Lately all of my faces have been super red. Worse than a bad sunburn. Very red. So much so that there is little I can do in post process even though I shoot RAW.

D700. Auto WB.

This is new. I've shot with D700 about a year or longer. It's always shot a little 'red' in that my photos have always been a bit redder than ideal but not too bad. Now it's off the charts.

I don't know if it's an equipment problem or something I'm doing. This is especially true in my studio where I've been using an Alien Bee 800 with softbox as main light and either a reflector as fill light or a flash shooting into translucent umbrella as fill light.

So, a very good portrait photographer I spoke with suggested I get a color-balanced QP gray card to click on in post process. I did that. $63 for this card. I clicked on it and doesn't do much good but I do need to read how to use it right. (Have to search 'net for that as it came with nothing).

I also need to learn how to accurately make a custom WB prior to shooting as I've been told I'm crazy to have camera on Auto WB. I have an Expodisc.

In addition to mastering custom WB and using new $63 gray card, could there be anything else going on? The WB amber/blue scale is at zero. The micro fine tune color option in menu (the colorful grid) is at zero also (right in center). Anything else I can check in the camera?

As I mentioned, this is new but I'm not sure I'm doing anything different.

Thank you.

If you are using studio lighting, set your WB to flash. Take a test shot. If its red, you have a problem other than WB.

David

Nope, 99% likely to be a white balance problem. Remember that some strobes like the Alien Bees change their color temperature when you change their output power. Make sure you use a good WB setting. Something like expodisc or cbl is a good idea.

You didn't mention but I'm assuming your room environment doesn't have colored walls/ceiling.. Those can throw off your color, too.

Thank you both. I'm going to spend some time with the Expodisc and see if I can get it to work.

The walls are off white.

I do have florescent lights overhead. But even when I turn them off it doesn't seem to make a difference.

I could also try setting WB to flash, thank you, I have tried clicking flash post process in Adobe Camera Raw but doesn't make any difference, can't remember what color I got when I did that but it was not right. I think it was too yellow/warm.

The output on the Alien Bee is way way down, near the end, low output. Small studio and softbox is close to subject.

Don't know which RAW program you have but all must have a 'White Balance' tool. Just click it on your gray card. You didn't mention which tool you used "to click on in post process". It always wotks with my D700 in any lighting situation.

KenL

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

you might have tried this but just in case you didn't, what happens if you reset your D700 to factory default. You could have in the settings changed the color profile and this does become your new default and does not show anywhere in the settings on the camera, it is just a new calibration that could screw up your WB.
Unless it has a fault in the sensor, it can't modify progressively the results, so I would first look at all possible causes on your own setting modification before thinking the camera is wrong.
worth a shot...

Hi. Thank you. I have Adobe Camera Raw. It does have WB eyedropper. But I click on gray card and the color is bad, too yellow and much too warm. Sigh.

Glad it works for you, so it means there is hope for me.


>Don't know which RAW program you have but all must have a
>'White Balance' tool. Just click it on your gray card. You
>didn't mention which tool you used "to click on in post
>process". It always wotks with my D700 in any lighting
>situation.

Good idea. Worth a try anyone. Thank you.


>you might have tried this but just in case you didn't, what
>happens if you reset your D700 to factory default. You could
>have in the settings changed the color profile and this does
>become your new default and does not show anywhere in the
>settings on the camera, it is just a new calibration that
>could screw up your WB.
>Unless it has a fault in the sensor, it can't modify
>progressively the results, so I would first look at all
>possible causes on your own setting modification before
>thinking the camera is wrong.
>worth a shot...
>
>

It is interesting about some strobes, including Alien Bees, changing color temp with output level. I wonder if the low level of output I have been using is causing the strong red color? I don't know why really that the level is so low. But any higher and my subjects' faces are overexposed. (At around 200 iso and 125/f. 5.6 give or take). My studio is small but not that small.

Thank you. I am working with expo disc. One question I have re that: When taking the control custom WB shot do you aim camera at light source (what if there are two? What if it's on-camera bounce flash?) or do you aim camera at where you'll be standing? Or at subject?

>>But I click on gray card and the color is bad, too yellow and much too warm. Sigh

If you click on the grey card area, are all the RGB numbers the same or very close? This means the file is correct, the camera is OK and the flash is not messing up the light. If so, you are looking in the wrong areas to correct the fault. I would guess the monitor needs to be corrected with calibration or is bad.

KenL

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Yes, if I click on the gray card, all the (three) numbers are the same. My new card has four wide bars of color: White, light gray, middle gray and darker gray. When I click on all four the numbers are all the same but different when I go to another bar or even another area within the same bar -- but still all three are the same for each 'click' or spot.

Depending on where on the bar I click the numbers are different. For example, if I choose the middle gray bar and click on it the numbers range from 170, 170, 170 down to 156, 156, 156, depending on where exactly on the bar I click. How can this be if the color is consistent within each bar? I guess the light falling on different areas affects the numbers.

So I took one of those readings, 165, 165, 165, and looked at color temp values. That translated to amber-yellow 5450 and red-green at -18. So I plugged those into a photo in that series and the photo is super red.

It's the same on both of my monitors, studio and home.

Thank you.

165, 165, 165 are RGB numbers - the amount of red, green and blue colors mixed together. If they are the same, they are a neutral (gray) color. Larger numbers are lighter and smaller numbers are darker because more or less of the colored light is being sent to the monitor.

All the numbers you mentioned are different grays so the files have perfect color. They have nothing to do with color temperature, they are just perfect grays in the file. Everything from camera to the file in the work flow is working perfectly. something between the file and the display is not being set properly. Have the monitors been calibrated?

KenL

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

interested in the final cause of this... thanks for letting us know.
Did you reset to fact default and test?
Now that you have tested your monitor calibration, it could only be light at wrong temp, camera settings, or a fault on the sensor...

I searched through the conversation but did not see a photo, did you upload a couple for us to see?

bernard

interested in the final cause of this... thanks for letting us know.
Did you reset to fact default and test?
Now that you have tested your monitor calibration, it could only be light at wrong temp, camera settings, or a fault on the sensor...

I searched through the conversation but did not see a photo, did you upload a couple for us to see?

bernard

Here is a photo. This is the photo I referred to in previous post where I clicked on gray card and, at 165, 165, 165, saw a color temp of 5450 and -18 so I used those values in ACR, opened the photo as jpg and sized smaller. Otherwise this is not edited at all. No adjustments for exposure, contrast, saturation, etc..... It is very red on my monitor.

This one is also unedited. This is 'as shot'. I was not using gray card. 5200 -21

Do you see pure white on the man's shirt and the lady's teeth? If not it is a monitor issue.

If they look like pure whites, then there may be a bit of over saturation?

The RGB numbers for skin tones do show a bit of extra red but it is not objectional. A tad more green helps the skin tones but wrecks the other colors.

If a viewer does not know these people, they look normal, but you know them and if the skin tones don't match, there is a problem that I am not able to help with.
Good Luck

KenL

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

The faces look too red on my calibrated monitor, despite a white shirt. I had a similar situation with my D700 shooting raw with auto white balance. Go to the shooting menu, then select picture control. After selecting neutral (my recommendation), use the right arrow on the multifunction button to see what adjustments have been made to "neutral". In my experience, a small increase in saturation here affected reds disproportionately. Also, this setting seems out of place in the menu and does not trigger a visual indication on the screen, so after setting it once, it's easy to forget about it.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Yes, it's funny that the man's shirt looks just right, white, yet the faces so red.

I went to picture control and changed from standard to neutral. Hit the right arrow and everything was at zero except sharpening, which, oddly to me anyway, was way down one bar away from zero (far to left). I say odd because pix are nice and sharp usually. Oh well. I'll try a few shots today with neutral, test shots with Expo Disc and gray card and I did reset to factory defaults.

Thank you everyone. I'll let you know how I make out with the Expo Disc. Haven't got any subjects but perhaps I can grab someone.

Don't florescent lights cast a green cast? Since I have florescents overhead in my office/studio could camera be trying to compensate for the green by adding red? Except I don't think there was any difference when I turned the lights off. Can try that test again.

Haven't got any subjects but perhaps I can grab
>someone.

If you can't find anyone to photograph, have you thought about using yourself as the model? I do it quite frequently when I'm testing my lighting.
Do you have a tripod? If not, you can place your camera on a solid, flat object.
I also set my self-timer to 20 seconds which allows me enough time to set up my camera and get into position.
I don't own Alien Bee's, do you know if their color temperature remains constant, (no color temperature shift) while you have them on?

Cheryl

>
>Don't florescent lights cast a green cast? Since I have
>florescents overhead in my office/studio could camera be
>trying to compensate for the green by adding red? Except I
>don't think there was any difference when I turned the lights
>off. Can try that test again.

Shouldn't matter if gray RGB = all same numbers unless there is different lighting away from the gray card.

KenL

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>
>Don't florescent lights cast a green cast? Since I have
>florescents overhead in my office/studio could camera be
>trying to compensate for the green by adding red?
What was your shutter speed? If you shot at a slow shutter speed then you're getting a color cast from the 2 different light sources, your Alien Bee's and the florescents. You'll want to shoot at least 1/100th of a second so your main light source will be from the Alien Bee's.

Cheryl

>Here is a photo. This is the photo I referred to in previous
>post where I clicked on gray card and, at 165, 165, 165, saw a
>color temp of 5450 and -18 so I used those values in ACR,
>opened the photo as jpg and sized smaller. Otherwise this is
>not edited at all. No adjustments for exposure, contrast,
>saturation, etc..... It is very red on my monitor.
>
>

I have a calibrated wide colour gamut monitor and your images are not too red. To me they look just as I would want them.

When you posted the EXIF data was stripped so we cannot use this to assist.

What profile is your monitor using and what is your editing program set to use for final output?

If you are using a wide gamut monitor that is using an sRGB profile you WILL get garish reds not only in photographs but also in any browser pages.

Ian

If only Mozart had had a camera

Thanks, I can use myself as model. Good idea. I do have a tripod. It's hard to get the focus right but I'm not interested in focus in this case. I do not know if the bees' color temp remains constant. Yikes, another thing to look into. Thank you.

Well, it's interesting that it looks good on your monitor. That sure suggests to me it's a monitor problem at least in part, although it's funny that they are red on both my monitors. I have Apple Cinema Displays I use with my MacBook Pro. I am glad they look nice to you but of course if I adjust them so they are nice to me now you (the client) will see something else. Oh it's so confusing.

Did not mean to strip the EXIF data, maybe it was never there? I am not sure what profile my monitor is using. Can I check this? I have calibrated them but not in a long time. I used a Spyder.

Not sure what my editing program is set to to use for final output. I use Photoshop CS4. I do believe it's set to sRGB as the camera is set to sRGB.

Thank you.


>I have a calibrated wide colour gamut monitor and your images
>are not too red. To me they look just as I would want them.
>
>When you posted the EXIF data was stripped so we cannot use
>this to assist.
>
>What profile is your monitor using and what is your editing
>program set to use for final output?
>
>If you are using a wide gamut monitor that is using an sRGB
>profile you WILL get garish reds not only in photographs but
>also in any browser pages.
>
>Ian
>

I found the color profile for the Apple Cinema Display I am currently using (I have two).

Space: RGB

The media whitepoint tristimulus is x: .950; y: 1.0; z: 1.089

Then, under red colorant tristimulus, there are three values each (x, y, z) for red, green and blue, for a total of nine values. Not sure if they mean anything re this problem or not.

Then there's a lot of other things. For example, red tone response curve is 1024 points.

I opened your photos on my monitor, iMac calibrated and they are a bit red, but nothing that could not be fixed. I am waiting for your comments when you have tried new shots after you reset to factory default

I used a WB tool from aperture to see how it would react and it slightly removed a bit of the red, not enough on the man, however I simply used one click in a grey area.

I then used my normal tool, nik software as a plug in and used color efex pro and used the remove color cast filter. It did remove enough of the red by default to make it look good on my monitor

I am also wondering why you use sRGB for shooting. I would have thought RGB for shooting when you will print and sRGB if you post them on a web. I might be wrong but would try this also.

I would also make sure I take a shot without the flash or strobe and this in manual setup as what you are going to use for the final photo, and see if anything appears on your screen. If it does, I would increase the shutter speed till I can remove all ambient. I guess your D700 can be used up to 250, however at low ISO, you will lose the ambient below 200 already.

That's all I can imagine to test,
here are the corrected photos I had with just one click on nik
http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/Other/tests/22129471_gq5gDW
by the way I seem to have the exif data someone mentioned that were missing

good luck
bernard

In the end, once you have checked with the default settings, and check if use RGB and get a result from a lab on a print, if you want to reduce the red you can modify it in your camera setting and create a new default position. And get it to what you want for your taste.

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

If you "save for web" in Photoshop it strips out all the EXIF data. This also happens in Lightroom if the minimise data is set when exporting.

Better to post to the Gallery by resizing the image to the stated gallery limits and save as jpg.

Ian

If only Mozart had had a camera

Now I'm confused! I opened your image in Photoshop CS5 and indeed the woman's face is red. I put it side by side with the same image shown in Firefox 10 browser (as I use for Niokonians) set to colour management on and the face is perfect definately no red.

Hope you can post the image again as I mentioned earlier without save for web so that we can view the EXIF.

Ian

If only Mozart had had a camera

I took the image from this forum and this is the exif that I have. Do you have something else?
you can see it on smugmug by clicking the info button
or are you referring to something else?

Date Taken: 2012-03-22 15:13:09
Camera: NIKON CORPORATION NIKON D700
Exposure Time: 0.005s (1/200)
Aperture: f/6.3
ISO: 200
Focal Length: 160mm (160mm in 35mm)
Date Modified: 2012-03-22 15:13:09
Photo Dimensions: 681 x 1024
File Size: 150.42 KB
Flash: flash did not fire
Metering: pattern
Exposure Program: manual
Exposure Bias: 1 EV
Exposure Mode: manual
Light Source: unknown
White Balance: auto
Digital Zoom: 1.0x
Contrast: 0
Saturation: 0
Sharpness: 0
Subject Distance: 42/25
Subject Distance Range: unknown
Sensing Method: one-chip color sensor
Color Space: sRGB

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

>I took the image from this forum and this is the exif that I
>have. Do you have something else?
>Flash: flash did not fire
>Light Source: unknown
>White Balance: auto


I’ve been following this discussion with interest, and I hope you all don’t mind if I interject a thought.

I see in this EXIF data the camera lists that flash did not fire suggesting flash was not used as far as the camera was concerned. We also know that the ambient lighting was fluorescent and the WB was set to auto. That would, I think, cause the camera to select a WB setting balanced for the fluorescent lighting, which depending on which type could be lacking in the red spectrum. I would then think the strobes used would add the missing spectrum causing the in camera WB selection to be in error. Although I don’t know how one could trigger studio strobes, but then have the camera think that no flash fired.

Hopefully my ignorance and lack of experience in this area is not causing me to come to an incorrect conclusion.

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thank you for responding. I now feel like I'm trying to communicate in another language with people who speak it fluently and I don't. I appreciate all the help very much. I am not sure my answers are very helpful.

I fired the Alien Bee strobe with a Pocket Wizard Plus II.

I had wondered as well about the fluorescent lighting but another member did not think that was factor. It does make sense that it would come into play however, especially if it's green and camera is detecting this. But here I am speaking a foreign language...... not able to connect the dots very well.

As I recall, the red was there even when I turned the lights off and the room was totally dark. Unfortunately, I did not make which photos were taken in the dark. I can try this again. But it's not like I came across a new series of NEFs and said 'Wow, something is different. These are better.'

>
>
>I’ve been following this discussion with interest, and I hope
>you all don’t mind if I interject a thought.
>
>I see in this EXIF data the camera lists that flash did not
>fire suggesting flash was not used as far as the camera was
>concerned. We also know that the ambient lighting was
>fluorescent and the WB was set to auto. That would, I think,
>cause the camera to select a WB setting balanced for the
>fluorescent lighting, which depending on which type could be
>lacking in the red spectrum. I would then think the strobes
>used would add the missing spectrum causing the in camera WB
>selection to be in error. Although I don’t know how one could
>trigger studio strobes, but then have the camera think that no
>flash fired.
>
>Hopefully my ignorance and lack of experience in this area is
>not causing me to come to an incorrect conclusion.
>
>Pete
>

Thank you. I don't think I have anything else. Only the information in ACR, such as color temps (such as as shot or how changed after tinkering in post process).

>I took the image from this forum and this is the exif that I
>have. Do you have something else?
>you can see it on smugmug by clicking the info button
>or are you referring to something else?
>
>Date Taken: 2012-03-22 15:13:09
>Camera: NIKON CORPORATION NIKON D700
>Exposure Time: 0.005s (1/200)
>Aperture: f/6.3
>ISO: 200
>Focal Length: 160mm (160mm in 35mm)
>Date Modified: 2012-03-22 15:13:09
>Photo Dimensions: 681 x 1024
>File Size: 150.42 KB
>Flash: flash did not fire
>Metering: pattern
>Exposure Program: manual
>Exposure Bias: 1 EV
>Exposure Mode: manual
>Light Source: unknown
>White Balance: auto
>Digital Zoom: 1.0x
>Contrast: 0
>Saturation: 0
>Sharpness: 0
>Subject Distance: 42/25
>Subject Distance Range: unknown
>Sensing Method: one-chip color sensor
>Color Space: sRGB

Thank you. Join the club! I am super confused as well. This is frustrating that they are showing red to some and fine to others. How can I have any idea what my clients are seeing?

I did not do a 'save for web' save or function. Did it do that automatically? All I did was open as a jpeg (from NEF unedited), resize manually and post. I am sorry my lack of knowledge here is making it harder for members to solve this mystery but I do very much appreciate the help and attention.


>Now I'm confused! I opened your image in Photoshop CS5 and
>indeed the woman's face is red. I put it side by side with
>the same image shown in Firefox 10 browser (as I use for
>Niokonians) set to colour management on and the face is
>perfect definately no red.
>
>Hope you can post the image again as I mentioned earlier
>without save for web so that we can view the EXIF.
>
>Ian

I took some shots yesterday after restoring to factory settings and taking a custom white balance with Expo Disc. They were very blue. That's due to custom WB I am 99 percent sure. But why so off? I pointed camera to the light source when taken the control shot -- the softbox, which of course fired. I then just used window light to take custom WB and it looked normal.

>
>I took some shots yesterday after restoring to factory
>settings and taking a custom white balance with Expo Disc.
>They were very blue. That's due to custom WB I am 99 percent
>sure. But why so off? I pointed camera to the light source
>when taken the control shot -- the softbox, which of course
>fired. I then just used window light to take custom WB and it
>looked normal.

May I suggest that you download and screen view one of the many available test images, e.g http://tinyurl.com/cu8qglp

In the above does the child's face look too red and does the guard's tunic look red or garish red?

Ian

If only Mozart had had a camera

Oh I did not know about that. Pretty cool. The baby's skin looks pretty normal to me.

So that might mean that somehow my photos are coming out red, somewhere. Maybe not in camera? In processing? But if so, where and why and how to fix?

Thank you.

If you were happy with the image as viewed in your ? browser now open it in Photoshop and see if it changes.

Ian

If only Mozart had had a camera

Thank you. I did that. The color looks the same, fine.

What does this mean now? That Photoshop is displaying colors properly?


>If you were happy with the image as viewed in your ? browser
>now open it in Photoshop and see if it changes.
>
>Ian

hi,

you did not post any more, does this mean you dropped the problem or you found the issue and fixed it?
If you found it, please let us know what it was and what fixed it, this is general knowledge and a good reference for anyone who might have a similar problem

thanks
b

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

Thank you for checking back.

This is not over though I have no more news. I do not really have a solution. I think turning out the overhead lights as helped. (For some ambient light I keep a window open.) I don't KNOW that turning out overheads has helped but I think so. I do still have the redness and it's frustrating but I think it might be better. I haven't done anything else.

Trouble is I ratchet back the red on the images and then see them in other programs (like my proofing site) and they are washed out and sometimes to green or cyan. So it could be my monitor. That baby photo someone suggested I download/copy as a guide does look pretty normal to me.

Thanks for sharing, I understand your frustration and wish there was an easy answer.
if you try a print quality, this might give you a clearer view of what the reality is, and maybe recalibrate your monitor.

good luck, do let us know if you get better results

b

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

Wow, what an ordeal. And it seems like you were just chasing your tail and not approaching this from a logical pattern at all.

There are three potential issues that I see.

1. A problem with the camera.
2. A problem with your lights.
3. A problem with your computer.

To eliminate #3, take your RAW images, convert to JPG, and open them on another computer, phone, or anything. If the images look fine there and horrid on your computer, then you have a computer problem.

To eliminate #2, go outside and shoot in the sunlight with a daylight balance. Do the images look right? If so, you may have a problem with your strobes. And yes, while Alien Bees do change with power, so do all other strobes to varying degrees. And the color shift on a Bee from minimum power to max power is CERTAINLY within the range of correction in LR or PS. It's a few hundred mired. No big deal at all.

To eliminate #1. Take a CF card to your local electronics store, and take a photo. Bring it back to your computer and see how it looks. If it's normal, it may be your camera.


From going through all that has been posted so far, you have a number of issues, some self inflicted.

Turn off AWB. NOTHING could be worse for studio flashing. Just set your camera WB to "flash". It may not be perfect, but it will be DANG close. Alternately, calibrate with your expodisc. This will put you in the money for a WB. Just set the camera up for a custom white balance, then go sit or stand where the model would go, and fire off a shot with the expodisc in place. And it will give a perfect WB, even if the AB's are shifting color.

The flourescents shouldn't matter at all. The strobes, even at minumum power are going to be 100x as bright.

It sounds to me like you've got an issue with one of your computer programs trying to process in the wrong color space. That's my initial guess. The biggest clue to this is that you say when you look at things on your proofing site (after your corrections) they look washed out. So do this to test. Shoot a shot normally. Do not process the image. Upload it to your proofing site. Does it look ok? If so, your monitor is fine, and your camera is fine. Your editing software has something messed up.

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thanks.

You are right about one thing (probably a lot more than that): I have been chasing my tail.

That all sounds like good advice. I wish there was somewhere/someone I could take computer to to look at all the editing/PS/ACR settings to see if I have at least got the computer set up right. I do try to calibrate the monitor(s) but honestly I do not know what I'm doing so I go thru the motions and hope for the best. I do know of two other photographers who have red issues with the D700.

When I am able I will get a D800 and we will see how the strobes react with that camera. But it will probably be a few months. I have D5100 but haven't taken any stills, not really, not of people, and can't open anyway as I have only CS4.

I am going to try some of your tests.

>Thanks.
>
>You are right about one thing (probably a lot more than that):
>I have been chasing my tail.
>
>That all sounds like good advice. I wish there was
>somewhere/someone I could take computer to to look at all the
>editing/PS/ACR settings to see if I have at least got the
>computer set up right. I do try to calibrate the monitor(s)
>but honestly I do not know what I'm doing so I go thru the
>motions and hope for the best. I do know of two other
>photographers who have red issues with the D700.
>
>When I am able I will get a D800 and we will see how the
>strobes react with that camera. But it will probably be a few
>months. I have D5100 but haven't taken any stills, not really,
>not of people, and can't open anyway as I have only CS4.
>
>I am going to try some of your tests.


Well, I hate to overstate the obvious.. but how do the pics look on the D700 LCD when you shoot them? That's certainly not a calibrated screen, but it's good enough to see if something is WAY out of line. If it looks good there, then your problem isn't your camera.

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Good question. I am trying to remember. I think they look red. All cards are since formatted so can't check now. Maybe it's the card. Probably not. I have been using the same card.

It can not be the card, there is nothing there that could alter the information. It is either readable or not, but color can not be changed.

all the steps described above are good common logic, unless you rigorously follow them, you won't know for sure, and there is no need to find someone who can look at your computer until you know it is the culprit

and if i can suggest, don't try to remember if it was or not red on the display, just shoot a few photos and you will know for sure

and if your D700 is the culprit and shoots too red consistently, there is a menu item where you can correct it to be right, but you must have a way to verify that it is your camera, and nothing else before you modify it

good luck
b

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

Perrone suggestion of color space is also important to check. Since you are not printing, maybe you should make sure you use sRGB on your camera and your computer program, without changing. Whatever you have, is easy to check in the preferences of your software. Make sure you consistently use sRGB through the whole process. Check the help on your software if you don't know where to change this, should be easy

my photos on: http://bernardcollin.smugmug.com/

Even if he IS printing, sRGB is still a viable workflow. Since I use Bay Photo, and now WHCC as well, my entire workflow is sRGB based. That's how their printers are calibrated. EZPrints and BWC as well. AdoramaPix is sRGB also.

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.