>>4135024Thanks for explaining, I've read up on the rendering intents and color gamuts, and the two videos posted above were also really interesting.
I'm however still kinda clueless about what sort of technicalities in a photo might make it a dealbreaker for a print because it will inevitably look like shit. Like I said, I have a bunch of very low contrast foggy photos with very faint subjects that I was heavily leaning towards, but since it was suggested that they will likely look bad I'm not sure anymore. Defo need some text prints.
But maybe there are other things that some anons might know of from personal experience that are absolute no-gos for printing.
>>4135468>Gretafuck outta here with that puppet
