A matter of display...

[rpcrowe]

I had a 16x24" canvas print done of this image at Easy Canvas Prints. The canvas did not include the white borders...



When the canvas print arrived, I was first a bit disappointed because it appeared a bit dark in standard room light. It is actually quite a bit darker than the print looks on my monitor. I also viewed the image on my wife's monitor and it looks every bit as light as it does on mine...

I realize that there is a difference between the way a print will look on a monitor and how it will look as a canvas print but, at first, I was still disappointed.

However, when I put this canvas up on the wall under a portrait light, it is absolutely awesome. It is a fairly low key rendition of the canal but, under the light, the image vividly shows the reflections on the water of the buildings across the canal, with the two primary gondolas in silhouette. The setting sun on the buildings at the top of the frame absolutely glows when the canvas is illuminated by the light...

In fact, I like the print illuminated by the portrait light better than I like the image on my monitor. While the original image was shot on a late summer afternoon, the canvas print looks like it was shot at the golden hour...

Now my only decision is "frame or not to frame". I had the print done with a 1.5" wrap which, IMO, looks great without a frame. My wife, however is a more traditional person and wants it in a frame. Guess who will win? (hint: it won't be me)...

[Shadowman]

Looks nice. How else would you display if not framed, mounted on board only? Probably easier to dust if framed.

[IzzieK]

I let my husband win every now and then...just to salve his ego a bit. I'd go for frame, Richard.

[rpcrowe]

I let my husband win every now and then...just to salve his ego a bit. I'd go for frame, Richard.

My goodness, it that what is happening when I think that I won an argument!

[dan marchant]

I have a question for you Richard, did you use a printer profile supplied by the printer? My understanding is that a calibrated monitor is only part of the equation. You also need profiles for the printer/paper/ink combination as they use a totally different method of rendering colour than our monitors.

P.S. just about to go through this myself. The G/F is a property baron/slum landlord and has commissioned several prints to hang on the wall in the stairway that links the three apartments she owns.

[GrahamS]

That awesome print deserves a gold baroque frame.

[Kris V]

My goodness, it that what is happening when I think that I won an argument!

Absolutely.
Never doubt it for a minute!
Stunning picture, Richard! (And no dog in sight.....)

[NorthernFocus]

I'll be that one does look awesome on canvas, Richard. And while I'm partial to the gallery wrap canvas style, that particular image would look awesome in a traditional frame.

I've found that images need to be lightened even more for canvas that for printing on paper. I think it is due to the texture which causes some of the light to reflect off into directions other than towards the viewer. Regardless of calibrated monitors, downloaded printer profiles, etc, it still requires a bit of trial and error for each different printer/lab used to get things right. I've settled on a couple of labs and for my particular situation, my conversion from monitor to print requires these changes:
- for prints brightness +12, saturation +12
- for canvas brightness +15, saturation +12
- for aluminum brightness +10, saturation +10

These are the adjustments I have to make in PSE to get the results I'm looking for from the labs I'm using. Not suggesting this will work for anyone else. Just trying to demonstrate the differences required by different printers, print media, etc. If you use a lab that uses auto adjust algorithms on their printers, it is really difficult to get dialed in and get consistent/predictable results.

[rpcrowe]

Thanks Dan,

I had not thought of different brightnesses for different type prints.

I am going to query them regarding brightness of the files that I submit.

Perhaps, I will find another, more capable and, obviously. more expensive printer...

[DanK]

Thanks Dan,

I had not thought of different brightnesses for different type prints.

I am going to query them regarding brightness of the files that I submit.

Perhaps, I will find another, more capable and, obviously. more expensive printer...

Richard,

I don't know what printer you have, but you may not need an expensive one for canvas. I printed a few with my Pixma 9000II when I bought a Moab sampler pack, and they seemed good to me. However, I haven't done any since, so I haven't looked into it in detail.

I second the suggestion of getting the printer's ICC for that particular canvas. I'd then soft proof. My experience is that soft proofing often does not matter much for large-gamut and reflective papers, such as my default, which is Moab Exhibition Luster, but it can matter a great deal for others. E.g., I use Red River Polar Matte for card stock, and this often takes considerable adjustment in softproofing. I don't know this for a fact, but my guess is that canvas finishes are among those for which adjustments in soft proofing may make a substantial difference.

Having seen this impressive one of yours, I'm tempted to buy some more canvas and try some more.

Dan