Adjustments for soft proofing to avoid washed out look

Hi, I've downloaded and installed my photo lab's printing profile. When I soft proof, everything looks washed out and lacks defnition. Blacks look gray and have little detail. Kind of an overall washed out look. I've tried adjusting contrast and saturation, but am underwhelmed with the results. What are the proper steps and areas of adjustment to try and achieve a closer match between the soft proof usng the lab's profile and my calibrated montior? Specific steps and areas of adjustment would help. I know the photo lab's printer gamut and paper makes the difference, but am left thinking there's a simpler way to adjust the photos for best results.
Thanks!

Hi, thanks for the suggestion, but you misunderstood my question. The profile is correct, the soft proofing is working as designed, the question is what controls/adjustments can I make in Aperture to adjust the photo to reduce this washed out look prior to sending the photos out to print. What Aperture adjustments have users found to correct for printer/paper/ink deficiencies? - L

Similar Messages

  • 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.

  • Does Photoshop support N-Color ICC profiles for soft proofing?

    Hi All,
    Does Photoshop support N-Color ICC Profiles for soft proofing? If yes, then can anyone guide me?
    Thanks!

    No, it does not.

  • No paper appears for Soft Proofing in Snow Leopard and R1900 Epson printer...?

    No papers appear for Soft Proofing a photo when using Epson R1900 printer and in Snow Leopard.
    Print driver 6.62 is installed. Soft Profing papers are listed when an image is open in Preview but
    can't print from Preview. None appear when a photo is open in Photoshop. Paper profiles
    are listed in Color Sync Folder in Library but they don't appear for Soft Proofing when in PS.
    How can I get profiles for Soft Proofing? They did appear when my printer was in Tiger & a Power Mac...?

    I can't really tell which drivers you are using right now. It sounds like the best course of action for you is to uninstall all of the Epson printer drivers and reinstall them one at a time. You will need to go into the Library/Caches folder and delete the Epson folder. Also go into the Library/Printers folder and delete the Epson folder. In the PPDs folder, delete the .gz files for your printers, too. If you are using the Gutenprint driver, you will need to uninstall that first. You can download the uninstaller at the following URL:
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-print/files/Uninstaller%20-%20Mac%20OS%20X% 20ONLY/1.2.6/gutenprint-uninstaller-1.2.6.dmg/download
    Click on the file it downloads and uninstall Gutenprint.
    Once all the drivers have been uninstalled, install the latest drivers for each of your printers one at a time and make sure each works before installing to the next one.
    Hope this helps, Syd

  • I would like to know about washed out look

    Hi,
    I notice that a lot of commercials lately have a sort of washed out look about them in the vision. I don't know the best way to describe it but it is like some sort of desatuation, unreal look and i was wondering how they get it. Does anyone have an idea what I am talking about?
    2.5 G5 DP, 2 x 250 HD, FCPHD, Motion, 30" 2.5 gig ram   Mac OS X (10.4.4)  

    Although I've posted about Magic Bullet please be aware that I don't necessarily favour it in any shape or form it was just easy way for you to see that look.
    Patrick once described it as Magic Snail - lol - and I've got to agree. hellish renders - what the others have posted are all equally valid alternatives.
    They're all fat as* renders, some faster than others ... esp on a long form show.
    Another sophisticated product is FinalTouch - expensive yes ...

  • SRGB or Blurb icc profile better for soft proofing prior to Book module?

    As I understand it images destined for Blurb are converted by the Lr engine into sRGB behind the scenes. To achieve best chance of colour accuracy in the finished Blurb book, is it better to softproof using a sRGB profile or the icc profile* offered on the Blurb Support website. On the surface this icc profile is recommended (by them) for their Booksmart process. Anyone know if that is similar to the Lr Book module process? There is no mention of Lr anywhere on the Blurb color management pages.
    It would be great to pin down the answer to this. I cannot find any recommendation for best work practice aimed at getting good colour reproduction in these books; and trial and error, whilst acceptable in making inkjet prints, is a very expensive route when applied to printing a Blurb book.
    * And even then, as far as I can see, there is no method for differentiating between the Blurb papers. It is just one profile to fit all.

    I tried using 'Export Book to PDF' in the LR Book module with 'Book' set to 'Blurb' and the PDF images are all tagged as sRGB profile and 8-bit color.
    SUGGESTION
    If you set 'Book' to 'PDF' under 'Book Setting' you can use Adobe RGB profile, 300 ppi, and your own Sharpening selection, which as Andrew Rodney mentioned is a better choice. You can submit the LR Exported PDF at Blurb's 'PDF To Book' upload page and they will do the proper CMYK conversion on their end. The only issue is that the images are still exported in the LR Book module as 8-bit color JPEGs. This may cause banding with a wider gamut profile, but that should be apparent when reviewing the exported book PDF.
    Here are some comments from Blurb concerning using Blurbs 'PDF to Book' workflow, which is similar to what I just described:
    From Me:
    My Workflow Details:
    My objective is to process all images in LR4 and then export them as 300 dpi, ProPhoto RGB profile, 16 bit TIFF images for layout in InDesign using Blurb's InDesign plugin (Blurb Book Creator CS6 v2.0.2.34d8). I will soft proof the placed images inside InDesign using its 'Proof Colors' tool and the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc profile. Once the InDesign layout is complete I will do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process using the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1.
    Blurb's Resonse:
    Response Via Email(David) - 07/18/2012
    Using InDesign and our Blurb InDesign Plug-in does mean you're using the PDF to Book Workflow. This is because your InDesign files will ultimately be exported/uploaded as PDF files.
    Regarding, "Once the InDesign layout is complete I would like to do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process":
      Unfortunately, there is no option for this and it's actually unnecessary during the export process. Our printers convert and process all images as CMYK using the Blurb ICC Color Profile, so even if you upload/export them with an RGB color profile, they'll be converted to CMYK for the production process.
    My Response:
    Customer By Email - 07/19/2012 05:10 AM Thanks for the explanation David. It sounds like I can just upload the PDF file using my ProPhoto RGB profiled PDF, but I would prefer to do the conversion from ProPhoto RGB to Blurb ICC CMYK profile. This way I can see the results before uploading the file to Blurb. Can I use the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1 with Output > Color Conversion to Destination > Blurb CC profile, and then upload the PDF file myself? If so please advise where I should upload the file on the Blurb website.
    Blurb's Response:
    Response Via Email(David) - 07/20/2012 03:49 PM Hi Todd,
    If you do end up exporting your PDFs with the workflow you're referring to, you can upload your files here:
    http://www.blurb.com/make/pdf_to_book
    IMHO there's no reason why Adobe and Blurb couldn't work together so ProPhoto RGB 16-bit images can be used in the book PDF that gets uploaded (or exported!) to Blurb's website. Blurb then handles the CMYK conversion using full-gamut 16-bit images and not clipped sRGB 8-bit images.

  • I added a profile but i can not find it in cc 2014 for soft proofing

    I added a color profile from White Wall a printing company in Germany.
    I want to soft proof it before I sent it to them to print it on aluminium.
    But the added profiles doesn't show up on PS CC2014?
    Photoshop runs on OSX version 10.9.5
    Can anyone tell me what I'am doing wrong?

    It does show up in CC 2014 (Yosemite 10.10.1) It should show up in Mavericks.
    First Place it in /Library/Colorsync/Profiles folder.
    When you go to "Device to Simulate" it will be located here on the list.
    Gene
    (Remember to mark the answer that solved your issue by clicking on “correct”. This indicates the question is answered and credits those who took time to help you or followup if there are further questions)

  • "Washed out" look of movie made from photos...

    I created a 5 minute movie (using iMovie 08) consisting entirely of photos (using K. Burns effects).
    Everything looked great in the iMovie application. I loaded it to my .mac web Gallery site and the whole movie is "washed out" - less vibrant colors.
    I then tried saving it to the desktop as a Quicktime movie & same thing - all colors are washed out and less vibrant than the project I see in iMovie as I edit.
    Any ideas??
    I have a brand new iMac running Leopard & with tons of space...
    Thanks for any help you can give.

    same issue here but with video files, doesnt matter in what way i export my video, the colors are always washed out.

  • Help needed with gray washed-out looking text on 23HD Cinema Display

    My 23 inch HD Cinema Display running on an ATI X800 is plenty capable of displaying nice deep dark blacks in graphics and photos, but text on screen seems to me to be very gray or washed out, even "thin" looking. I've set my color preference for high gamma, but while a bit better still no joy. I have the brightness 4 full clicks down from full (and it's still plenty bright)...
    Is this normal for this screen or are there steps I could take for better appearing text without messing up graphic & photo elements?
    Sorry if this has been asked & answered before; a quick search here didn't turn up any good matches.

    Launch the "Digital Color Meter", set the aperture size to 1 pixel and drag your cursor over some text. You will see that text is not displayed in "pure black" but in shades of grey with a lot of colored highlights. In order to get the best performance out of your display, you really need to calibrate it. There are a lot of "shades of grey" between black and white. For the very best results, you need to use a colorimeter. The Spyder2 for example, runs through the entire range of greys as well as RG&B. After using one of these or a similar unit, you will be much happier with your display in general and specifically, in it's ability to display text. You might get OK results using OS X's "expert mode" calibration tool but it's much more subjective and therefore not nearly as accurate.

  • W540 Washed out look in Word

    I've just received my W540 and am using office 2013 on it. Does anyone know how to improve the screen so that things like Word right-click menus do not look so faded.
    Surely the screen can't be that bad, can it?  The blacks are poor but I would have thought pop-up menus should be ok.

    Thanks. I did a calibration but that didn't help. I also suspect that switching graphics cards wouldn't affect the screen but would increase graphics speed on some programs. I tried changing the brightness, contrast and gamma using the Intel control panel and that helped a bit. The top of the screen is better, the menus are much less washed out, but the bottom only improved slightly.
    I think that is just a poor quality screen. If I tilt the screen back the it improves, but it's too far back to work. It's almost like there is a torch at the bottom of the screen shining up, forming a white-ish arc from the corners to the middle, if that makes any sense.

  • Ques re: bright white washed out look

    I recently got my first iSight and when I hook it up and look at the video picture in iChat, I can see a decent quality picture when I point it out my window to the street in front of my house.
    I recently am trying a software security program called SecuritySpy and using my iSight as the camera. While in that program the picture quality is fine whenI am pointing the camera at myself using my computer and my shutters on the windows are closed. When I point it outside my window to the street, the picture is completely washed out and doesn't adjust itself to a clear picture.
    I did adjust some camera settings within the SecuritySpy program but very delicately.
    Any suggestions as to why the washout when using this program?

    I went into the SecuritySpy settings and clicked default and after that the camera works fine now when I point it out my window. I answered my own question

  • Hp3525 Light print, all colors.Washed out look.

    I was working on a light print issue on an hp3525. I tried pretty much everything. cleaned all contacts, tried different cartridges, cleaned the scanners,which are a pain to remove.
    The problem turned out to be a bad connection on the dc controller, it has at least 5 ribbon cables and numerous other connections, I unplugged everything from the board and plugged it all back in, apparently oxides can build up ,most likely on the ribbon cables, I cleaned them with a pencil eraser to make them shine and that solved the problem.

    Hi lazrprnt,
    Do you have an issue you need assistance with on the HP 3525 printer?
    I am an HP employee.
    Say Thanks by clicking the Kudos Star in the post that helped you.
    Please mark the post that solves your problem as "Accepted Solution"

  • Soft proofing and Out of Gamut warning

    I like to use Blurb for a perfect photo book. I am an amateur photographer but like the most of my pictures on paper.
    What's the perfect workflow for soft proofing ?
    A friend of me has calibrated my screen (Thunderbolt Apple screen).
    My current methode :
    I take a picture in RAW with AdobeRGB profile setting, i adjust a few parameters in Lightroom and then go to Photoshop and start de soft proofing with the Blurb-ICC profile.
    The result with soft proofing is like there's a white mist over the picture. Then i try to optimize this with various parameters.
    When i try the soft proofing with the Blurb ICC profile + out of Gamut warning option .... there are many colors out of gamut .
    My second methode :
    When i import the raw picture in photoshop cc and i convert the picture to the Blurb profile, then there are no out of gamut colors but everything is in CMYK.
    Is this a good way for perfect photo books in Blurb ?
    Or must i ignore the out of gamut colors ?
    Is it better to make my pictures in sRGB ?
    When i want to save the end result in Photoshop cc ( jpeg for Blurb )  must i enclose the Blurb ICC (when in CMYK) , Adobe RGB or sRGB profile (when in RGB)  ?
    Please help me make a perfect photobook 
    Mario

    Since I don't know what "Blurb" is, I'm going to assume that's your printing service somewhere, and that they have provided you with their target printer profile.
    What you describe under current method is absolutely normal, expected behavior.  Adobe RGB simply is a much larger color space than whatever this Blurb profile is.
    If you care to let me know how or where I can get a hold of this Blurb profile, I can in a matter of seconds prepare an illustration of how the two profiles compare to each other.  From where I sit, it would appear you're throwing away a lot of image quality by using Blurb.
    There are two wacky ways of getting around your seeing the out of gamut warnings.  The first is not to soft-proof at all. (Duh!  )  The other one is an unorthodox workflow which works just fine PROVIDED you are aware that the image files as an end product are only good for Blurb and for no other purpose, and that is to set your WORKING COLOR SPACE from the get go to the Blurb profile.  Of course that is not the recommended or even kosher workflow.  It is only a workaround to the deficiencies of this Blurb profile.
    I cannot comment on your "second method" until I know more about this Blurb phenomenon.  If they print on a CMYK press, then they are throwing away a lot of colors, even if you send them images in sRGB.  Nothing you can do about that.
    The one thing I can say is that if the outfit doing the printing is the one that sent you the profile, then they will know how to deal with an sRGB file.  The profile they sent you is just what their printing process uses.  No need to attach a copy of their own profile. 

  • Can you soft proof for Blurb in Lightroom? Can't get Blurb icc to show up in list.

    I have added the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc to Library/ColorSync/Profiles and Library/ColorSync/Profiles/Recommended, but when I turn on Soft Proof in Lightroom and try to select the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc from the Profile dropdown in the Soft Proofing Workspace on the right, clicking on other to add it, it simply does not show up as an item in the list even though I have added it to the Profiles folder. 
    The Blurb profile does show up as an option for soft proofing if I try to do it in Photoshop, but I really want to do it in Lightroom to save time since I'm using the Book Module and I know Lightroom so much better than Photoshop.

    Yes. I found another discussion on a blog that discussed the whole thing in detail. Has anyone found a profile that comes close that one could use in LR to soft proof for Blurb? Some said they used sRGB, but I compared and there is a huge disparity. Blurb color space is about 2/3 smaller than sRGB.

  • Can I soft proof in LR4 like I can in PS CS5?

    I haven't used LR 4 yet, but did view the soft-proofing tutorial.
    I applaud Adobe for adding this functionality in LR4.  It was one of the most obvious lacking features in the previous version, and I've still been mostly doing all my printing through PS CS5.
    While soft-proofing is not a perfect replacement for test printing, I've been mostly satisfied with proofing in CS5.
    Proofing in LR4 seems a  little different, but by using a virtual copy it looks like if I use my printer/paper profile I should theoretically be able to not only be able to deal with color gamut issues, but also adjust contrast & brightness to more closely match my original developed image, and could compare the original with virtual copy in compare mode.  Is it that simple?  And if so, why is there a contrast & brightness adjustment in the Print module?  That latter adjustment would be similar to what one goes through in PS CS5 when soft-proofing prior to printing.  However, why have it if it can be done in the Develop module......and regardless, from the video tutorial it looks like you can't preview the image after making those adjustments in the print module nor compare it with the original......thus forcing one to make multiple prints until the result is satisfactory.
    Just seems to me there is a bit more tweaking to do in LR4 to make the soft-proofing more functional.  Or, perhaps I'm too stuck with the paradigm set forth for soft-proofing in PS and need someone to clarify how I can achieve the same result in LR just as confidently.

    Beaulin Liddell wrote:
    BTW, I've benefited immensly from your and Martin's Evenings books.......you've never steered me wrong.
    Thanks for the kind words...but LR4's soft proofing is worth the effort to use. It really is better than Photoshop's soft proofing. I'm still on the fence regarding VCs vs Snapshots for soft proofing It's a tossup but the VC part has been built in while making a snapshot wasn't.
    The advantage of LR4's soft proofing is you get the ability to do a Before/After while still using the full range of LR4's controls to adjust the printed version. Makes it really easy to nail great print (assuming you have good print profiles).
    As for the Print module Brightness and Contradt...that's really a special case that doesn't involved color managed output. It's a crutch for those who don't have a locked down system. It's east to tweak but you have to make example prints since the controls don't actually display but only impact the output. I tend to avoid that.

Maybe you are looking for