with Aperture unless the problem really can't be solved.
    Sorry for such a long first post, I would be very very grateful for any help you can give me!
    Regards
    Susan 

    Generally I would not use Facebook for sharing any photos, it compresses the photos substantially, and when you have shadows and dark colours you get visible "bands" where there should be subtle gradients, ie at sunsets and sunrises.
    It sounds like you are using two methods to upload to Facebook:
    1. Sharing from within Aperture, which basically syncs Facebook with your Aperture album, so any changes made at either end gets synced, hence the deletions from Albums, although the original file should still be in your library, just removed rom the album. It is like a playlist in iTunes.
    2. Exporting pics and uploading to Facebook from the browser.
    I am not sure how method 1 gets compressed, but I know that uploading hi-res jpegs to Facebook using method 2 results in poor quality images.
    I wouldn't even bother comparing option 1 or 2, and they will both be poor images once you view them on Facebook, as opposed to viewing uploaded images on proper image sharing / hosting sites.
    Your problem is not with Aperture, it is using Facebook for showing your work.
    If you export pics form Aperture at high res jpegs or TIFFs your images will be fine.
    If you insist to use Facebook as your way to share your work, then your workflow should be this:
    1. Right click images you want to share.
    2. Select Export version.
    3. Export as 100% size and ensure the export settings are set at 100% quality.
    4. Upload this pic into Facebook.
    This will get you the best image size and resolution on Facebook.
    See how you go.

Maybe you are looking for

  • How can I set 'Adobe PDF printer' as one of my printer choices?

    I've given it half an hour. Can't seem to figure out how I can set 'Adobe PDF printer' as one of my printer options. I'm not sure if I need to download an Adobe file, and what folder I might need to place it in, and if I also need to add a specific d

  • BW Crystal Reports interface

    Hi, We are planning using Crystal reports for one of our applications. Can some one please provide me the system requirements and the steps involved in setting up the connection between BW and Crystal reports. Your help is greatly appreciated. Thanks

  • Can't enable DVD or CD Sharing

    Hi I just got my MBA yesterday, and I couldn't enable 'DVD or CD' sharing under 'Sharing' of System Preferences. There is simply no such option, only Screen sharing file sharing etc. What should I do?

  • Details of contract employee

    Hi Experts, I would like to know  contract employee  information for this i have checked in P0001-PERSK EE subgroup.but for  that employee he does not have contract number.may be i have to check based on the company .Please correct me if i am going w

  • Enhanced CTS for XI SPS13: Exception: (126) NO_DEFAULT_REQUEST_FOUND

    Hello, I have installed CTS+ for XI SPS13 with the aid of the HOW TO... Guide: How to... Configure Enhanced CTS for SAP NetWeaver XI 7.0 SPS13! Unfortunately i have an error by exporting a design object from for example the integration repository! De