Samantha LaRue

What version of PS is this?

In the pinned post at the top of the section Damien lists the guidelines for posting. http://ask.damiensymonds.net/topic/106-read-this-first-posting-guidelines-and-featured-threads/ Rule #3 discusses that if you need to post an image, please post the SOOR. Sorry if this wasn't more clear! I'm sure Christina only meant this in jest. I'm positive she wasn't trying to offend you or imply you were too stupid to figure this out. Just trying to lighten the mood a bit since you seemed a little frustrated. Please don't ever feel like you can't ask a question here. We've worked very hard to make this a safe and more professional environment so that people can feel more welcomed asking questions and receiving help. I know sometimes we can come off as a bit more blunt and direct than intended, but I hope you understand that tone is often difficult to convey through written text, and that all of our questions and suggestion come from a good place. We truly are here to help, in anyway that we can.

Hmm, I'm sure Damien will be able to offer some suggestion, but I'm curious to know what the original format for the image was? Was it printed on Canvas? It almost looks like someone took a photo of a computer screen. That's a very interesting pattern.

that would probably be best.

And further to that, what exactly did you change in the box? (And what article were you reading?)

You can also check out the lab reviews section Damien has here: http://www.damiensymonds.net/lab-reviews (which are admittedly a little sparce for this lab, hopefully someone who sees your question will take a moment to provide their review!)

You don't need to do a full edit - just the raw processing (what you do in ACR or in LR). It should only take a few minutes to make remove the noise, and make simple adjustments in your raw processor.

Hmm, I don't think whatever you were trying worked?

And make sure you do all your raw processing first so your white balances match. The ones you originally posted were much too cold.

It's the raw processor you use on your computer. Either ACR (adobe camera raw) or LR.

Are you satisfied with how the bottom image (bw with watermark) looks on your screen? Or do you see a lot of banding there too? Because from my end, it looks pretty good. At least not anything startling obvious.

Shutterfly does not count as a reliable lab and will not work for the purposes of calibration. Sometimes they print well, other times they don't. Mpix is better, but not quite a professional lab either. If you can only choose between those two, I'd trust the Mpix prints. And just to make sure, you did print without color correction applied, correct? I think Mpix applies it by default, and I'm pretty sure Shutterfly does as well. If you forgot to order these without color correction, then you'll need to order new test prints, this time preferably from a professional lab.

I believe you need to use the "ratio" option here. I think the WxHxResolution option you selected is what caused the width to be slightly less than 11.

Here is one of Damien's articles on the subject. Let me know if you have anymore questions! http://www.damiensymonds.net/2011/02/selling-digital-images.html

Assuming you haven't renamed the files, have you tried searching for them to see if you saved then somewhere else by accident?

Awesome! Just make sure to check your calibration to verify it's still ok.

You should be able to see in your images if you need to use either of those features. Damien has written a bit about CA here, and what to do when the options in raw don't fix it:http://www.damiensymonds.net/2014/12/fixing-chromatic-aberration.html I don't think he's written anything on lens corrections though. But I don't see any reason why you can't use it, as needed.

Have you seen this post? Someone had a similar issue, so perhaps their solution can help you?

It's unlikely your room is causing the issue since it appears different in separate programs. (a room issue would impact all the programs the same)

Not sure where you are seeing the 4gb for the memory card on the first one. I only see it say 2000mb? As for the 2nd laptop, I'd avoid. It's a touchscreen. Those aren't great screens and can be even more difficult to calibrate. And the hard drive on the HP seems slower, though I'm not sure in practical terms how much slower that is.

Looks good to me and about what I'd expect for a desktop. It doesn't come with a monitor, so you'll have to spend another couple hundred on that but everything else looks pretty good. Curious to see if Brian or Damien any other suggestions.

I think you got your hard drive numbers wrong there. My memory cards for my camera are more than 2gb, and hard drives are much bigger.

You'll have to wait for Brian to explain how to get around that. I'm not familiar enough with Mac OS to be able to help you. Sorry!

Can you post a crop like this please? http://www.damiensymonds.net/2013/09/grabbing-700x700px-100-crop.html

Love your screenname Yes, increasing the memory up from 8 would be a great improvement. Have you checked out the crucial scanner yet? It's what Brian recommends to make sure you get the right ram for your computer. http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/systemscanner It's also very likely that is is the ram that is causing the lag too. If you can fill out this real quick though, we can make sure there isn't anything else obvious that could be causing the issue: http://www.damiensymonds.net/thread1.html