|
|
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
rayonline:
nitro:
Also, do you know what those photos were taken with? Photos taken with small sensors (most smartphones) won't capture as much detail in the first place.
My image haha. Nikon D600 with a 18-35g lens ISO 100, F8, 1/250. 24mm.
Geektastic:
There are several possibilities.
1) Did the image start as RAW and get processed (eg in Lightroom) before being turned into a JPEG, or was the JPEG out of the camera? I have yet to see an OOC jpeg I liked and would rather manufacturers actually made cameras RAW only myself, freeing up space to hone other camera features and abilities in the firmware
2) How good was the print compared to the image? We can't see both to compare, but I guess you can. You need to determine if the print is the problem - try printing it on a paper with more texture
3) The camera settings may be adding to it, as may the quality or otherwise of the lens on the front etc etc
4) Photo printing is a bit of a dark art, with RAPs and all sorts to take into account as well as the actual device and file prep. I do not own a photo printer, I outsource that to specialists if I need it done. Maybe you can review the printing process.
I'd reprocess the RAW (if there is one) for more punch and contrast then reduce sharpening then ask someone else to print it using a different machine and paper. See what you get and whether you like it better.
1. RAW capture, I use Lightroom exported to JPEG with 85% quality setting.
2. Similar I guess. I didn't do excessive post processing since this is digital rather than mould the file.
3. Settings above.
4. WPS printing just on the mini lab's luster / matte paper.
Maybe it is just the way digital is unless one goes away and do more post processing. I didn't do this after all it is digital and I guess if I wanted more that texture I could just shoot film. Not just my image alone, it is a kinda look with the other photos as well, maybe it is just the digital photo look? I don't mind if it is in a magazine or a print held close to me but when it is framed up to me it is more a fine art kinda thing and the grain gives it bit more something ...
The 85% quality setting won't be doing it any favours. Exhibition prints are usually IME at least printed from 16 bit TIFF files, which are HUGE and provide heaps of information for the printer. The last time I had an exhibition, the files had to be delivered to the printers on a portable HDD because no other method was realistic.
Moderator
ID Verified Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
if you feel like playing with it, perhaps do a trial of LR CC and see if the Texture tool can do what you need, or at least help...
result on your jpeg by just sliding it (by quite a bit!) to the right is as below:
i would expect better results working on a raw file.
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
|
|
|
