Bad color profiles on B8850

posted in another forum but thought I'd try here before I lose my mind trying to figure this out...
I think perhaps my color profiles are bad? Here's the situation:
1) printed a color wheel image on plain paper to test what colors I'm having problems with, and everything looked fine.
2) printed the same color wheel on photo paper and the oranges are just dead, really grey looking, but the rest of the colors are fine.
So, seems like the question is why are my photos not printing correctly on photo paper but do on plain paper? Any ideas or suggestions? Bad color profiles or something for the HP Photo Paper?
I'm losing my mind trying to figure this out. Any ideas are greatly appreciated.
cheers,
Aaron

Every type of paper accepts ink a little differently. If there is a setting that matches that particular paper right in the driver preferences available, I would try that. However, if that is what you are using, then try a different selection, or go into the color management tab (depending on operating system, drivers installed basic versus full) and adjust colors that way to improve the output on that media.
This might offer some additional help:
http://www.hp.com/united-states/consumer/digital_photography/print_better_photos/tips/printer-settin...
007OHMSS
I was a support engineer for HP.
If the advice resolved the situation, please mark it as a solution. Thank you.

Similar Messages

Need Help Fixing Bad Color Profile (Leading to Bluish Tint)

Hi folks,
I've been experiencing problems with my late-2011 Macbook Pro for the past several months. Whenever it switches to dedicated graphics, the screen results in a bluish tint.
I believe it's a problem with the color profile on my machine. The diagnostic identifies two problems with the color profile, but the system is unable to fix the problem (see attached photo).
Does anybody know how I can fix this?
EDIT: I should note I'm running the latest version of OSX 10.8.4. I never experienced this problem with 10.7.x.

Header message digest (md5) is missing in Colorsync profiles

Bad ramifications of color profile used in previews

It seems that Aperture's choice of color profile for its previews has some rather wide implications. In a RAW workflow, previews are assigned an Adobe RGB profile. In a JPG workflow, previews aren't generated at all at first (which makes sense - no need to create a JPG from a JPG), but they are created once you edit a photo. Then once again, the preview is assigned an Adobe RGB profile, irrespective of the color profile of the original photo. This all kind of makes sense. Presumably, Adobe RGB is the same as, or close to, the color profile Aperure uses internally.
The problem comes when photos are "shared". With the Aperture preference set to "Share previews with iLife and iWork", Aperture generates an XML file that can be used by external programs. This XML file points the external program at the previews (or the original in the case of an unedited JPG). Then photos can be picked up in various places:
* In mail.app via the Photo Browser.
* In any app via the Media section in Finder.
* On an Apple TV via the "Choose photos to share" option in iTunes.
BUT - all these photos (with the exception of an unedited JPG) will ALWAYS have an Adobe RGB profile. This is generally not good, since the photos will display badly in any app that isn't color managed. Unfortunately, this seems to apply to Apple TV. Photos there have the typically subdued look of Adobe RGB when not color managed. The situation actually gets worse with JPGs. An unedited JPG which originally had an sRGB profile will display fine, but as soon as you edit that photo in Aperture, it willl display badly because now iTunes/Apple TV is working with an Adobe RGB profile. I've done tests and it's painfully obvious.
Anyone else come across this? I'm not sure what can be done. Maybe having an option to generate proviews using sRGB would be good, but that might involve too much processing in Aperture when it's continually generating previews as you edit.
Thoughts appreciated!

The export settings don't have any effect on the problem, unfortunately. What preference are you referring to? Do you mean the Import "tab" in Aperture prefs? That just governs what Aperture uses for its initial preview. it will now, by default, use the preview that is embedded in every RAW file to speed up processing. As soon as you look at the photo, even without editing it, it will then generate its own JPG preview (with Adobe RGB profile).
I haven't received any other feedback about this problem anywhere, which is surprising to me. I think I can only post the problem through Apple feedback, and hope for the best. It seems that, in the meantime, the only course of action is to export everything you need to display properly on an AppleTV, and re-import those JPGs into Aperture (or iPhoto) so they can be displayed via iTunes. A royal pain!

Colorsync can't repair bad printer profiles

I'm getting really bad color qulaity out of my HP B8850 photo printer, but only when I print to photo paper (on plain paper prints the quality is fine). Seems like a color profile issue so I finally came acrossn Colorsync and got "bad profiles" for all of my B8800 icc files. I've tried repairing them numerous times but colorsync can't repair them (I tried unlocking them, too and that didn't work). Any suggestions on how to fix them? Here's an example of one of the error messages...
/Library/Printers/hp/Profiles/photosmart/HP PSPro B8800-Advanced Photo Glossy.icc
   Tag 'desc': Tag size is not correct.
   Tag 'dmdd': Tag size is not correct.
   Tag 'desc': Description tag has a bad Macintosh string.
   Tag 'dmdd': Description tag has a bad Macintosh string.
thanks for any suggestions/help!
cheers,
Aaron

I deleted all of the burried HP software and drivers and did a clean reinstall of it. Still getting the same bad profiles and bad image prints on photo paper. I switched to a different HP driver for a different series of printer and those are coming up bad as well.
/Library/Printers/hp/Profiles/photosmart/HP PSPro B8800-Advanced Photo Glossy.icc
   Tag 'desc': Tag size is not correct.
   Tag 'dmdd': Tag size is not correct.
   Tag 'desc': Description tag has a bad Macintosh string.
   Tag 'dmdd': Description tag has a bad Macintosh string.
Also have a bad Nikon Profile...
/Library/Application Support/Nikon/Profiles/NKLch2.icm
   Header connection space is not correct.
   Header data space is not correct.
   Header profile class is not correct.
   Tag 'A2B0': Number of input channels is not correct.
   Tag 'A2B0': Number of output channels is not correct.
   Tag 'B2A0': Number of input channels is not correct.
   Tag 'B2A0': Number of output channels is not correct.
This is driving me crazy. I'm getting bad prints and there seems to be no answer. Could it be just a colorsync/vendor matching issue that I've missed. Anything I should think about in terms of settings that I'm missing?
Help!!!!!!!

Printing to an Epson R2880 results in bad color (only from Adobe SW)

I've had a nice workflow that I've used for years. I'm sure many of you would find it a bit tedious and I won't go into the details of it, but the important part is that I always printed out of Photoshop (CS6 Extended - now at 13.0.3 - yes I have the stupid Trial window bug, but that's another matter). My monitors are profiled (no custom printer profiles, but I've downloaded appropriate profiles from PixelGenius for those times when I've needed them, and with my color management my prints have been fairly accurate. I use and Epson Stylus Photo R2880 and I've been very happy with it. I mainly work on a 24" iMac (2009 vintage). Recently I decided to change my workflow entirely based on some of the tutorial videos I've purchased from LL. I decided I was ready to integrate much more LR into the workflow, especially now that it includes soft proofing. Because of the new workflow I was really looking forward to printing out of LR. That should more or less get you current.
To date, I haven't printed with my new workflow and I'd say I haven't printed anything since 13.0.1 on PS and 4.1 on LR (not that I was printing from LR at the time). Having not printed in a while I knew I'd need a head cleaning (sure enough I did) and, as is my habit, once the head was clean, I printed (from LR) a 4x6 of the image I planned on printing at a larger size. It catches any lingering gunk after a cleaning. The print just didn't look right to me (too dark and the colors were a little off). I've encountered prints with bad colors once before and it turned out to be a driver issue. In the process I found a great image that is indicative of some kind of problem and I keep both good and bad prints of it handy... just in case. I decided to print this image, and sure enough it came out looking like the standard craptastic version I was getting with the bad driver ages ago. Just to check out that it didn't have to do with my new process, I printed the same image from PS (which worked fine last time I printed this image). It too came out all wrong (the same all wrong as LR). Since the bad prints looked just like the old "bad driver" prints, I figured I knew what was going on and worked with Epson to reset my print pipeline and reinstall my printers (I also have a Workforce 845 for "throw away" printing and for my wife to use).
With new installs for my printers in place I went ahead and printed again... and again it came out wrong. I was, to say the least, despondent. As a final sanity check I loaded the image up in Nikon Capture NX2 (version 2.3.1) and did a print. All of a sudden the print came out perfect. It matched my old "good" prints and, just as importantly, was a dead ringer for the image on the screen. This is where I find myself. Apparently color management is broken in my Adobe products, but works fine in my Nikon software. I'm at a bit of a loss. I'm 99.999999999% sure that I'm printing out of LR, and especially PS, correctly. Anyone have any ideas? I'd love to be able to print again. Printing out of Capture NX2 is really not a great option.
Thanks in advance,
David

I agree this whole issue is confusing. I have been on the issue (proper printer driver behavior and proper application behavior) using Apple's new print path for a few years now, so I will try to make an attempt to clear up as much confusion as possible.
If drivers and applications are working (written) properly this is how it is supposed to work.
When printer manages color is selected in an application print dialog then all functions of the printer driver are available.
When applications manages color is selected then Color Matching is grayed out defaulted to ColorSync, and the property written print driver defaults to No Color Adjustment (Epson) or No Color Correction (Canon).
See attached examples of both Epson 9600 driver version 8.19 and Canon iPF driver version 2.14.
Epson can and has definitely gotten it right with their latest drivers.
Canon on the other hand uses a special case file (AppColorMatchingInfo.xml) which list the applications that use Apple's new printing path. New application like Photoshop CS5 will need to be added to this file or the driver will default to color management when application manages color is chosen which results in double profiling.
I see nothing that indicates to me that neither Apple or Adobe have problems or bugs in this printflow. Only drivers (and old drivers) that are not written correctly for Apple's new printing path seem to have these problems with double profiling. That being said, do I agree with Apple's approach regarding the new print path? NO. It appear to be an attempt to idiot proof printing using application manages color printing, although it is claimed to be necessary for 64-bit applications. I personally would prefer to use the old print path (like still available in Indesign) where all options are available in the driver regardless of what CM setting I choose in the application print dialog. But it is what it is.
Doyle

Picture color profile in Lightroom vs Photoshop CS2 editing

Hi all, I hope someone can solve this for me.
When I'm viewing picture in Light room, all my pictures are a bit warmer ( have a yellowish tint to them ) compared to when I view them in Photoshop CS2. The same is true if I view them in other programs. This is true for all my picture file type (jpg, tif or raw). I get the feeling that it's Light room that in the wrong in how it displays the picture and not the other programs. Using the warms tool to make the picture a bit colder, only adds a bluish tint to the image which isn't even close to what it looks like (unedited) in Photoshop.
I get the feeling that Lightroom does something to the picture, or uses some sort of color profile, driver that other programs don't use.
Is there a way of changing this?

>When I purchase these ADOBE products I expect them to JUST WORK!!!!!
Unfortunately, when Microsoft, Dell and others enter the fray it's no longer up to just the Adobe folks. Differences between Photoshop and Lightroom are almost always due to a corrupt monitor profile. Adobe has nothing to do with that.
>I dont wanna have to be worried about corrupt profiles yada yada yada!!!
I just want to be able to do my color correction and exposure corrections in Lightroom export as a High Res Jpeg and then do the remainder of my work in Photoshop and have them both look the same.
If your screen is correctly calibrated that will be the case. Unfortunately if you want to do color sensitive work on a computer with a typical monitor, you have to have a rudimentary understanding of profiles and color management. There is unfortunately no way around it. This is no different from traditional color photography where you have to understand what different film, different filters and different development do to your colors. The terminology is just different.
>How do I fix this and please go through it STEP BY STEP BY STEP!!!!
I am not one for the computer lingo....
OK. I'll assume first that you have no hardware calibrator and that you are on windows:
1. Make sure your Photoshop color settings are set up to respect embedded profiles. See the
first screenshot in this post(ignore everything else as it is no longer relevant in LR 2).
2. Open your monitor's properties panel, click on advanced and go to the color management tab. Delete any profile you see there. This is the culprit. Probably a bad profile got installed in some driver update for your graphics card or your monitor.
3. Restart Lightroom and Photoshop and that's it! You'll have corresponding colors. You are however, cheating yourself as your monitor is completely uncalibrated. This is how 99% of computer users run their monitors.
So here is what you should be doing if you care about your color and matching to print and making sure that others see the same colors. Even though hardly anybody calibrates, the only way to get a good average correspondence is to calibrate your monitor and use color managed apps. This sequence is valid for both macs and PCs
1. Do as above step one and make sure Photoshop is set up correctly and then go out and buy a hardware calibrator (or order online). They can be had for <$100 for pretty good ones. Look for example for Spyder2 and Huey Pro.
2. Calibrate your screen following the instructions from the software
3. Restart Lightroom and Photoshop. Now you'll have identical but correct color.
If you have a mac, you can cheat slightly and use http://www.computer-darkroom.com/colorsync-display/colorsync_1.htm instead of hardware calibration. You cannot expect very good correspondence between monitor and prints though with that method.

Convert Colors profile to threshold to black? [A9]

Is there a reasonable way to create a color profile that can be used with Convert Colors to apply a threshold (180/255) function to convert an RGB PDF into a black-and-white PDF? Acrobat 9 (CS5), OSX 10.6.7.
I have some multipage PDF files I want to "sharpen" (make clearer) before printing, and found that opening a page in Photoshop and applying Image > Adjustment > Threshold to 180 (out of 255) does a nice job. This is a pain for multipage PDFs because I have to extract the pages from Acrobat, apply a batch action in Photoshop, and then (potentially) re-integrate them into a PDF file.
Acrobat can apply ICC profiles to convert an image via Advanced > Print Production > Convert Colors. But how can I generate an ICC profile that does something analagous to the threshold function?
One crummy way is in Photoshop. Edit > Color Settings, which allows you to define a custom CMYK profile. Under Dot gain, you can set transfer function curves for C,M,Y, and K. I tried doing that, with curves at zero up until 70%, at which point I ran them straight up to 100% with a very steep (almost vertical slope).Tried a bunch of GCR/UCR/Black conversion settings. I saved the profile so Acrobat could see it. This gave me weird results:
In Photoshop, it came close to doing what I wanted, but not totally, when I converted the image to that profile. But it wasn't drastically wrong. But when I applied the same profile in acrobat (with Convert Colors), it looked much much worse, with large blocky pixel groups and the document, which was mostly a raster image of text, almost unreadable.
(Sorry for the lack of screenshots/images -- they're at the office, I'll post them tomorrow...)
Any tips? Is there a better way to do what I want and apply a simple transform to a PDF file?
A better tool to create ICC profiles for Acrobat's Convert Colors?
Am I just using the wrong settings in Photoshop?
Thanks!

OK, some more info. So, my PDF contains letter-size pages with 300dpi 8bpp images that are DeviceRGB DCT-encoded (JPEG). Here's how Acrobat displays one of the characters:
(All those obvious JPEG artifacts which explain why it prints badly and would benefit from processing). It looks pretty much the same in Photoshop (via Edit Image from Acrobat, or opening the PDF file directly). Thresholding it to 180 in Photoshop does a great job:
For simplicity, I tried to build a Gray profile that did what I wanted. But it looks like Photoshop's gray profiles only let you adjust dot gain and gamma, and neither of those are sufficient to achieve this kind of effect. RGB doesn't let you use curves. So I converted the image to CMYK, and then Edit > Convert to Profile, then choose CMYK and Custom CMYK and define a profile like this:
with these Curves:
And it seems to do the right thing when the image is converted to it in Photoshop; not perfect but much better than the source:
So, back to Acrobat, and apply the profile with Convert Colors:
basically a disaster. and some very faint jpeg artifacts turn into a big blue rectangle.
So what to do? Is there a better way to construct these profiles? Or should I give up and use batch operations?

Display Calibration Creates Color Profile Problems.

I haven't received any response out of the MBP Display forum and I thought you guys might have better insight anyway because you are dealing with color calibration more often. Here it is:
I used colorsync utility to calibrate my monitor, hoping it would at least get the colors more accurate than they are with the "Color LCD" profile. The Color LCD profile has a bad yellow tinge to it. I went through the process 4 times so I would be able to choose the best profile out of the 4. (Now I can't delete the extra profiles but I guess that is a different topic...) The color accuracy and the gray-tone is MUCH better BUT I have a slight (understatement) saturation problem.
My problem is after using Color Sync, ALL of my REDS are oversaturated and blown out. There is a problem with the blues and greens as well but it isn't as bad. Of course, they look fine in non color managed applications (ie FireFox) but everything else makes my photos look horrible. Even the RAW files straight out of the camera look blown out.
I had, at first edited these files on a PC so they always looked fine but now that I have switched to Mac I have noticed how oversaturated they are in all of its color managed applications. (Safari, preview, and even the desktop.) I thought perhaps that I had just pumped up the contrast and saturation too high on the PC and the color profile was now creating a problem because the color was set for an un-profiled file. BUT after viewing the unaltered .NEF's straight out of my camera, they too are oversaturated.
Now, I have some wallpapers I had downloaded from the web that look the same as before. It is just MY OWN photographs that are oversaturated. Obviously I have chosen the wrong color profile or something is wrong with my workflow. The wallpaper that looks the same doesn't have a profile assigned it when I view-info. It just labels the color space as RGB. All my photos that have problems, have a color profile assigned. I am using sRGB as recommended. There are a few still using Adobe RGB (which is what my camera defaults to) and they have the same oversaturation problem.
Aperture is set to export with an sRGB profile and CS2 uses sRGB as well.
Any advice? What monitor and color management profile's are you guys using?
I can't tell what is right anymore. What should I edit my photos to look good in? The only MONITOR profile that doesn't blow them out is Adobe/Apple RGB, Color LCD, and a few of the other default installed profiles.
I've got a bad case of color vertigo!

sorry uberfoto, did not get what MBP meant at first.
what Jan says about color calibration tool is right....and start again from the RAW.....
i am photographer in the advertisement, reportage, portraits and landscape.
my problem was to get the thinks printed as I saw them on the screen.
here what I have to say on that (part of another discussion):
".... Sorry, but no AppleTFT Display comes close to a hardware calibrated display. Maybe they are semi-professional. I do not say this to insult Apple, ore somebody else, but i say this to sway out the illusion of , " if I just spend more money on the calibration tool and software, I´ll have better prints". It´s just not possible, because the display cant show what is there. A Apple CRT Studio Display is far better in this. I you want to have a flat-screen TFT Display to bring good results, you have to choose one that is able to be hardware calibrated and has a higher lookup table (EIZO, LaCie, QuatoGrafics......)
I use use one professional EIZO CG21" and one semi-prof. EIZO FlexScanL985EX(21") and the diffrence is important between the two.
But i need only one to be Print Proof ready.
Before i was always afraid when i gave the picture file to my client, because of what my pictures look like once it is printed. Now the outcome is right or differs only very little from what I saw on the screen. my calibration tool is EYE ONE. "..
BUT your main problem is how it looks in the web.
my thoughts and suggestion on this:
1. most people see the web on PC Display. those use a gamma of 2.2
(apple = 1.8) so pictures appear more blue with more contrast. this setting is made to hide the low ability of the system and display to show colors as they are and give and give crispy impression. So you will have to consider this when you prepare the pictures for the web. therefor the standard calibration of your MBP is best for your needs. ( for printing the Display has to be set on 5.600 kelvin ,that would be to warm 4 the wwweb).
2.
a) In the beginning I use Aperture 1.5 (or Lightroom) to select and prepare the pictures as I like them.
b) then I export them in 8 bit/300 dpi in the size they will be used as PSD or TIFF.
c) I will then open them in Photoshop (color-settings=web /internet) make the cleaning and so on.( 4 the web I always increase the saturation because sRGB and JPG will throw away lots of colors).
d) AND NOW "save for the web ". This is definitely the best tool to prepare pictures for the web. on the right upper part of the window there is a flash-open menu where you may choose to see the colors like in windows or macintosh system.
and on the lower right of the application-window there is a roll-down menu where you may preview the results in different browsers of your choice.
It is here where you can produce amazing high Q pictures 4 the web under 100 kb.
Hope this may help.
good luck,
larry
G5 dual 2.3/4,5 gigRam/ATI 9600 128MB-PB G4 12" Mac OS X (10.4.2) EIZO CG 21"+EIZO L985ex 21"
G5 dual 2.3/4,5 gigRam/ATI 9600 128MB-PB G4 12" Mac OS X (10.4.2) EIZO CG 21"+EIZO L985ex 21"
G5 dual 2.3/4,5 gigRam/ATI 9600 128MB-PB G4 12" Mac OS X (10.4.2) EIZO CG 21"+EIZO L985ex 21"

Bad color in PSE working window

When I bring up an image to edit in PSE it's always dark and off toward the red or orange. But, when Iook at that same inage file with another inage viewing program, then the colors look alright. Can someone tell me how to fix this?
I have attatched a screen grab that contains a portion of an image in PSE and a portion in Windows Picture and Fax viewer. The color looks more normal in the Windows Picture and Fax Viewer.
Any words of wisdom on this?

It's most likely that your color-rendering issue is caused by a defective color profile; Samsung is one of several display vendors that install bad profiles. Windows can sometimes balk at letting your remove the display profile, and it's easy to make a mistake following the instructions for removal.
I recommend not setting PSE to No Color Management -- this strips the color profile from your photos when you save them. The color profile (usually sRGB) tells programs and printers how to interpret the color numbers in a photo; but when you remove the profile, they have to make a guess as to how to interpret the colors, and they can guess wrong.
By default, most Windows programs and printers will use ("assume") sRGB for images that don't have a profile. So if you set PSE to No Color Management, you may never experience a problem with misinterpretation of colors in your photos. However, Mac OS 10 does not assume that images without a profile are sRGB -- so it's entirely likely that your edited images will display incorrectly on Macs.
Further, if someone sends you images tagged with the Adobe RGB profile, PSE set to No Color Management will very likely not display them properly. (With the advent of raw, it seems that fewer people are taking pics with their camera set to Adobe RGB, but there are still posts on the forum from people using Adobe RGB.)

Confused about color profile support in PNG

NOTE -- you have to hover over the image to see the real images. The images embedded in the webpage have their profiles stripped -- just like photoshop does! Interesting.
I ask a similar question on this before, but couldn't give a satisfactory demonstration of how photoshop doesn't support color profiles in png's.
But now I have a great one.
Picture A: this is with the correct color profile and displays correctly in firefox and probably other browsers -- also displays correctly on windows desktop and in large-icon view.
Ok, anyone who doesn't believe me, grab that image and try to read it into photoshop...
I do, and get no warning on profile mismatch like I do on jpg's or tiff's:
photoshop strips the existing profile and adds sRGB which isn't the correct profile.
This is how photoshop transforms good colors into bad:
Completly screwed up.
I have had multiple people notice how my png saved images from photoshop had "off" or bad colors -- usually washed out in comparison w/my monitor profile.
I can get 'ok' results if I flatten the image and *convert* my existing profile to sRGB -- and I usually get
something that looks 'acceptable'...though the jpg's render in accurate color.
Basically, photoshop can't read or write png web images. and maintain color fidelity unless they have no profile. Even if they have an sRGB profile, I usually get washed out looking pics if I don't strip it but let adobe convert it.
In googling for my own problem, I found references to this problem in Adobe Photoshop going back to 2002.
Why does adobe refuse to fix this? It's horrible.
They could fix it with a file plugin for existing CS5-6 users, but it really needs to get fixed and Adobe needs to stop ignoring this problem.
:-( I find this extra depressing because I prefer to distribute my pictures losslessly in png, but with photoshop, I'm left with lossy jpegs to get accurate color reproduction.

How did the SFW thing even come up?? When I embed profiles in jpg and tiff, I do it as part of the File Save or File Save As dialog. I can choose what profile to save it with -- and I usually save it with my currently calibrated monitor profile -- as that color profile is what was used to create the picture. Why would I want to convert them to some other profile?? Only thing I have needed to convert have been PNG's because it doesn't embed my monitor profile in the PNG the same way jpg and tiff do.
If it did, png's would look the same as jpgs and tiffs... but the jpgs and tiffs have the full depth of color and look the same as they do in PS. png's look washed out because -- it's been my belief that PS is not storing my profile in the png, but setting a bit in the file to use the sRGB profile.
AFAIK, PNG provided for a sRGB profile-compat bit -- so images that were compat w/that profile could just set a bit rather than including a profile. I see no evidence that PS is saving my monitor profile with the PNG.
My 'settings' for RGB are to convert to working RGB profile which is my monitor profile.
I do have it set to ask me abou profile mismatches on opening or pasting.
Since I don't get a 'this document has a different color profile than the working space'
message when I edit most png's, I assume it has none. Thus from my settings
it should autoconvert it to my monitor profile and save that on save -- which seems to be what happens when I save as jpg or tiff (or I can check off the box to save profile...but I usually don't).

IWeb 08 screws my photos color profile

Anyone has this problem with the new iWeb 08?
I installed the new version, ran it without any problems, did some rearranging of my site, created a new page etc.. And then published the whole site all over again.
But now, all my images are tagged with the sRGB profile instead of the profile that was in the images.. now all my images have become very saturated and dark. The thumbnails are fine, but when you click in to see the photos in slideshow or not, the images are loaded and it looks horrible.
I've went into my iDisk to check the images and found that all my photos are tagged with the sRGB profile instead of my normal AdobeRGB profile or Nikon sRGB profile or no profile...
ARGH!!!!

iWEB 08 is a fully color confused application, whilst iPhoto is only partly color confused.
The following applies when dragging images from iPhoto library, with the "Optimize Images on Import" option on. According to the manual, this option only changes the size, but I would not be surprised if it changes something else also. Then after, exporting from iWEB to files on the hard drive.
Having spent 8 hours analyzing the problem, I am beginning to understand what is happening but certainly not WHY???
iWEB appear to convert the images 2 times (when importing and when exporting I wonder), both times incorrectly, and to top it off, it exports images without a color profile BUT with the EXIF data of the original, which at this point is incorrect. HOWEVER, it appears that thumbnails are only converted incorrectly once, adding to the confusion.
Before going into some remedies let me answer the question: What color space etc. is "correct" for the WEB?
There are three rules to publishing photos on the WEB (files for download is a different story):
a) Image, including thumbnails should be in sRGB color space (Otherwise it will NOT display correctly on MicroSoft systems, where browsers happily ignores color profiles and sRGB is ASSUMED for all images)
b) There should be an sRGB color profile in the image file, including thumbnails (Otherwise it will NOT display correctly on MacOS, where browsers assume AppleRGB, but will happily adjust to any color profile)
c) Discard unnecessary information in the file to reduce size, such as EXIF information, thumbnails etc (optional rule)
Having said that, you may ask yourself, who do that? Well to tell the truth, not many. A quick check on Apples website reveals that there is a mix of color "strategies". For instance, the pictures demonstrating the cool features of iLife08, appear to be in sRGB but without color profile. Thus, they will be displayed correctly on a MicroSoft system but not on a Mac.
Well, back to iWEB - To try to fix the color problem, do one or both of the following:
1) Keep calling Apple Cupertino until they fix the problem (really, I am not joking, I am tired)
2) Convert images after they have been exported. This seems to work also, almost. However, converting a pictures color space is not exactly reversible, thus result is not perfect. Use for instance Photoshop CS1 or later (make sure color settings is such that there are no conversions when you open files and use the colorimetric conversion option in advanced settings) and:
a) Open picture
b) Assign AppleRGB profile
c) Convert to sRGB
d) Assign the original profile (usually sRGB or AdobeRGB or the cameras RGB)
e) Convert to sRGB
f) Save (with option: include color profile)
File is now about 2 times the original
g) Open graphics converter
h) Choose convert...
i) Choose file(s), hold Cmd-key and choose remove resources (which does not remove the color profile)
File is now ok for publishing on the WEB
TIP, if it seems like a daunting task to manually convert all of the exported images (and do not forget the thumbnails), make an Action-script in Photoshop, then use the Batch feature with sub-folders etc .... . Also the graphics converter operation can be applied to include subfolders. I did this, and it works ok, but be sure to only convert YOUR images, not the other files in the structure. I also applied the same conversion to the thumbnails to simpify things and it turned out not to bad. (Can somebody make an AppleScript maybe?)
And finally, how about iPhoto? Well, iPhoto will always export images in the color space and profile it happens to be imported with, unless you edit the image in some external editor. If you are WEB publishing "lucky", the image will come out in sRGB color space and with an sRGB color profile. And yes, I have also tried various iPhoto-WEB export plug-ins, and they also all do it wrong.
If you read all of this, you are a patient person. Thanks for the attention.
Tomas Jonsson, Genicore Embedded Systems AB

[Vista] No color profiles in Lightroom

I have a problem with printing in lightroom.
There are some more topics with printing problems, but not like mine.
The problem is that i would like Lightroom to manage the color profiles, but on the printing page, when i click the color profile field, i can only choose 'managed by printer' and 'other'.
When i click 'other', i get a popup screen, where i should be able to select a color profile, but this screen is completely empty, so there is nothing to select.
How can i make a color profile appear in this screen?
When i use printer managed, and select a color profile in my printer screen, i get very bad prints, thats why i want lightroom to manage the colors.
PS: i have a HP D5160 printer.

Hi Ronnie
I have exactly the same problem but using a HP 3210 all-in-one printer. HP doesn´t seem provide ICC profile for their printerns. So, I guess thats the reason no beeing able to view them i th manage by application dialog box.
I have serious problems getting acceptable colours on my prints from Lightroom 1.1 and 1.2 (no difference). No problem at all printing from Photoshop CS or Elements, getting fine printings.
When chatting with HP support they refuse to answer straight questions about ICC profiles and start blaming on Adobe applications instead. Really frustrating.
Really hope that someone finds an acceptable workaround.
//Sten

LR4.3 and color profiles

Adobe have investigated the problems some have reported with v4 profiles or even v2 LUT profiles and reported that their tests show LR 4.3 can handle both v4 and v2, LUT and matrix color profiles correctly, IF the profiles have been made correctly by the profiling software.
On Macs, LR does not handle the profiles at all, the conversions are done by the OS, so any problem is a profile or OS problem. The ColorSync utility can be used to verify or repair bad profiles, apparently (I don't use Macs). On Windows, LR does do the transforms, but can handle all types of correctly made profiles.
So the problems are most likely with the profiling software, and this should be reported to the software company. I seem to remember several of the posts I read referred to ColorEyes profiles.
Hope this helps.
Bob Frost

bob frost wrote:
Adobe have investigated the problems some have reported with v4 profiles or even v2 LUT profiles and reported that their tests show LR 4.3 can handle both v4 and v2, LUT and matrix color profiles correctly, IF the profiles have been made correctly by the profiling software.
On Macs, LR does not handle the profiles at all, the conversions are done by the OS, so any problem is a profile or OS problem. The ColorSync utility can be used to verify or repair bad profiles, apparently (I don't use Macs). On Windows, LR does do the transforms, but can handle all types of correctly made profiles.
So the problems are most likely with the profiling software, and this should be reported to the software company. I seem to remember several of the posts I read referred to ColorEyes profiles.
Hope this helps.
Bob Frost
Allow me to repeat the reply I made in the feedback forum:
Robert Frost,
I'm sorry to say I'm not convinced, Bob.
Lightroom is the only application I have running on OS X (10.8.2) that has problems with ColorEyes icc v2 LUTs. Photoshop CS5 does not have any problem with those profiles.
The ColorSync Utility indicates the LUTs are fine.
I would be interested to know who at Adobe investigated the problem, when it was done and where the report was made.
Message was edited by: Bob_Peters I sent you one of the offending LUTs.

Bridge Filter Tab - Color Profile

I have an iMac (Mountain Lion OS X
10.8.4) Nikon NX2, Nikon
D800E camera, and Photoshop CS6.
Most of the 100 or so photos I
have transferred to my Mac by (USB and
also card) are RAW NEF at approx. 40MB a file. (Lossless compression) Most all of these pictures are in Color Space Adobe RGB, because that is
what I set up on the camera.
When in Bridge > Filter Tab > Color Profile > [this says that the majority of the NEF
photos , in the camera’s Color Profile Space of Adobe RGB, are not in this
color space, but the color profile of “UNTAGGED!” I’ve studied all the preferences and options of
Bridge and I am not 100% that I know what to change so these photos will show
in the color space I want them to and I don’t want to make a mistake by
clicking something that I can’t undo so…
How do I
get these photos (which I guess are showing up in Bridge as sRGB color space)
to show up in Adobe RGB. And if I can
change this, what could be the good or bad consequences of changing to Adobe
RBG?
There is
also a Thumbnail Option – “Generate 100%
previews. Will checking this show the previews at 100%? And what consequences does using this have?
Thank You Very Much For Your Help,
Thank You,
Sandy

I looked at my canon raw files and they also say untagged. So Apparently the color profile does not get saved in the side car file. Which maybe a good thing. The raw file is suppose to be your negative, in that it doesn't need any color profile until you do something with it in another file format that does support color profiles.
The generate previews will use up more drive space to speed up previewing them. But in general, I never really needed it. So it boils down to what type of system do you have, ex. plenty of drive space, speed of cpu, amount of ram, etc.

SRGB Color Profile Appears Dull in All Adobe Applications

I just installed CS3 in Windows Vista Ultimate x64 on my PC and I have my working color space set as sRGB. The color is dull when opening documents in any Adobe application with the working color space set to sRGB. The color is fixed if I change the working profile to my monitor profile which is "Monitor RGB - Dell 2407WFP-HC"
When in the "Monitor RGB - Dell 2407WFP-HC" profile whenever I open an existing file Photoshop alerts me that the embedded color profile is different than my working profile (all of my existing files are managed as sRGB and on my previous computer the sRGB profile looked perfect.)
Photoshop I could theoretically live with but the same problem occurs in Acrobat and changing the "Working Profile" in Acrobat has no change on how the sRGB managed PDF is being displayed. The same PDF will look fine on another computer.
How do I get sRGB color to display correctly in Adobe applications and not look dull and muted?
Additional Information: The problem is still prevalent when accessing the computer with Remote Desktop which leads me to believe it has nothing to do with my monitor or the video card I am using.

Bryan Nieman wrote:
> I fixed it!
I don't think so. But at least you fixed one of several problems ... so the situation now is better but still not perfect.
Bryan further wrote:
> My monitor profile appears to be the culprit.
It indeed is. I also have the Dell 2407WFP-HC, and the ICC profile that came with it is rubbish. Don't use it!
When using sRGB as the monitor profile then Adobe applications will render colours the same way as non-colour-managed apps---i. e. everything else under Windows. So now you're having a consistent (but not correct) colour rendition across your whole system, inside and outside Adobe applications. This system-wide consistence is nice ... but problems may, and most likely will, arise as soon as you're trying to match the colour renditions of monitor and printer.
As Tom just has pointed out, the problem is the 2407WFP's actual colour gamut which is not sRGB; it is significantly wider than that. So printed colours will appear muted, or less vivid, in comparision to the colours on the (improperly profiled) monitor. In order to solve this issue, you should use a proper monitor profile in the Color Management tab in the Display dialog in the Control Panel.
This, in turn, leads to two problems. First---where to get a proper monitor profile from? As I said, the original Dell profile that comes with the monitor is badly wrong ... or at least mine is. If you, or anyone, know how to obtain a good canned ICC profile for the Dell 2407WFP-HC then please let me know. Second---as soon as you install a monitor profile that is different from sRGB (and then re-boot), non-colour-managed applications (notably Windows itself, and e. g. all kinds of web browsers) and colour-managed applications (e. g. all Adobe products) will render colours differently.
If you want both at the same time---i. e. consistent system-wide colour rendition *and* proper colour management---then better switch to Mac. There's a reason why most graphics pros prefer Mac over PC.
-- Olaf

Bad color profiles on B8850

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for