Damien Symonds

Yep, I discussed all that in Module 11.

Have you read the new Module 4 of the Raw Class that I published last week? It's still under "Detail" exactly as it used to be.

Did you see this post?

So the brightness is better ... but is the screen still too warm? I'm doing everything I can here, but in my bones I really do fear that you are going to need a new screen soon.

Do you have any other screens in your house that you could plug in to your computer and calibrate? Fix the room light first though.

Unless you have reason to believe the lab messed up your order somehow, the prints you have are fine. You need to make your screen match them, period. And that begins by being in good light.

I know, it's one of the most persistent myths floating around. Editing in low light is completely nonsensical. As soon as you stop and think about it you realise this is so.

That's bad. That's exactly what I'm saying. Does that not make sense to you?

So the room is nice and bright? Because this ... .... suggests that your room is not bright enough.

Gee, are you sure your room light is ok? https://www.damiensymonds.net/2012/01/light-around-your-computer.html

You should try raising that WHITES value to see if you can get a reading closer to 6500.

Yeah, it's not a wide gamut screen. I've just been playing with my NEC, but the controls aren't quite the same. If you go up one step to get to "WHITE", can you then use the left and right arrows to adjust the white temp?

Did you press on and finish the calibration? And if so, how was the print comparison?

It's not a wide gamut screen as far as I know.

Oh, interesting. Can you quickly do this check?

So you tried all the presets, and the closest one was 4992?

Ok, can you show me a screenshot of the steps in the action?

Oh gee, you have to run Glary once a month.

No. You MUST NOT USE A TOUCH SCREEN FOR EDITING.

It is related to resolution and quality of course, but by itself the jpeg file size is not a firm indicator of those things. You need to explain to her that smaller jpeg size is actually an indication of better file quality. https://www.damiensymonds.net/2015/08/about-jpeg-file-size.html

And please don't wait too long to join the Print Sharpening Class. You can't keep flying blind like this.

Great! So increase that to 12000x18000 at 300ppi, and send the file to her. Save it as a jpeg at Level 7 quality.

The PPI is irrelevant. Only the pixel dimensions (height by width) are relevant. What are they?

Oh, you'll DEFINITELY need to do them over.

What action are you running in the batch?