Calibration Lightroom Question

Hi folks,
I've calibrated my MacBook Pro monitor using a Spyder2 Pro which has produced nice colours on the OSX desktop.
When I open Lightroom I find that all my images are supersaturated and that the colours just seem wrong. Blues look quite purple and greens are really intense with the saturation and vibrance sliders at zero. When I output to jpegs the colours are all extremely weak and the vibrant colours of the image don't seem to be there.
I am a colour management novice and am wondering what I am doing wrong.... Any ideas?
Kind Regards
Mark

I am not an expert in this, but it seems like you have not actually applied the Spyder Calibration to the Monitor. LR is Color managed and would use it, where I am not at all sure the OSX desktop is.
Seems more like what ever Monitor Profile you are currently using is corrupt.
As to the Jpeg, what Profile are you exporting them in? sRGB is what they should be. The flatness could be from aRGB or ProPhotoRGB if you are viewing them in a Browser.
Don
Don Ricklin, MacBook 2Ghz Duo 2 Core running 10.5.1 & Win XP, Pentax *ist D See LR Links list at http://donricklin.blogspot.com for related sites.

Similar Messages

Monitor Calibration & Lightroom 2

Hello, I have a problem. Normally I shot in RAW, edit the image, save a jpg (with sRGB Color space) resized for an on-line printing service and another jpg in full size and resolution.
Recently I bought a Spyder express monitor calibrator, so I have my calibrating profile called "spyder2express.icc" and I configured in windows xp my display to read this profile.
I edit a raw file with lightroom, but when I export to jpg and I look it with another viewer it doesn't look like the edited raw file, but it is mure saturated and different.
The same thing happened with Photoshop, looking the photo with the software is ok, but the jpg looked with xp viewer, ot faststone capture, or irfanview the jpg is different.
I'm sure that the profile is sRGB, so why this difference?
Is there anyone who can explain me what to do, and how to configure my computer?
Many thanks in advance

Just to clarify above the explanation by the others. Monitor calibration consists of two parts. One part is the calibration of the gamma curve. Gamma basically corresponds to contrast. This part is picked up by all applications and is handled by a correction table (called a LUT for LookUp Table) that is sent to your videocard. The second part is the correction for the gamut of your monitor. The gamut is basically the range of colors it can display. The gamut is determined by the actual wavelengths of red, green, and blue your monitor uses to mix the colors. This is different for every monitor out there and often quite different from sRGB. Some monitors have a much narrower gamut (most laptops) and some have a much wider gamut (the wide gamut displays that lots of people have now made by NEC, Samsung, Dell, etc.- my guess is that you have one of these). So even if you use sRGB, you still have to correct for this in order to display the right color on such displays. ONLY color managed apps do this. Lightroom is color managed as are many other apps such as Photoshop, Firefox 3.5, Safari, etc. However, many apps on windows are not, such as internet explorer, image viewer before vista, etc.

Workflow HDRI Pro from Lightroom Question

Hi,
to combine several images from Lightroom to the new HDR Pro feature in PS CS5 you can use 'Edit in/Merge to HDR Pro' in Lightroom. This will load the images in PS and starts the HDR Pro dialog. My question is: Does this workflow offer the possibility to align the images automatically?
My shots are often made free hand so they have to be aligned in software. How can I merge these shots in Photoshop to HDR Pro *with auto aligning them* ? Load them in PS each shot in a single layer, align, crop, save each layer as an image and load these images in the HDR Pro workflow? There must be an easier way...
Thanks
Gerald

Unless the program you Move To, from Lightroom, can Read the edits placed in XMP files created by Lightroom (Or those edits written to the actual RAW file by Lightroom) all that work will be lost.
Adjustments made in one Raw file editor can't be read by some other Raw file editor. They all use different systems to make those adjustments.
What you could do is once you make all the edits you want on any Raw image file Export it to a TIFF file as a Master and never change that Master file. If you need to edit that Master or Raw file make a Copy of it first or once opened in a program like Photoshop select Save As and save it with a different name so the Master file is left as it came out of Lightroom.

Calibration interval question

I have at work a spare PXI 4065 which is calibrated until April 2015.
On the production line I have another PXI 4065 which is calibrated until February 2015.
I never use the spare PXI 4065 until February 2015. Question: If I put the spare PXI 4065 into the production line in February 2015, that means according to calibration certificate that my spare DMM is calibrated only for 2 months?Then I have to resend it to calibration?
Please help!I looked at the calibration documents and the 2 labels with due date for calibration and I'm confused...

Hi,
NI recommends calibrating your NI PXI-4065 every year (NI 4065 Calibration Procedure), but the calibration interval is really determined by the specifications you require. Regardless of how the device is being used, the specifications of the NI PXI-4065 are dependent upon the time interval since last calibration. This means that the 1-year specifications for your spare PXI-4065 are only guaranteed until April 2015, even if it is not used until February 2015. We typically list specifications for 24 hours since last calibration, 90 days since last calibration, and 1 year since last calibration. Outside of one year, we do not guarantee any specifications. For more information regarding guaranteed specifications, please see the NI 4065 specifications.
Hopefully, you find this explanation helpful.
Regards,
Mike Watts
Product Marketing - Modular Instruments

Calibration hardware question

I have suggested to my boss that we get some sort of calibration device for our monitors at work. my questions are, Does one brand stand out?, and can one puck be used on multiple monitors in the shop? any suggestions are appreciated.

My Mitsubishi has it's own gun control. I didn't know about pre cal.
OTOH, I also have a LaCie 19" with no gun adjustments and the results are quite close. Not perfect, however.
I had an interesting experience with both. When I was running the 9600, the monitor which came with the system was a Dell. There is a definite difference between my Mitsu and the Dell, which is why I borrowed the Eye one which came with the 9600 package. I tan both calibrators on both monitors, and in each case, no difference was detectable between ColorVision and Eye one, yet they didn't match, particularly on separation in shadows, which would not necessarily be the cal HW/SW. Yet, when I took the prints home and checked them against my monitor, they matched.
I learned not to tweak the settings I saw on the Dell. But again, if I did tweak a customer's image, which we did continually, the prints matche the Dell.
Unfortunately, before I could design some further testing routines, the long time owners (50 years) decided to retire and sold off the equipment. I wound up with the Dell computer but not the monitor.
If I took the time to set each gun so that the differential values cancelled, I actually did not have to proceed with the rest of the tuning.

Camera Raw 5.5 will not install? And Camera calibration button question.

I just built a new computer with 7 PRO and installed all my software. So when it comes time to instal 5.5 raw it goes about half way through and tells me to shut off Bridge. As far as I know the bridge window and program are off and not running. I even unpined it off the taskbar.
In CS4 when opening a Raw file and I go to my camera calibration botton there are only two options that come up, Arc 3.3 and 4.4. Where are all the other options at? Do they come with the 5.5 update? Thanks Keig

Keiger wrote:
As far as I know the bridge window and program are off and not running. I even unpined it off the taskbar.
Odds are you've got Bridge set to auto-launch at startup...make sure it's not running when you try to install the update.,.and yes, the update should install the addition DNG Profile options.

A Calibration.Gamma Question

I've been calibrating a fairly new 21 Inch Samsung LCD, with the Eye One Display 2. Generally speaking, I am very happy with the results. The colors seems true and the monitor is not too bright. The problem is the Gamma. The target chosen is 2.2; yet, each time I calibrate the result is 1.9. The color target of 6500 and brightness of 120 are achieved.
So, what effect does this slight variance have, and any ideas why it can't be achieved?
I adjust the brightness/contrast and RGB values using the software and the LCD OSD controls. Each step I get the values almost dead on in the center, so I can't figure out what's going on.

Now i'm confused, so let me get this straight,
I said:
>As long as what you're seeing between LR, PS and web syncs up, that's as accurate as you're going to get.
you:
>There's no reason why LR/PS and web colors should sync up, unless you're using a color-managed browser such as Safari.
and then,
>Which is why I always see a difference, sometimes ever so slight, between CM and nonCM apps.
So,
> As accurate as you're going to get.
> Ever so slight.
To me these mean the same thing.
There are subtle differences between applications, but getting within 3% of expected is essentially, accurate color.
Why sweat those last few %? It's going to look different on everyone else's monitor, so why kill yourself?
I apologize if my language caused a minor fire, but i just found your statement to be slightly offensive. Telling a user that they're not supposed to have consistent color seems like an attempt to scare them. I don't know about you, but i make my living producing color. I work on multiple systems spread throughout several agencies and photographers. In each of them, i've walked in, set up an unfamiliar system and had consistent and reasonably accurate color up and running within the first hour (mac only). And the process is always the same. Unless the monitor you're working on is beyond repair, once you've calibrated, getting consistent color between apps is simply a workflow issue. Of course, the moment you bring an output device (other than the monitor) into the mix, everything goes to hell. Fortunately, the majority of my work these days is destined for the web. But if i had to tell my clients, "oh sorry, these files that you just spend a couple hundred thousand producing are going to look like inconsistent dog meat because some browsers aren't color managed," they would fire me. Seriously. This issue was resolved last century. I can bring up my work in any image editor, and ALL browsers and not see any obvious differences. This is how it should be and is.
In case you haven't tried this, calibrate to 2.2/65K. Now, open LR and PS. Take an image from LR and export as sRGB. Open in PS. Notice any major differences between? You shouldn't. Next, Save for Web from PS. This will take your sRGB image and strip its profile (if unchecked). Save it. Drop the jpg into all your browsers. What do you see? That's right, consistent color! And yes, it is possible to produce out of gamut color which shifts after being squeezed into sRGB. Fortunately, this is rarely the case.

Lightroom question

I have photoshop elements 9. Does lightroom interface with this software or replace it? Does lightroom have more capabilities?

Photoshop Elements is a cut down version of Photoshop, primarily aimed at basic graphic processing required by amateur users. Its ability to process RAW files is very limited in comparison to Lightroom.
Elements's management tool is not as sophisticated as Lightroom's. If you are going to work with Raw images a lot and you are very serious about it, Lightroom is the answer.

Html gallery of Lightroom question

IS there some simple way to get a filename with the thumbnail previews . I can only get " index " number into gallery index page , which is giving me headache because customers want " image number 323 " loooking at index , instead of ordering _IMG_12345
that is stated on the large image .
I dont want index numbers , I would like the filename to be seen even on that index page .
Any clues ? Impossible ?
It worked fine in web gallery made from PS 7 ...:)

If I had a penny for every expert that told me they hate something or other, I'd have £2.56 now.
I think there are some questions to think about when you choose a technology to use on your web pages:
1) Does everyone have a really fast link?
Answer: no. If all your customers are corporate, viewing down a big fatband connection, then use Flash; otherwise the download speeds get tedious and people walk away.
2) Does everyone have Java?
Pretty much, yes. Some of the more obscure viewers, particularly the text readers for blind people, don't really like Java. But, at the risk of appearing somewhat cold, blind people don't look at photo websites.
3) Can you please everyone?
No. That's just how it is. The feedback I get on the Java galleries centres around the fact that they look very slick, download very quickly (especially if I'm not greedy with the image sizes) and are quite intuitive to use.
So for me:
* the original lightbox concept appeals to me aesthetically
* the slimbox implementation of it is fast to download
* the mootools java is ridiculously compact
* Matthew's implementation of it all into an LR template is very usable in my workflow
* my styling of it is just what I want and works in IE6, IE7, Firefox and Safari
The best piece of advice, I think, is not to subscribe to the intolerant tyranny of the belief that there is one best way of doing it.
Damian

ACR Calibration Results Question

I recently purchased a D300 and have been shooting in RAW format. I am working my way through Bruce and Jeff's book and decided to try to calibrate my camera.
I shot a MacBeth (now X-Rite) color checker and followed the directions from the RWCR CS3 book.
All went well with the calibration and the results I ended up with are:
No Shadows correction
R Hue -15 Sat +38
G Hue -16 Sat +33
B Hue +11 Sat +5
The results of applying these corrections is kind of mixed. Overall the color looks pretty good but the greens esp in grass are pretty saturated and kind of faked looking. Skin tones seem a little on the red side as well.
Overall the image seems a bit too saturated. I guess I could adjust my corrections by eye and save those as a new preset, but I was wondering if my results were normal or perhaps I went astray somewhere.
I intend to run some of the auto calibrators like the Fors script or Rags script to compare.
Thanks,
Les

Les,
I cant really comment on your current results. But I am currently working on a new update that you might want to help me Beta test. If so, please contact me offline.
I am also always looking for test images from new camera models. I jumped on the D3 bandwagon and I am delighted. I could use a D300 image for my test suite.
Cheers, Rags :-)

What is the conclusion? Lightroom question...

I am trying to read alot of the old post concerning metadata
when I export I cannot see my name or keywords
was the conclusion having the correct Windows version?
OR does metadata show in Lightroom only?
what is the purpose of the metadata if you are trying to have them in web galleries and you cannot add your info
to the images...of should I say add them in Lightroom only to not see info OUTSIDE of Lightroom
thanks
MT

What program or method are you using in an attempt to view the metadata when you don't see it?
You might attach a resized-to-small version of one of your exported JPGs for others to look at.
You might try EXIF Tool to more definitively tell you what is in the JPG header:
http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/
Download then unzip/install the program and drag-and-drop your JPG to the EXIFtool(-k).exe program file.

Two Lightroom Questions

Hi,
I am fairly new to lightroom recently having switched from Aperture. I am using the latest version of LR (not CC) and Photoshop CS6. I have encountered two problems which occurred at the same time. Hopefully, I did something silly, and this is a quick fix.
1. When I edit photos, I no longer see the little icon in the lower right hand corner of each edited photo, in the photo strip that runs along the bottom of LR. I do see the icon in grid view. I know the edits are there, as I can check the before and after photos.
2. When I edit a photo in PSCS6, I right click on the photo, and select "Edit in". Previously a screen popped up giving me three choices, and I selected the top one, "edit and keep Lightroom edits". Now, the pop up menu does not appear, and the photo simply opens in PS6.
I am sure one of you experts can help with this! Please try to keep the answer simple, as I am not an expert with LR or the computer.
Thanks!
Steven

Thanks Jim. In fact I did reduce the size of the film strip so that the badges were not visible. Corrected.
I just downloaded Camera Raw 8.7.1. The problem, which was not a problem before, occurred with Camera Raw 8.7.0.
I trust you are correct and LR and Photoshop/Camera Raw are synchronized, so that all edits will transfer to Photoshop. HOWEVER, what if I wanted to make one of the other choices previously available to me? I no longer have that option?
Steven

Question re: second catalog in lightroom 4

I created a second catalog in lightroom 4 and imported a number of photos. the photo id number i.e. the name of the photo was not imported so the second catalog has an entirely new set of identification numbers. this is not helpful to me as I have references/notes to the original numbers. how do I indicate that I want the original names/numbers to transfer to the second catalog? can I fix what has already happened?
Also: now that I have the second catalog, I want to delete some photos with out deleting the photo from the original catalog. so far, when I delete a photo it gets deleted from both catalogues in lightroom.

Question: Are smaller catalogs faster?
Answer: At some things: yes; other things: not at all.
Yes: when doing whole catalog metadata operations, like displaying consolidated metadata, and lib filtering, and updating smart collections.
No: when editing in develop module, or displaying thumbs or loupe view in library module.
Why?
Databases use random access (read/write directly from/to pre-computed location) for reading and writing info for a single photo. - Therefore it is just as fast even if there are millions of photos and 100's of gigabytes in the database (catalog).
However some things do require Lightroom to read or write *all* records of the database, and process the data - those things take longer when the catalog is bigger.
So, whether to split your work into multiple catalogs depends on how you work. For me, a second catalog when traveling, consolidated with main upon return is my only use for a second catalog. But for people who work for independent clients, or who don't re-access older photos... - multiple catalogs makes more sense.
Summary: How you divide your work (photos) into catalogs depends mostly on how you work. Dividing into multiple catalogs for general performance improvement is not recommended, unless it really fits your workflow. However you do it, I recommend minimizing switching back and forth - lest you become crazy... .
Just my .02 opinion - YMMV...
potato321 - until you know what you're doing, I'd definitely recommend consolidating back to one catalog: just import your 2nd catalog into your main (original) catalog. Make backups of both catalogs first, in case you run into trouble.
PS - I agree with both Cornelia and dj-paige: having the same photo in more than one catalog is a recipe for disaster - just don't do it (ok, I could imagine some really unusual circumstance where this might make sense, but in 99.9% of cases: no). Now that I think about it, I did have all the same photos in Lr3 catalog and Lr4-beta catalog when I was strattling both worlds, but at the risk of sounding immodest: I knew what I was doing.
PS - Catalogs don't suck photo file data into themselves, they reference it from where it sits, in "independent" files on the disk, *but* you can duplicate physical photo files into the same directory as the catalog when you export a catalog - so be careful: it's worth knowing exactly where your photo files really are... - and whether you've inadvertently created duplicates... - I help way too many people recover previews who've inadvertently deleted photo files.
PS - I wish Lightroom had a checkbox you had to check: "I swear I understand the basics of catalog/photo-files and importing, non-destructive editng/xmp, and embedded-previews vs. rendered raw data" before it would allow you to open Lightroom - until then, it just presented the basic tutorial... (joking, but you get the idea - right?).
Rob

All photos displayed in Lightroom are very dark

This has just started in the last few days. Now all my imports into Lightroom 1.4.1 appear very dark compared to shots on camera display or same photo displayed outside Lightroom. This applies to dng, raw, or jpeg. Old libraries now all appear dark. If you adjust in Lightroom to look right they appear washed out in every image viewer outside Lightroom. Import a jpeg that was previously exported from Lightroom and looked fine now looks very dark when imported back into Lightroom. I have reinstalled program and tried every setting I could think of and all photos still look very dark.

Hope this fixes it. Deleting the default profile will make windows (and therefore Lightroom) assume your display is exactly sRGB. This is a good first approximation, but to get correct color you need to actually calibrate. Note that after calibration, Lightroom and unmanaged apps will not exactly correspond to each other, but they should be close. Most importantly, the contrast should be the same as long as you calibrate to the standard gamma of 2.2. You should see tiny differences in color saturation and in shadow colors - this is normal.

Lightroom workflow help (from an aperture user)

I'm testing out the demo version of LR3 trying to determine if I want to switch over from Aperture to LR. To be honest, I've flip flopped between the two a couple of years ago. I haven't taken a look at Lightroom since it went to version 3.
I'm using two cameras, first is an aging D70s and my newest addition is a canon G12. In both cases I shoot in RAW. At this point in my life would consider myself as a quasi-serious amatuar. Family demands prevent me from going whole hog into photography but I love shooting my family and vacations.
First question which may open up some debate - converting my RAW images to DNG. What advantages will I have in doing so? Secondly should I use adobe's DNG converter, i.e., external app or let Lightroom convert to DNG on import.
Second question - I'll be going on vacation and taking my laptop, yet my desktop is my main computer. How best handle the fact that I'll be doing some post process work on my MBP and then exporting/transferring those images to my desktop. Obviously my aim is to retain any metadata (keywords, and other exif data) and any image editing that I apply
As I compare and contrast Aperture vs. Lightroom, getting this information will aide in my decision as to whether LR is a good fit for me needs or if I should stick with aperture.
I my post a couple more aperture vs. lightroom questions in the next day or so
Regards
Mike

I would imagine that metadata for a xmp sidecar or dng work in the same way where only the metadata is updated and not the whole file re-writen. I would like to know if this is true or false from someone here at adobe as it would change my current view on dng. As far as backup and transfering between people here is my take:
I thought this too a while ago in a similar discussion, but I was convincingly shown that on current filesystems this is not generally possible and in most cases the entire file has to be rewritten. That's not a big deal for an occasional file but if you work with lots of dngs, writing 15 MB is very different from writing 10kB or so. This becomes especially egregious in networked settings. I too consider the writing of metadata inside dngs a disadvantage because of this reason. I would realloy like it if Lightroom had the option to use xmp sidecars instead if writing to the file. I don't want anything to write to my originals if I don't specifically ask for it. Together with the incompatibility with camera maker tools (which is an issue once in a while for me), I just don't bother. Lightroom doesn't care, ACR doesn't care. I do use dng when I export a few raw files to share with others using Lightroom so that I have a nice contained package that has all relevant copyright metadata inside. This is rare however.

Calibration Lightroom Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for