Aperture B&W: Brightness vs. Exposure?

[gtownby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm having a devil of a time getting my Epson R2400 B&W prints "light" or "bright" enough. The files look awesome on screen (Nik Silver Efex Pro conversions) but look "muddy" when printed out on Epson Exhibition paper. Usually, I end up boosting the "Exposure" slider 25-40 percent before printing. Looks much too light on screen, but prints out better. Would the "Brightness" slider be better for this?

 

I've never used a hardware calibrater. Is it worth doing for B&W printing?

[Shootist]

There have been many posts like yours.

The first question is are you using a LCD monitor?

If you are most of them have the screen brightness turn up way to high as there default setting.

Turn down your screen brightness until it get close to the brightness of your prints.

[gtownby]

Shootist --

 

Thanks for that. Yes, I'm using a big LCD, which I have the option of turning down a bit (but the brightness range is not as big as on my laptop screen - I'll have to find the directions). I think that will make a difference in the prints.

 

Actually, after my post, I went back into Silver Efex Pro and worked with "Brightness" "Contrast" and "Structure." By boosting "Brightness" and "Contrast" by 22 percent and "Structure" 15 percent, a lot of detail came out of the shadow area. Then, after saving, but before printing, I boosted the "Exposure" in Aperture so that the histogram "foot" reached all the way to the right edge.

 

Result: Much improved. As you can see from the attached, I had a difficult file to work with: lots of highlights and shadows.

[Steve Ash]

I had the same problem with my Canon printer. Regardless of monitor calibration the prints

where way off. Problem was solved by buying a Mac which takes care of color management.

Regards

Steve

[Shootist]

I had the same problem with my Canon printer. Regardless of monitor calibration the prints

where way off. Problem was solved by buying a Mac which takes care of color management.

Regards

Steve

That has got to be the most, I don't know what, answer.

Buy a Mac, Buy a Mac, Buy a Mac.

 

How about learning about color management.

I have a PC with XP Pro and have no problems getting my prints to look just like what is displayed on my Dell LCD monitor.

[gtownby]

Thanks for the suggestions, guys. I think it will be a matter of turning down the LCD monitor, calibrating, exploring RIP options, and "seeing" the monitor image in a different way. And, by the way, I'm already using a Mac, with a 30-in HD Cinema Display.

[Guest joewehry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My understanding of Exposure control is that it is more universal (affecting lower, mid, and upper tones) where Brightness is more local for the mid tones.

 

My suggestion is to get an exposure you like, then recover any highlights, then set black point, and finally mid tones if needed. Evaluate each image, since there is no one recipe.

 

When you have an image the way you like it on screen, use Aperture to create a Duplicate Version and give it a subname like "print" (ex your version is "flower1", the second version "flower1print")

 

Then print out a test image of the second version and fiddle with it in Aperture until you get a print that you like. This way you have your first image that looks nice on screen for web or emailing to people. And a second version you can use for printing.

 

IF the tones are looking muddy, make sure your black point is set to give you dark blacks if the image requires it. The muddiness may come from a lack of contrast in the image. You may be overworking the brightness control and spreading out the mid tones so there is longer any contrast.

 

Alternately, create six versions, and adjust the contrast, brightness, etc., to varying degrees on each of the six versions. (Keep it constant however. For example start with base version and create three versions adjusting just the contrast. Create three more versions adjusting exposure. Create three more versions adjusting tones. Then select all six versions, go to Print, and select the Contact sheet option to print one page of mini versions. This will give you a way to evaluate how your printer responds to the different versions.

 

Of course, the minute you change paper types, expect to go through this again.

 

Post production and Printing is the equivalent of dark room work, and it can take awhile to get prints the way you want.

 

But once you find a way, you can start getting more consistent results, and take better exposed pictures since you know what parameters affect what in your images.

 

Best of luck. And keep experimenting. It's a great way to learn.

[gtownby]

Joe --

 

The time you took to assist me is truly, truly appreciated. Your posting represents all that is good with this forum.

 

You raise a lot of good ideas that I hadn't thought of. Black point, for instance. (I shoot both digital and film, and haven't yet been able to get the blacks of gelatin silver prints, though I've heard that modern printers (Epson K3) and paper (Epson Exhibition Fiber, etc.) are capable of producing deeper blacks than gelatin silver.)

 

Also, I really like your idea of doing multiple versions and then making a contact print of those. Brilliant -- and a great way to save paper.

 

Raising the standard on my digital prints is my goal for the next few months. Thanks for your help . . . .