Comments on: MPIX Launches New Totally Updated “MPIX 2.0″

By: Viagra

Viagra — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:31:35 +0000

That’s Too nice, when it comes in india hope it can make a Rocking place for youngster.. hope that come true.

rH3uYcBX

By: buy_vigrxplus

buy_vigrxplus — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:57:26 +0000

Great post! I’ll subscribe right now wth my feedreader software!

By: Nancy Cuppy

Nancy Cuppy — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:08:05 +0000

It seems to me there is so much conflicting information on color spaces which to use etc., it leaves my head spinning. I pay for Lynda.com training and their training for cs4 color management says prophoto or adobe rgb 1998. I read on another website stay away from prophoto you will end up with funky color when you convert to srgb. On Carey Schumacher’s blog she quotes “One last tip I learned years ago from Scott Kelby, and it hasn’t failed me yet: Use the color space sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in Photoshop (edit –> color settings). Set your working space to sRGB IEC61966-2.1, and if you shoot RAW, be sure to export your jpgs (or tiffs or dngs, whatever floats your boat) with that color space as well so they will match the working color space you use in Photoshop.” I shoot raw, rbg 1998 color space, work in the same space and then in photoshop make sure I make another copy and convert profile to the srgb space before sending to print if they ask for srgb. Not sure if what Im doing is the right way with all the conflicting info out there.

By: Mpix Finally Comes Through Again « Central Illinois Photoblog

Mpix Finally Comes Through Again « Central Illinois Photoblog — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:52:51 +0000

[...] my images in-hand sometimes within 36 hours of uploading. In fact other reputable bloggers have written good things about them so I’m not their only [...]

By: John, Mpix.com

John, Mpix.com — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:01:12 +0000

sRGB is the working space for photographic printers. Consequently working in a larger color space does not offer any advantage from a printing stand point. A larger color space in theory allows a greater range of colors and dynamic range to be captured and manipulated. We suggest sRGB as the working space because that is the color space that the printers require. Before images are printed here they must be converted to sRGB by suggesting that clients use sRGB as their working space they are insuring that what they see will be what they get as much as possible.

John, Mpix.com

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:12:43 +0000

I’ve seen a lot about Mpix lately so I thought I would give them a try with a personal project before using them for any of my professional work and unfortunately things did not go so well.

I ordered a 24×36 gallery wrap from them and it arrived within a few days of ordering which was impressive. However the quality wasn’t that great. Black streaking lines began to appear where it wraps on the frame! Soon people began commenting on the black streaks as they were distracting from the beautiful photo. I have since removed the photo from view.

I contacted Mpix customer support about this issue on July 29 and on July 30 Matt from Mpix agreed to reprint the gallery wrap and put a protective coating on it. I was impressed with the quick response and happy they were going to reprint it. If I were to ever use them for my professional work it would be important to me that if a customer had an issue with a print that Mpix would be responsive and take care of any issues ASAP.

Unfortunately this turned out not to be the case. I waited a couple weeks and the reprint never showed up. So on August 13 I contacted Mpix again to check on the status. I never received a response and again contacted them on August 19. Finally on August 20 Matt emailed me back and said he thought I had received the reprint and that he would check into things. He asked me to upload the image again so they could do the reprint.

It is now August 29 and still no reprint and no word from Mpix. If this had been a print for one of my customers I would have had a very upset customer that probably wouldn’t be doing business with me again. Well, actually after the first week of not hearing from Mpix I would have done the reprint at my own expense with a more reliable and professional company.

It is because of this that I cannot recommended Mpix for professional work.

Greg

By: Mike Paterson

Mike Paterson — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:37:37 +0000

Scott, I had a quick question about canvas prints (gallery wraps)… is Mpix your place of choice for canvas? I haven’t seen many examples, the one a friend of mine did just wasn’t the quality I would have expected. Is this an exception? (I’d also love to hear other people’s input.

Thanks

By: Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:07:11 +0000

>Photos printed by Mpix are sRGB. where does the advantage of Adobe RGB really come in, if I canâ€™t really see it besides on my monitor?

This Adobe white paper might help:
http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_colspace.pdf

As far as monitors, I’ve got two that are nearly the gamut of Adobe RGB (1998) and far, far wider than sRGB. Such displays are actually affordable these days.

For my work, even Adobe RGB is too small. But I output to Epson K3 inks which have colors that exceed this space. And my capture device (Raws from a Canon 5D) produce far wider gamut too. I want to store and use all the colors I’ve captured.

By: Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:01:15 +0000

>What strikes me as interesting, is the fact sRGB workflow prints (Mpix)work so well, that they are the preferred lab for NAPP. Would Adobe RGB or ProPhoto workflow prints look that much better? if they were side by side, could we tell the difference?

IF the capture device and working space are larger than the output color space, there’s going to be clipping. If you clip to sRGB, its not like you’re going to get awful prints! The workflow does work. But you’re throwing away colors that you could potentially print. If your work is brides in white wedding dresses, you’ll never notice a difference. If your work is of a highly saturated nature (say Jay Maisel kind of work), it could. And we don’t know since we don’t have an output profile from so many providers. Nor as I said can we soft proof, control the rendering intent (which is image specific, not output specific) or post edit the image based on that soft proof. So its not ideal but it works. Its a workflow that blows lots of prints out the door quickly. But its not ideal in terms of end user control.

Lots of labs do profile their devices and supply them to customers. If and when more customers ask for this, its more likely we’ll see it offered.

Adobe didn’t put all that custom soft proofing in Photoshop, or the ability to convert working space images into output ready color just for grins. Soft proofing is a major big deal. We’re hearing many LR 2.0 users asking how that one got missed from the release….

By: Bob DeChiara

Bob DeChiara — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:47:10 +0000

Hey Adam, go to http://www.shortrunposters.com.

It is actually $2.00 a poster. You just saved yourself 2 bucks.

I had 12 posters printed, one for each kid on my sons little league team. You should have seen their faces when i passed them out. I was actually a bit skepitcal since I always believe you get what you pay for. But for 2 bucks you can’t beat it. The color is not the greatest but again for 2 bucks it is worth it.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:42:56 +0000

Andrew Rodney,
Thanks so much for the detailed explanation.
What strikes me as interesting, is the fact sRGB workflow prints (Mpix)work so well, that they are the preferred lab for NAPP. Would Adobe RGB or ProPhoto workflow prints look that much better? if they were side by side, could we tell the difference?
I’m really interested in this b/c I’ve spent lots of time researching this topic and sweating the details between shooting and photoshoping in sRGB, or in Adobe RGB, and I think in the end, it doesn’t seem to make much difference in the “real world”. It does make for some great discussion though.
Photos that are posted online are sRGB. Photos printed by Mpix are sRGB. where does the advantage of Adobe RGB really come in, if I can’t really see it besides on my monitor?
Thanks again for anyone who contributes to help me understand this topic. I appreciate the time and response.

By: Kurt Shoens

Kurt Shoens — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:45:50 +0000

I also have used MPix and loved them. The one time there was a problem with prints they redid them immediately with no questions asked. In cases where I’ve needed prints in a hurry, it has been less expensive to use MPix plus fast shipping than to print locally.

One of the new features of MPIX 2.0 is that you can mix paper types in a single order, which you couldn’t do previously.

On the sRGB color space question (as well as TIFF vs. JPEG, 8 vs 16 bit), MPix says don’t worry about it, although folks might not find their explanations convincing. You can read their take on it here: http://mpix.com/support/Help.aspx?id=3.

My question is 8 or 16 bit and TIFF or JPEG for their true black & white process. I tried an 8 megapixel comparison at 8×12 inch size and tested the prints on my friends. As I recall, one person out of about a dozen confidently and correctly selected the 16-bit TIFF over the JPEG. I’m curious about the experience of others.

I don’t know where I read it, but I thought MPix uses a Lightjet for photographic prints. I remember seeing long ago an offer on mpix.com to send printer profiles to those who want them for soft-proofing.