Damien Symonds

Does this help at all? I just cloned out some of the worst scratches, then half desaturated the silver.

Can you check something for me? In Photoshop, go to Edit>Assign Profile, and assign the monitor profile (instead of sRGB) to your image. Does that make the problem worse, better, about the same, or just a different shade of awful?

And just to confirm, you're definitely viewing the files in Photoshop?

Which look dull? The prints, or the images on screen?

Ok, and how is the print match now?

Excellent. Next, tell me about the light in your office. Have you read this?

And do the prints from those two labs match each other?

Jewellery retouching is a whole advanced specialty, in which I have no experience, I'm afraid. What colour is it supposed to be - gold or silver?

No no no no no. Other screens are irrelevant. Only the prints matter. Which lab are your prints from?

Bridge is a free program nowadays. You can install it on any computer you like, as far as I know.

I'm not sure why you mentioned this point. Editing video has nothing to do with anything. A calibrated screen is a calibrated screen, no matter what you're editing, or which calibrator you used. Well, there are multi-level answers to this. At the bottom you have the Spyder Express, which literally can't calibrate more than one screen (attached to the same computer) - the software won't allow you to do it. Next you have the Spyder Pro, which does allow you to calibrate multiple monitors, and does a good job of it if they are both quite good screens, but lacks the fine-tuning to really make them match exquisitely. At the top you have the Spyder Elite, which has those great fine-tuning controls. I'm pretty sure you can buy the Pro now, then pay to upgrade the software to Elite later, if you wish. As far as I know, the hardware is exactly the same, the difference is the software. However, make your own enquiries about this, to be sure. Glossy is the devil. ESPECIALLY for you, on location, where you can't possibly control all the reflections that might hit your screen and drive you crazy. NEVER get a glossy screen. I don't know, actually, but assume they mean sRGB.

The best in the world, I promise: https://www.damiensymonds.net/trainingraw.html As much as possible. While your raw data is still raw data, make the most of it. Once you transfer to Photoshop, it's still good data, but no longer that amazing quality raw data.

There is some info about them in this article. However, I beg you to consider the Layers & Masks Class, because it covers everything in much greater detail, and you'll be rewarded with rich understanding.

The ICC profile is the little set of instructions that tell the program how to display your photo correctly. Without the profile, the program (be it a web browser, or Photoshop, or whatever) has to guess. Often the guesses are very good, but sometimes they can go bad. So it's much better to always be safe, and include the profile.

https://www.damiensymonds.net/trainingfaq.html

Hi Sweer, yes, 52% is definitely small. I'm very surprised to hear such screens are still being made. How old is the laptop? 74% is on the small-ish side, but I rocked a mid-70s screen for quite a few years, and it really didn't hold me back. It might trouble you for floral photos, or sunrises and sunsets, but from your question, it sounds like you might be indoors? The 74 would be ok; but of course if the 92 is going to come back into stock soon, and you can wait long enough, it would be better. Your wording of this question concerns me - it sounds as though you consider calibration optional. It is NOT optional. No matter what computer or screen you have, if you intend to work professionally, you must be calibrated. Therefore, your first step MUST be the purchase of the calibrator. Even the 52 screen you presently have will be a LOT better with calibration. Your assessment is correct here. External screen is the best option for quality, but completely impractical for dragging along to events. https://www.damiensymonds.net/2015/07/buying-mac-or-pc.html

Did you try it?

Sandy?

How are the prints, @flor?

@haddoxmom?

@Julie K?

Don't just give them that bad news cold. As I said, accompany it with a version of the photo with the flyaways fixed. That will appease them a bit.

I doubt it. Cloning would present the same problem of blurring, possibly worse.

Well, you could try a bit of very gentle and very patient Liquifying. But the trouble is, Liquifying softens fine detail a bit. If you'd shot this in such a way (eg very shallow DOF) that the hair was slightly out of focus, I'd have a lot more faith in the Liquify approach. But I reckon you've nailed that hair in pretty good focus, yes? In that case, Liquify presents a big risk of blurring it noticeably. To be honest, I'd clean up the flyaways nicely, and tell that that's all you can do. Let's face it, this is a stupid request. You can't be expected to accommodate every stupid request that comes along.

@mlchristy?