Prints aren't as sharp as file? HELP!!!

I've printed out 4x6's with shutterfly at 72 dpi and they came out really sharp. I've even printed out larger prints at 72 dpi with great results at mpix. Who are you going thru for prints?
 
Well I have tested prints from Mpix, Millers, Nations Photo, CPQ, ACI, WHCC and H&H.

So far I have noticed that the larger prints like 8x10 print sharper than wallets and 4x5's....wonder why this is true? But with all my testing I believe CPQ maybe the sharpest output with H&H a close second.

I still don't understand why these images are not as sharp as what I see on screen......these images are soooo sharp in Lightroom and Photoshop, but print not-so sharp. I mean, they are ok.....my clients probably couldn't see a difference, but I can! It drives me crazy. Could it be something with the fact that these are the first prints I have had printed with my D300? Maybe a setting that is default with this camera that wasn't with my D40x?

It is just so frustrating to strive for sharpness, but loose that sharpness during the printing process.
 
Because sharpness also depends on the display medium. A typical computer screen has a larger dynamic range than a well lit print. There are whole products based around sharpening for different targets, and even Lightroom 2.0 has features under export which let you sharpen for screen display, printing on matte paper, or for printing on glossy paper. Although Lightroom's feature falls far short of Viveza's Sharpen Pro which has different sharpness profiles for Canon, HP, Fujifilm, Kodak etc printers, and for the various papers.

Assuming you're doing everything right, and the printing company is doing everything right, if you still insist that the images aren't quite sharpened to your tastes then these products may be worth looking into.

Alternatively maybe your mind has been poisoned by the ludicrous sharpening applied to images normally, especially those that come from every consumer digital camera. First common complaint when people switch from a point and shoot to an SLR is lack of sharpness. Without seeing what you're looking at it's hard to tell if the images are not sharp or if your mind is too sharp ;)
 
Alternatively maybe your mind has been poisoned by the ludicrous sharpening applied to images normally, especially those that come from every consumer digital camera. First common complaint when people switch from a point and shoot to an SLR is lack of sharpness. Without seeing what you're looking at it's hard to tell if the images are not sharp or if your mind is too sharp ;)

i have to respectfully disagree here. my film images were almost always tack sharp. i have been so disappointed since switching to digital that i sometimes contemplate switching back. i keep hoping i'll adjust.
 
I think Garbz was talking about a digital SLR, not film.

IMO, All digital SLR photos need to be sharpened. - You just have to find the right combination of in camera sharpening and post sharpening.

On the other hand P&S cameras have a tendancy to oversharpen to please consumers.
 
I think you guys are all missing my point......it is not that I am unhappy with the sharpness of my images from my digital SLR......they ARE tack sharp!!!! On screen in Lightroom and in Photoshop they are super sharp even viewed at 200%........it is the prints that I cannot get to come out sharp!!!!

I do have to say that I have since received a couple of 8x10s from CPQ Professional Imaging that ARE tack sharp! The 4x6s I got from them (from the same files) were not as sharp. So I think it is safe to say that sharp images loose fine detail(that makes them appear sharp) when printed on any image smaller than a 5x7 or 8x10.
 
Are you examining your prints and the end of your nose? Hold them at least a foot away, or at arms length, how do they look then?
 
Unless you're printing 100s or 1000s I'm not understanding why you don't print them yourself. Canon says their new (3 years ago) high-end printers ($300 LOL) make prints that will last 100 years in a photo book and 50 years (or something like that) if framed behind glass in the standard home setting. And that rating is supposed to be before they even begin to fade noticeably. I'm sure Epson and/or HP says something similar. A 7-ink ink-jet looks awesome and it's less than or about $1.00 to print an 8x10 considering ink and paper.

Printing your own you will have complete control over how "sharp" they look. Print, check results, edit if needed and reprint. If you think it needs to be more sharp just load up PS and sharpen it more and press print.

Unless you're printing 100 copies of a 100 different jobs it's really fast too. I dunno what it is exactly for a 7-ink printer as they're a tad slower than my 5-ink printer but mine prints an 8x10 in something like 15 or 20 seconds.
 
I think you guys are all missing my point......it is not that I am unhappy with the sharpness of my images from my digital SLR......they ARE tack sharp!!!! On screen in Lightroom and in Photoshop they are super sharp even viewed at 200%........it is the prints that I cannot get to come out sharp!!!!
.

i am getting the point. in fact, it is my point exactly. my film prints were sharp, my digital prints are not. on the screen the digis are great, but not on print. it is very frustrating. they also tend to always print darker. i need to find a better lab i guess. i am just not sure where to go. it is not practical for me to print a wedding out on my home printer, nor would i provide that to a client. but finding a decent, local lab has been trying.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top