Soft Proofing now dark & yellow

Photoshop (CS4 on Windows XP) froze at startup this morning - 3 times in a row.
I was able to restart but now my custom Soft Proof settings, and I tried serveral, make the images display as dark and yellow.  It's as if the Paper White setting was the equivalent of the lowest grade of old newsprint you care to imagine.
What happened and how can I fix it?
cvt

Well I re-did the monitor profiles with PMP 5 and got  the same results - toggling Soft Proof on and off (Cntrl-Y) displayed a darker/yellow image when on.
Then I re-profiled both monitors with i!Match (I profiled the lesser, an HP-TFT display, and then matched the NEC IPS to it) and now Soft Proof works as it should.
Why did PMP 5 do this?
I ran PMP 5 on another Dell with a Dell monitor to see if I had overlooked some step or setting that was crucial and nothing leaped out at me.
This makes me wonder if I can depend on any profile from PMP 5.
cvt

Similar Messages

  • Why are my soft proofed prints always too dark in the dark areas and why are the colors, especially red, washed out.

    Use a calibrated camera and monitor. Work in PS CC. Have a controlled work room. Soft proof according to Jeff Schewe of the 'Luminous Landscape'. Printing on a new Epson r2880 with a custom profile. Use fresh Epson Luster paper. The problem keeps persisting no matter what I do. Any and all help will be much appreciated.
    Thanks.
    Richard

    Please turn off your auto reply in your emails.  The forums are designed to be used through a web browser while logged in to the forum.  We don't need to see stuff like your "On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:50 PM, station_two <[email protected]>".  Everybody sees everyone's post.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Now, did they first send you a target file which you then printed on your particular printer using your intended paper and inks, then snail-mailed the print to them in California in order for them to make your custom printer profile for you, which they then in turn emailed to you?   If that was not the case, you do not have a custom profile at all, but a meaningless stock one.  Even if they used a printer model exactly like yours when they created the profile, it was not done on your particular unit and therefore is not valid.
    On the other hand, if the procedure above was indeed followed correctly, then that custom printer profile is showing you exactly what your images will look like once you print them.
    That's precisely what soft proofing is for, so you can adjust your image while in Proof view.
    Hope this clears it up for you.

  • Custom Soft Proof Settings....

    Hi....I'm looking for a way to save and load custom soft proof settings in AiCS4. The Adobe help docs say this is possible:
    http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Illustrator/14.0/WS218910C1-B8D3-450b-AC31-9E6EA50C2BAD.html
    ...but my custom soft proof dialog doesn't give me the options. I'm wondering if it's possible.
    Illustrator CS4 v14.0.0
    Thanks,
    Carl Stawicki

    Well I re-did the monitor profiles with PMP 5 and got  the same results - toggling Soft Proof on and off (Cntrl-Y) displayed a darker/yellow image when on.
    Then I re-profiled both monitors with i!Match (I profiled the lesser, an HP-TFT display, and then matched the NEC IPS to it) and now Soft Proof works as it should.
    Why did PMP 5 do this?
    I ran PMP 5 on another Dell with a Dell monitor to see if I had overlooked some step or setting that was crucial and nothing leaped out at me.
    This makes me wonder if I can depend on any profile from PMP 5.
    cvt

  • Printing, Soft Proofing & Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions

    Printing, Soft Proofing, and Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions
    There are 2 common ways to set color management in Adobe CS2:
    1. use managed by printer setting or,
    2. use managed by Adobe CS2 program.
    I want to ask how Color Management for Adobe LR 1.2 differs from that in CS2?
    As is well known, Color Management by printer requires accurate printer profiles including specific model printer, types of ink and specific paper. It is clear that this seems to work well for LR 1.2 when using the Printer module.
    Now lets consider what happens one tries to use Color Management by Adobe LR 1.2. Again, as is well known, Color Management by printer must be turned off so that only one Color Management system is used. It has been my experience that LR 1.2 cant Color Manage my images correctly. Perhaps someone with more experience can state whether this is true or what I might be doing to invalidate LR 1.2 Color Management.
    Specifically, I cant use Soft Proofing to see how my images are changed on my monitor when I try to use the edit functions in LR 1.2. Martin Evening states in his text, The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book that it is not possible to display the results of the rendered choices (Perceptual or Relative) on the display monitor. While it is not clear in Evenings text if this applies to LR 1.2, my experience would suggest that it still applies to the 1.2 update even though the publication date of his book preceded this update.
    Can someone with specific knowledge of Adobe LR 1.2 confirm that Color Management and Soft Proofing with LR 1.2 hasnt been implemented at the present.
    The writer is a retired physicist with experience in laser physics and quantum optics.
    Thanks,
    Hersch Pilloff

    Hersch,
    since just like me, you're a physicist (I am just a little further from retirement ;) ) I'll explain a little further. computer screens (whether they are CRT or LCD) are based on emission (or transmission) of three colors of light in specific (but different for every screen) shades of red, green, and blue. This light stimulates the receptors in your eye which are sensitive to certain but different bands of red, green and blue as the display emits, making your brain think it sees a certain color instead of a mix of red green and blue. Printers however, produce color by modifying the reflection of the paper by absorbing light. Their color mixing operates completely differently than displays. When you throw all colors of ink on the paper, you get black (the mixing is said to be subtractive) instead of white as you get in displays (the mixing there is additive). The consequence of this is that in the absence of an infinite number of inks you cannot produce all the colors you can display on a monitor using a printer and vice versa. This can be easily seen if you compare a display's profile to a printer profile in a program such as Colorsync utility (on every mac) or
    Gamut vision. Typically printers cannot reproduce a very large region in the blue but most displays on the other hand cannot make saturated yellows and cyans.
    Here is a flattened XY diagram of a few color spaces and a typical printer profile to illustrate this. Most displays are close to sRGB, but some expensive ones are close to adobeRGB, making the possible difference between print and screen even worse.
    So, when the conversion to the printer's profile is made from your source file (which in Lightroom is in a variant of prophotoRGB), for a lot of colors, the color management routine in the computer software has to make an approximation (the choice of perceptual and relative colorimetric determine what sort of approximation is made). Soft proofing allows you to see the result of this approximation and to correct specific problems with it.

  • Rendering intent when displaying, exporting or soft proofing?

    I am trying to make use of soft proofing to adjust my images for a given output device for which I have ICC profiles. The two profiles I am playing with are for a Lambda and a Fuji Frontier. The Lambda working space almost fits within Adobe RGB, it exceeds it in only a few places but is noticeably smaller for a number of other colors. The Frontier working space is for most colors a bit smaller than the Lambda and about equal for only a small number of colors. The Frontier working space would also almost fit into sRGB (to give you an impression of its size).
    When soft proofing with Aperture, dark greens desaturate more with the larger Lambda working space than with Frontier one. If the rendering intent were relative colorimetric, colors should be clipped more and limited by the smaller working space of the Frontier. If perceptual is used then colors would in general be somewhat more compressed (ie, desaturated) with the smaller Frontier working space. But I see rather the opposite. In short, neither explanation makes sense.
    So I tried exporting from Aperture into Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB hoping that both would be big enough to contain most of the internal gamut of Aperture in order not to require much compression or clipping when converting from the internal color space of Aperture (I saw no difference between Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB in the exported files, so I guess both are large enough for my purposes). And I then converted/soft proofed these files from Photoshop into my two output profiles. More options (different rendering intents, black point compensation) but none seemed to really match what Aperture was soft proofing. I still have a lot of ideas what to try out but if anybody could shed some light on rendering intents and soft proofing with Aperture, it would be very much appreciated.
    (A related question, what rendering intent is used when converting colors, let's say defined in the Lab space in Photoshop, to the screen? I guess this is defined in the monitor profile, which in turn is created by the monitor calibration software, and therefore might depend on the latter. I would guess some kind of perceptual, but how the colors are really fitted and converted from the larger Lab color space into the smaller monitor one might very noticeably been different calibration software and will be different again for the monitor profile supplied by Apple.)

    I went on about this a little more scientific by creating an image with three rectangles: red, blue and green.
    All of them are 100%, e.g. (255, 0, 0). Colorspace: ProPhoto RGB.
    Results when exporting the images to AdobeRGB and sRGB, concentrating on the reds:
    - sRGB looks very washed out
    - AdobeRGB looks a bit washed out
    - Original ProPhoto has so much red that it almost drives me nuts
    Now, I would really expect similar results when activiating soft proofing.
    But when selecting either AdobeRGB or sRGB, the reds always drive me nuts.
    There is just no difference at all to the original ProPhoto image!
    Conclusion 1: Dorin, you were right, previews are in AdobeRGB. What I saw in the reds was the difference between ProPhoto and AdobeRGB. Somehow my screen seems to have extreme reds (calibrated recently with an X-Rite ColorMunki Display).
    Conclusion 2: Soft proofing with AdobeRGB and sRGB really DOES NOT WORK!

  • Soft proofing to sRGB not working as expected

    I've gone through three customer reps via chat on this, and none of them had a clue.
    I recently discovered the soft proofing capability in Lightroom 4, and watched an Adobe video about it. Looked pretty cool. I experimented with soft-proofing for printing to an Epson Artisan printer. I'd always struggled a little bit with prints being too dark, etc., but now I was able to produce the best prints I've ever had.
    But then I started to experiment with soft proofing for sRGB. My photo club takes photo submissions as sRGB, and they then show them on a monitor during meetings. Sometimes they don't look so good. So, I figured soft-proofing them first would help correct that.
    So, I've got a photo that has a lot of red in it (a flower). The soft proofing indicated pretty much all of the reds were out of gamut. I tried reducing the saturation, but they had to go pretty much completely desaturated (black and white) before Lightroom said they were in gamut. I also experimented with change the hue, but still no luck.
    I then deleted the soft proof virtual copy, and just exported the original as sRGB. Looked fine.
    This would seem to make the soft proofing to sRGB to be somewhat useless for me (at least for reds - seemed okay for the small number of other photos I experimented with that didn't have that much red).
    Just wondering if anyone else has had issues with this, or if I'm doing anything incorrectly, etc.
    Thanks!
    P.S. Update...  Last chat rep had me try something that seemed to work better. My photos are stored in Lightroom as JPGs with a color space of RGB and a color profile of ProPhoto RGB. If I export that photo to JPG / sRGB, then re-import it into Lightroom, and then do the soft proofing again, it works much better. The downside of this that the two-step process makes it a bit unusable for me.

    > if I'm doing anything incorrectly,
    You should not really try to do the bringing of the colors into gamut too much. I know the videos you see online show this but it is really counterproductive in many cases. You'll often completely desaturate or get really disagreeable hue shifts if you trust the out of gamut warnings as you have noticed. What you should do is turn on the softproof and check whether your image looks good and the colors don't shift too much. If they do or you lose essential detail, try to correct it using the HSL tools or local desaturation. The out of gamut warning is more useful when you are proofing to a printer profile and you might have colors that your display cannot show but your printer can print. For sRGB, not so much in my experience.
    > Last chat rep had me try something that seemed to work better. My photos are stored in Lightroom as JPGs with a color space of RGB and a color profile of ProPhoto RGB. If I export that photo to JPG / sRGB, then re-import it into Lightroom, and then do the soft proofing again, it works much better
    That's a silly answer that rep gave you. What happens when you export to sRGB is that all your colors will get truncated hard(it uses a relative coloremtric conversion) to the sRGB profile, so if there was detail there that you wish to preserve you just lost it and you won't be able to get it back. Of course if you then soft proof the sRGB jpeg to sRGB, you will have an easy time conforming it to sRGB, since it already is! The out of gamut warning it might show you on sRGB jpegs without any correction is not correct - a known bug or strangeness with how Lightroom handles these and just tiny touches on the sliders will make them disappear. It is fooling you and in fact you were better off not even trying to soft proof and simply exporting to sRGB and ignoring soft proofing.
    P.S. the monitor problems you have noticed in your photo club are probably more an issue of the monitor not being calibrated and probably not using a color managed application to show the images. If your monitor is calibrated and that one is too and using a color managed app to show the images should give you very good correspondance in color between your monitor and that one regardless of what color space you choose for the images. That might perhaps be a good thing for the club. You really need to be calibrating monitors and use only color managed apps for display.

  • Costco and soft proofing show dull washed out image

    OK, so I am trying to utilize my nearest costco to print some images from lightroom 5. I am getting back dull washed out prints.
    Facts:
    I shoot in RAW in manual mode
    I am using sRGB when I do my post processing
    I export to jpg for printing
    I used the costco LR5 plugin from Alloyphoto to upload to Costco
    I have installed the printer profiles from drycreek for the specific location/printer and have chosen the correct profile as I export
    I made sure that I chose to have Costco NOT autocorrect the color
    Even when I use LR5's soft proofing, I get the same result on my monitor
    I checked the print I got back and it says that they did NOT autocorrect (taken with a grain of salt)
    The machine they are using is a Noritsu QSS-A, so I know my profile is correct
    I have attached a screen shot of what I am seeing.
    Why am I seeing this on my soft proofing as well as my prints?
    How can I solve this and get vibrant prints?
    Any advice would be helpful.
    Message was edited by: moviebuffking

    moviebuffking wrote:
    I have calibrated my monitor as good as I can get without specific hardware. I have 18 years experience calibrating monitors (via optical media and my eyes), so I know that mine is very close.
    It is virtually impossible to "accurately" set the Luminance, Gamma, and Color temperature "by eye." This is most likely the cause of your prints not matching the screen image you see in LR. That being the monitor's Luminance (i.e. Brightness) level is too set to high.
    http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/colour_management/prints_too_dark.html
    To see if this could be your problem I downloaded the posted screen shot and cropped out the 'Copy' image, which has your adjustments applied to it. Here are my results:
    Click on image to see full-size
    I needed to apply a full F stop (+1.0 EV) of Exposure correction to achieve a good midtone brightness level for the print image. You'll notice I also added -50 Highlights and +50 Shadows along with +25 Vibrance. I bet the image with my adjustments added looks way too bright on your uncalibrated monitor.
    You have two (2)  issues–Monitor Calibration and LR Basic Panel Control Adjustments
    Monitior Calibration
    I would highly recommend investing in a hardware monitor calibrator such as the X-Rite i1 Display and ColorMunki, or Datacolor Spyder models. If you tell me what make and model monitor you are using I can recommend specific calibrators.
    Temporarily you can try adjusting the monitor "by eye" to get it closer to the desired 120cd/m2 Luminance, 2.2 Gamma, and 6500K Color Temperature using the test patterns at this site:
    http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
    When the monitors Brightness and Contrast controls have been correctly set the screen image should look much closer to the prints you have recently made with the LR Soft Proof adjustments. So in fact you will be adjusting the monitor to make it look bad with the LR adjustments you applied. The proper monitor settings will make the Lagom test patterns look correct AND should make your bad Costco prints now match the screen image using you original LR settings.
    After changing the monitor's Brightness and Contrast settings try readjusting a few of the  image files you had printed and send them to Costco as check prints. Compare them again to your monitor's screen image. They should be much better!
    LR Basic Panel Tone Control Adjustment
    LR's PV2012 Tone controls can provide much improvement to your raw image Highlight and Shadow detail. Start with all of the Tone controls at their '0' default settings and adjust them from the top-down in the order shown below.
    1. Set Exposure for the midtone brightness ignoring the highlight and shadow areas for now. Setting Exposure about +.5 EV higher than what looks correct for the midtones seems to work best with most images.
    2. Leave Contrast at 0 for now. You’ll adjust this after the first pass.
    3. Adjust Highlights so that blown out areas are recovered and “fine tonal detail” is revealed.
    4. Adjust Shadows to reveal fine detail in dark areas. For most normal images simply setting -Shadows = +Highlights (Example -50 and +50) works very well.
    5. The Whites control sets the white clipping point, which you can see by holding down the ALT key as you move the slider. Adjust it to the point where you see clipping just appear with the ALT key.
    6. The Blacks control sets the black clipping point, which you can see by holding down the ALT key as you move the slider. Adjust it to the point where you see clipping just appear with the ALT key.
    7. Now go back and adjust the Contrast control to establish the best midtone contrast.
    8. Lastly touchup the Exposure control for the best midtone brightness.
    9. If necessary “touch-up” the controls using the same top-down workflow.
    moviebuffking wrote:
    Am I correct in assuming that the soft proof (with a certain profile) is a "preview" of what that print will look like?
    Soft Proof does two things. It shows you what the image's colors will look like in the target color space (i.e. printer profile). You can see what (if any) colors are "out of gamut" by clicking on the small icon in the upper-righthand corner of the Histogram. You can also see if any of the colors fall out of your monitor's gamut by clicking on the small icon in the upper-lefthand corner of the Histogram.
    When you check 'Simulate Paper & Ink' the Soft Proof image's contrast and color saturation are changed to make it look closer to what the "reflective" print image will look like when held next to the monitor for comparison. Many people have difficulty using 'Simulate Paper & Ink' since it requires using precise light levels for viewing the print and a well calibrated monitor.
    In summary my best suggestion is to purchase and use a good hardware monitor calibrator on a scheduled basis to insure you have an "accurate" screen image inside LR and other color managed applications like PS.

  • Display profiles and soft proofing Windows RGB / Monitor RGB

    This might have asked before, but I did not find any definite answer for this. Sorry this gets a bit long.
    Short question:
    What's the difference between softproofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets? I see differences in my image between these targets.
    Long question(s):
    Here's some reasoning.. let me know when I go wrong.
    I have hardware calibrated my display Spyder 3 elite to sRGB standard. I have understood that the generated display profile contains a LUT table that affects gamma values for each RGB component, so that affects both gamma and color temperature. That table is loaded into video card when Windows starts. In addition to the LUT table, the display profile contains what? Probably information on what color space the display has been calibrated to. Does that matches directly with the LUT table information, but may deviate from sRGB in the case my monitor cannot reproduce sRGB 100%?
    Now if I have image that that is in sRGB, but the embedded sRGB profile has been stripped away, should any non color management aware image viewer show the colors properly, if it is assumed that 1) my monitor can handle full sRGB space and 2) my monitor was succesfully calibrated to sRGB and the LUT table has been loaded into video card?
    Or does it still require a color management aware program to show the image, which implies that the LUT table information alone is not enough and the display profile contains some extra information that is needed to show the image correctly? I would think this is true, as I needed to turn on color management in Canon Zoom Browser to see images in it the same way as in Photoshop.
    Now to the original question, what's the difference in Photoshop when soft proofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets
    I read from www.gballard.net that
    Photoshop can effectively "SoftProof" our web browser color:
    Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Windows RGB
    Photoshop's Soft Proof screen preview here simulates how unmanaged applications, web browsers, will display the file on 2.2 gamma monitors, based on the sRGB profile. If the file is based on sRGB and our monitor gamma is 2.2 and D/65 6500 degrees Kelvin, we should see very little shift here, which is the goal.
    Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Monitor RGB
    THIS IS WHERE the color-brightness-saturation problem will repeat consistantly.
    Soft Proofing Monitor RGB here strips-ignores the embedded ICC profile and Assigns-Assumes-Applies the Monitor profile or color space.
    The color and density changes seen here show the difference between the monitor profile and the source profile sRGB.
    I'm not sure how to read that. Assume here that my monitor has been calibrated to sRGB and the PS working space sRGB. Do in both cases photoshop strip away color profile from the image at first? What happens after that? Does in Windows RGB case Photoshop pass the color values as they are to display? What does it do in "Monitor RGB" case then? Does it assign my monitor profile to the image? If it does, does there also happen conversion from one color space to another? In either one conversion there must happen as the soft proofing results are different. Does either one cause "double profiling" to the image as the monitor is already calibrated?
    Thanks

    Windows defaults to sRGB if you don't calibrate your monitor so untagged sRGB files should display (more or less) correctly in applications that don't know about color management on systems with uncalibrated monitors.
    When proofing against Windows RGB you're proofing against sRGB, it will show you how applications that don't know about color management on an uncalibrated monitor will show the image. This is what you proof against if you want to see how the image will display in web browsers.
    When you proof against Monitor RGB, Photoshop will assign your monitor's icc profile to the image which tends to be utterly useless most of the time.

  • Soft proofing quit working in 4.2 update

    the Cloud just updated my Photoshop CC to 14.2 and now the soft proofing feature doesn't work properly.  It slows the machine to a crawl and only shows unlinked blocks of proofs.  It was working fine inm the last version.
    Thanks anyone for helping

    I am having the same problem with Apple TV 2 - My children's movies are showing all songs.  Comedy movies the same.
    I have changed 8 movies (meta tags) and call them kids movies, go to the Apple TV2  and shows all songs.   When I update the genre and called the movies genres "business" it seems to fix it.  I don't see any rime or reason. 
    I can't understand it - never had this problem with Apple TV 1
    Thoughts?
    I just bought the Apple TV and it was on 4.2 and now I am on 4.22

  • Strange sRGB soft-proofing behavior

    I am wondering if the CMS gurus might have an idea about this:
    I am using Photoshop CC, but had a similar experience with the previous version and on a different machine.
    I have a wide gamut NEC monitor which has been profiled using i1 Display. The generated profile is selected in Windows as default profile. Everything seems OK with this side of things.
    So I have a bitmap file with sRGB embedded profile, and my working space is sRGB.  Colour appears correct in 'normal' editing view, i.e. PS is already adjusting what it is sending to the monitor based on the fact that it is an sRGB image. To confirm, I can look at the same graphic in Firefox with CMS switched on, and it looks the same as in Photoshop. And it looks "correct". Furthermore, if I soft-proof to "Monitor", what I see makes sense too. (Overly vibrant colours). And that's also visually consistent with looking at it in Firefox with CMS switched off.
    So far so good. The fun begins when I ask PS to softproof the image to sRGB.  Now, you might ask what would be the point of that, since in theory I'm already looking at it being rendered into sRGB colour space. Regardless, what I expect to happen is that soft-proofing to sRGB makes absolutely no difference to what I see. However this is not the case! The on-screen representation changes markedly... not only is it overly saturated but there is a colour shift as well!  To make matters more confusing, when I use the Info box to show the raw and the softproof colour values, they are identical, as they should be. So the numbers seem OK, but the on-screen rendering is clearly wrong.
    I also see a similar effect if I do a "convert to profile sRGB" with preview switched on. Up until I hit the OK button, the preview rendering is "wrong". Once the conversion completes (which did nothing because it was already in sRGB space) it renders as it did before.
    I'm wondering if this is some kind of weird bug that happens when you softproof to the space you're already in?
    MT

    tozzy wrote:
    it's very confusing behavior and leads you to wonder if there are other times when the on-screen CMS rendering behavior can't be trusted.
    In my observation there are two forms of color-management implementation, both controlled by Adobe:  The first is the traditional Adobe Color Engine as executed by the CPU - this is run if you have the [ ] Enable Graphics Processor setting unchecked or have it checked but are using Basic drawing mode in the Advanced Settings section.  Phtotoshop also reverts to this CPU-resident color-management while you are moving a window and when you're using View - Gamut Warning.
    The second form is executed by the GPU and is used when in Normal and Advanced drawing modes.  This GPU implementation is presumably faster, but is also observably inaccurate under certain specific conditions.  For example, if your document is in the ProPhoto RGB color space, it will show subtle color banding in a pure gray gradient.
    The GPU-resident color management transforms have also been seen to add multi-value output level jumps, resulting in visible banding, in high bit depth gray gradients, where the CPU-resident code does not.
    I reported these inaccuracies to Adobe some time ago, but either the GPU-resident color-management code is inscrutable or they just have other priorities, because the inaccuracies remain.
    I just brought all this up, tozzy, since you mention the problem going away when the CPU-resident color-management code is invoked.  To retain GPU acceleration for other things, but use CPU color-management, try using Basic drawing mode if you're concerned about getting the most accurate displays from color-management.  Remember that you have to close and restart Photoshop after making changes in these settings.
    -Noel

  • Dueling Features: Soft Proofing vs Print Adjustment

    I'm really trying to appreciate the value of the new soft proofing feature that's got many around here excited. While there are other uses I'll get to in a minute, is it fair to say this feature is designed to make printed output predictable and save paper? I watched Julieanne Kost's tutorial and saw how we can identify out-of-gamut colors on our display device and any number of output devices/processes/papers. Her mooring pole example only seemed to illustrate the inherent compromises we have to make. If we're lucky our monitor IS showing us a hi-fidelity rendering of the image gamut and we're making an informed creative decision about which way we accommodate outlier colors in the output space. If, as in her example, both ends of the line are out of gamut, I'm not sure we're doing much more than fiddling. Not that I have anything against the illusion of control... if I did I couldn't stay married.
    So assuming we've got a good monitor and decent eyes, soft proofing gives us some predictive power over what we're going to get before we feed a 24 x 30 sheet of Exhibition Fiber into the 9890 and blow $6 plus ink.
    More useful in my own case is the potential to tailor image adjustments to client's prepress requirements. If I can get a prepress profile from a magazine client I can try to give them images that print better on their presses while staying true to my vision. Am I on the right track here?
    Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities. One saves paper, the other says "throw another sheet in the machine and let's see what comes out"
    I'm purposely trying to be humorous. I picture two LR teams arguing across the meeting room table. The calibrationists vs the gunslingers. MadManChan tell me it ain't so.

    VeloDramatic wrote:
    Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities.
    Yup, very confusing. Especially if the issue is, my prints are too dark compared to my display which this is presumably supposed to fix. If the prints really are too dark, the RGB values need to be fixed and we have to wonder why the user didn’t see on their calibrated display, the RGB values are too dark. If instead, the print is darker appearing than the display, the fix seems to be to properly calibrate the display or fix the print viewing conditions to produce a match. And if the print is only too dark appearing compared to the display, what do the sliders do once you have a lighter (matching) print next to your too bright display and move the print away? Seems it would appear too light, not a good solution.

  • Lightroom 4 soft proofing doesn't show installed ICC profiles

    If I go to printing options there are many paper profiles I can choose. However in the Other menu of the soft proofing tool, there is no profile except the visualization ones.
    I have an HP officejet 8500 pro printer and windows 7 64 bit.

    Disregard my second message about not understanding your email reply.
    I thought I had to hit "H" to see a link -on the email- to confirm my registration.
    I didn't realize it was your answer.
    Since I had just installed my 3.4.1 update and the default on my installed version of LR, and since my 'pins' have never been hidden, the 3.4.1 default of hiding the pins was a problem and is likely to fool a lot of users that hadn't read about hiding those pins yet.  Shouldn't the installation of -any- new version, pick up the defaults currently in LR?  That is an issue.
    We're good now.
    Thanks for the response.
    Michael

  • How differs soft proofing in View - Proof Colors and Save for Web - Preview?

    Hi, I'm currently confused with one inconsistency. My working space is Adobe RGB and I use calibrated monitor. After I finish my work on image I go to View -> Proof Colors -> Internet Standard RGB. Image looks terribly with the overall violet/purple hue. Then I open Save for Web dialogue, I check Convert to RGB and from Preview options I select again Internet Standard RGB. Now the previewed image looks as expected. The same results I get if I manually convert image to sRGB before soft proofing and saving for web. So... what's the difference between preview in Proof Colours and in Save for Web? Thank you for your opinions.

    Hi 21, thank you for your input. All what you say makes perfect sense, it is exactly how it should work and how I expected it works. My problem was, that while testing this theory in practice, I have come to different results. I expected, that if I stick to the theory (meaning keeping in mind all rules you perfectly described) I should get the same result in both soft proof and save for web preview. But... it was not the case. Save for web preview offered expected results while soft proof was completely out of any assumptions and colours were totally over-saturated with violet/purple hue. Also, Edit -> Assign Profile -> sRGB gave another result then Soft Proof -> Custom -> assign sRGB (preserve numbers), but the same as save for web preview.  What troubled me was why this is so.
    Today I've made tests on hardware calibrated monitor and... everything works exactly as you describe and as I expected.
    Then I went back to another monitor which is software calibrated (both monitors are calibrated with X-Rite i1 Display Pro). And again... I received strange results described above. So I did the last thing I thought and disabled colour calibration on that monitor. And suddenly... both soft proof and save for web preview gave the same result.
    Probable conclusion: soft proof and save for web preview (together with Edit -> Assign Profile) are programmed to use different algorithm which is evident on standard gamut monitors with software calibration. Question can be closed.
    Gene and 21, thank you for your effort.

  • [LR 5] Soft Proofing - Monitor Gamut Warning vary with printer profile ?!?!

    Hi,
    There's something I can't understand when using the soft proofing feature in LR.
    The Monitor Gamut Warning feature (top left icon in the histogram when soft proofing is enabled) is supposed to show us what colors in the current image cannot be reproduced on the display. Right ? If I understand well, the warning computation is made by comparing the current image (virtualized by LR in the Melissa RGB color space) to the gamut of the display (read from the active calibration profile).
    So why does LR show different "out of gamut" areas for the display when I change the printer profile selected when using soft proofing? This doesn't make sense to me.
    Did I miss something?
    Thanks in advance.

    indeed they are vague about this. My thought about this comes from conversing with Adobe folks here and elsewhere as I am pretty sure I'vce discussed this on the forum before. As far as I know the monitor warning is supposed to be calculated after the conversion to the printer profile so that you get an idea whether the soft proofed color is accurately displayed. That shoud be the correct behavior as proofing can actually take a color either in or out of the monitor gamut. I am not 100% sure on this though but it certainly explains how it behaves.
    Also if you calibrate your display and write out a icc v4 display profile, the situation changes again as now the display profile can actually contain a perceptual rendering intent, making it even less precise and the assumption of simple one-to-one linear conversions between color spaces is invalid. Few calibration software packages do this though but there are a few exceptions.
    If you only want to know whether your image is outside of the display profile, you can indeed trick the soft proof to allow you to select a display profile as the printer proofing profile. You can in principle select a standard working space such as prophotoRGB there and get results that make sense. But you definitely do not want to have a random printer profile selected for the reasons cited above. I guess they could add some smartness to detect that you selected the profile of the current display and not a profile of another random display and then collapse the interface but that is such an edge case that I doubt Adobe would prioritize this. It works fine if you simply realize that you selected your monitor profile as the printer proof profile.

  • Soft Proofing: Setting Output Levels

    In Uwe Steinmueller's Fine Art Printing book a very interesting workflow concept is presented that involves assessing shadow and highlight thresholds for specific output combinations and then making a compensating adjustment for the print to maintain detail at either end.  A test strip (ramps from RGB0, RGB1, RGB2 etc and RGB 255, RGB254, RBG253 etc) is generated using the desired printer/ink/paper and you identify where shadow and highlight details are no longer differentiated between adjacent levels.  You than transfer those settings to the output values in a Levels adjustment layer for your print.  Shadows are rendered at the blackest point possible for that printer/ink/paper combo and maintain detail from there, likewise for the highlights through paper white.  It works really well and takes value of the media's full dynamic range.
    This would prove to be a great addition to the soft proofing function, or in general as an addition to the Tone Curve panel: boxes where you could manually input shadow and highlight output values in the same manner as a Levels adjustment layer.  You can accomplish this now by just moving the shadow endpoint up and highlight endpoint down but involves more trial and error.  Even showing the output value as you slide those endpoints (in the same manner that you see RGB values when moving the curve) would be welcome.

    Jay Mitchosky wrote:
    Does current color management remap RGB 0,0,0 to the maximum black registestered in the profile, and RGB 255 to paper white?  It's an interesting question I hadn't thought of, but the process above does seem to work.
    It (the profile) should. And ideally, 1/1/1 would have some measurable difference on the print from 0/0/0 the max black. But like your comment above, we’re not at that point yet, certainly on a heck of a lot of output devices.

Maybe you are looking for

  • Counter does not start at zero sometimes

    Hi, I wonder if someone would be able to give me a little advice, with a counter I am having trouble with. First, about my application. I am (trying to) control a point on wave switch from labview. The switch turns on when it receives a digital 1 and

  • How do I dynamically create a hyperlink in Indesign with vb

    Hi, does anyone know how to create a dynamic link to Indesign with vb? I'm coding a catalog from Access database with images and would like to make an "Enlarge image" hyperlink while generating the page. Somehow I seem to have no luck in my code. Tha

  • Integration Process is not being Triggered

    Hi Gurus, I have a file to file scenario in which I am using BPM to make a synch call in between. Everything appears to be fine in IR and ID.  But, Intergration Process is not being determined as a receiver and hence, IP is not getting  triggered. Wh

  • Colors are off

    I've used previous Photoshop versions and recently upgraded to Photoshop CS5 (I've used the same Dell monitor with previous versions and it looked just fine before). For some reason the colors I use in Photoshop CS5's work-space are off. For example,

  • IPhone 4 soundis very low when headphones are used

    my iPhone volume is extremely low when i plug headphones in when listening to Netflix, Pandora, etc. When i unplug the headphones, the volume is normal when coming from the speakers in the phone- this only happens when we use headphones. We took the