Color gamut issue

Hi, I am having a problem and I am not sure what's the cause but I think that it is related to gamut.
I recently noticed that some colors started to show as black instead of their original color. for example if I open a new document and set it's background to #00ce57 I see it in black instead of neon green.
when changing the color mode to 32 bit I see the correct color and also when I am turning on gamut warning all the black color turns into gray.
what can I do to fix this? this is bothering me a lot.
heres an example:
this is how the image should look.
and this is how the image looks in photoshop:

Yes, that is it. ATI has yet to come out with a good driver for CS6. So far the best is 12.8, but it has some color issues. Noel has been testing and keeping us up do date. 12.13beta is last version. They also just brought out an uninstaller which Noel posted a few days back.
Might run some scans to see if you can find some of his posts on drivers as answers problems. Try "ask question" and also on web.

Similar Messages

A different take on the "Save For Web" color shift issue...

Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
Nothing new here.
Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
Anyone know of such a beast?   I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
Anyone got a decent solution for this?

Sorry, I think I'm being unclear. This has nothing to do with individual monitor profiles. In Proof Setup, "Monitor RGB" amounts to turning off ALL color management, and simply letting the monitor do what it will. It is what the vast majority of web browsers do (even if the operating system provides color management, the browsers don't take advantage of it), so that is what you need to consider for images that will be viewed on a web browser. If you convert your image to sRGB, select Monitor RGB in Proof Set up, and turn on Proof Colors, you will see the image as it would appear on a web browser (after you save it as a jpg or use "Save For Web/Devices" to save it as a jpg).   Since almost everyone is running different uncalibrated monitors, there will be lots of variation in how it will look to them, so precise control of the color is unimportant.
That said, I would expect the color on a calibrated monitor (such as the one I use when editing) to be reasonably close to the colors I am seeing while editing in PS. To the extent a monitor deviates from "calibrated", those colors will vary, but a good monitor should show good colors.   Unfortunately, this is NOT the case, as my previous post shows. The colors produced by the steps above are oversaturated and significantly shifted in hue. There is, to my mind, anyway, no reason for this. Adobe clearly knows what the mapping is between the colors as it displays them in PS and the un-controlled "Monitor RGB" -- that is, it is the color map they are using during normal editing display. If they were to reverse-apply that map prior to saving it as a jpg, then the image would appear on a browser on that same (presumably calibrated) monitor very similar to what you set up when editing. Anyone else viewing the image on a web browser with a calibrated monitor would also see good colors. To the extent other viewers' monitors are out of calibration, their colors will suck, but there's nothing you can do about that.
I guess in some sense I AM "asking for a Color-Mamangement-solution for a "non-Color-Management-situation", but specifically I'm asking for PS Color Management to do the best it can for non-Color-Managed situations that we all face every day.
Does that make more sense?

Looking for a better solution to the "Save for web" color shift issue

Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
Nothing new here.
Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
Anyone know of such a beast? I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
Anyone got a decent solution for this?

Chris
I spent all day Googling and doing side by side comparisons of my old and new systems.
My display is a Dell U2410. It has several presets, including sRGB and Adobe RGB. I've been using sRGB.
On my OLD system, (Win XP, PsCS2, DwCS4) there seems to be no distinction between color managed and non color managed apps, even on this wide gamut display. I could capture (digital camera) in Adobe RGB, open and edit in PsCS2, save as .psd, convert to CMYK for print, or convert to sRGB for SFW. All images looked identical and they printed and displayed perfectly. I thought this was normal, and seemed logical. This also seems to be the source of my incorrect assumptions. I was trying to get my new machine to behave like my old one.
So I get this new machine (Windows 7, PsCS5, DwCS5) and now (still in sRGB display mode) all color managed apps appear de-saturated. Non color managed apps are OK. If I switch the display to Adobe RGB, color managed apps are OK, but non color managed apps are way too saturated. From my investigation, I believe this is normal behavior on a wide gamut display. I've tried changing the Control Panel > Display > Screen Resolution > Advanced settings > Color Management options, but to no avail. Either I'm missing something, or Windows 7 is doing color management differently.
It seems my only option now is to use Adobe RGB display setting for Ps, etc. and switch to sRGB for Dw and non color managed apps. Or, have 2 separate files for print and web. I've Googled 'til my eyes are numb and still not sure I'm getting this. Any enlightenment would be greatly appreciated.
Finally, I don't see an edit function here, so I can't remove my previous incorrect reply. Moderator, please feel free to do so.
Thanks

HP EliteDisplay E201- What kind of Color Gamut testing in QuickSpecs PDF

In HP E201 QuickSpecs PDF at page 3 section panel. What kind of standard you use for Color Gamut testing CIE 1931 or CIE 1976?

Hello Songvut,
Welcome to the HP Forums, I hope you enjoy your experience! To help you get the most out of the HP Forums I would like to direct your attention to the HP Forums Guide First Time Here? Learn How to Post and More.
I understand that you have questions about the HP EliteDisplay E201 LED Monitor. I am sorry, but to get your issue more exposure, I would suggest posting it in the commercial forums, since this is a commercial product. You can do this at Business PCs - Compaq, Elite, Pro.
I hope this helps. Thank you for posting on the HP Forums. Have a great day!
Please click the "Thumbs Up" on the bottom right of this post to say thank you if you appreciate the support I provide!
Also be sure to mark my post as “Accept as Solution" if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others who face the same challenge find the same solution.
Dunidar
I work on behalf of HP
Find out a bit more about me by checking out my profile!
"Customers don’t expect you to be perfect. They do expect you to fix things when they go wrong." ~ Donald Porter

Color management issue from Photoshop Acrobat

I'm having an issue that I believe has been isolated to Acrobat X related to Color Management, but was referred to this Photoshop forum because more experts in color management tend to read here. My thread in the Acrobat forum with several updates on tests is here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4646650#4646650
The short version is that any RGB image I create in any app (including Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, a non-Adobe app with Word, and Acrobat's own PDF from Screen Capture feature) displays in both Acrobat X and Adobe Reader with dull colors, very similar (if not identical) to how an RGB file with full intensity colors (i.e. R255 or G255) looks when converted to CMYK.
I've tried numerous settings in the Color Management system, and have Synchronized my Color Settings via Bridge across all Adobe CS6 apps. I've tried synchronizing to both the default North American General Purpose 2, and the (sometimes suggested) Monitor Color, using a calibrated profile for my Dell display from OS X's built-in tool. Have also tried various settings of Preserving Embedded Profiles, ignoring them, Assigning a new Color Profile to a document, turning off color management completely, etc. No change in result.
I have a multi-monitor setup (3 external Dell displays connected to a Macbook Pro, 2 of them via USB video devices), but I've also tried making each display (including the laptop's built-in display) my Primary monitor and can see the color shift on each one, so it doesn't appear to be a calibration issue.
This issue is on my Mac at the office. I have a similar setup at home (albeit a MacPro 1,1 vs. a laptop) but with the same Dell monitors and CS6 software installation, and I can take the same document (whether it's InDesign, Illustrator, or Photoshop), make a PDF of it, and it displays with 100% accurate colors when viewed in Acrobat X.
In addition to the tests mentioned in my original thread, I've also tried uninstalling and reinstalling both Acrobat X and Adobe Reader.
I believe the issue is related to Acrobat, as I can repeat the issue with no other apps than Acrobat in the workflow: if I display a full-intensity RGB image on screen, then use Acrobat X to create a PDF from Screen Capture, the resulting PDF immediately shifts to the dull colors.
Have also thoroughly checked through Acrobat's preferences, as it seems almost as if there's a setting somewhere along the lines of "View all PDFs in CMYK color gamut", but no such setting exists. I did a complete uninstall of Acrobat X as well, which I imagine would also dump its Preferences, so it would be a clean reinstall.
Another interesting note: Apple's Preview app seems to display the PDF with accurate RGB colors, so I know the PDF actually has the correct color definitions intact. But the same PDF opened in Acrobat X or Reader side-by-side displays the dull colors.
Any thoughts?
-R

i wasn't able to follow your lengthy post, and the color management chain is too complicated (for me) to address here other to say Acrobat reads tagged elements and converts their colors to Monitor RGB (so you must have stripped the profiles in the PDF, and the Acrobat CMS is applying or passing through the wrong profile)
further, if you don't want to rely on profiles, your safest bet (for screen viewing) is to CONVERT everything to sRGB (but i would still include the profile in case someone wants to display or print the document 'accurately'
Here is a look at a several critical color setting in Export to Acrobat that control: Downsampling, Compression, Color Conversions, Destination, and Tagging (click on image for blowup):
PS:
these panels were grabbed from an InDesign Export PDF process, but Photoshop should have similar options somewhere

Color shift (color management) issues in Mavericks

Noticed color management lacking for Safari and Dock icons just after Maverick update, but was unable to check it with recalibration. Today X-Rite issued an update for i1 Display PRO and i was able to recalibrate my display, but the problem unsurprisingly wasn't in the display profile.
Bellow are two screenshots of Safari vs. Chrome and FF vs. Chrome respectively.
Color difference is seen with the naked eye, but gray and blue fields' values are also annotated (Safari is on the left, Chrome is on the right).
These are FF (on the left) and Chrome (on the right) with no color difference, both browsers are color-managed.

Issues here too: 2013 Mac Pro, latest Mavericks/browser versions (OS X 10.9.4), and Dell UP2414Q display (known for good color—not to mention the only retina display money can buy).
Safari seems fine: web sites with no color profiles in the images look very much as I am used to from OS X Lion and Windows on other machines (some variation from screen to screen is just life). CSS colors match image colors when they should.
Firefox is ultra-saturated: web sites the look fine in Firefox--and identical to Safari--under OS X Lion (on a different Mac/display anyway) but on the new Mavericks system, colors are eye-burningly saturated! That's CSS and images alike (without color profiles). CSS and image colors still match—but both are WAY oversaturated.
Note: images dragged from Safari and Firefox to my desktop both look fine when opened in Quick Look or Preview. Both (again, images without profiles) look super-saturated like Firefox when opened in Photoshop CC—despite Photoshop having the same settings I'm used to using (color management Off for RGB, working space set to Monitor) on my old Mac with PS CS6 under Lion. Yet the color values in PS CC do register as correct despite looking so bad (same goes when opening my own RGB source PSDs that generated the web sites to begin with).
Shouldn't Safari and Firefox out of the box look alike, since they do in earlier OS versions? (Even if some workaround is found, "out of the box" a new Mac with default Firefox installation now looks terrible.)
Separate but complicating issues, in case it helps to diagnose this:
a) The Dell display's default calibration looks quite good to me; but if I run Apple's visual calibration steps which I would normally do on a new Mac, everything gets very dark. (So I went back to the default calibration, which is supplied by Apple and called "Dell UP2414Q"; Apple clearly supports this display specifically, since I never installed any Dell software.)
b) When I take an OS X screenshot of Safari, despite it looking "right" everywhere (Preview and Photoshop CC alike), values are way off. (Regardless of whether I strip the color profile or not when importing the screenshot into Photoshop CC.) When I take a screenshot off Firefox, the screenshot looks "right" (no longer oversaturated!) in Preview and Quicklook. When imported into Photoshop CC, Firefox screenshots behave just like drag-saved images from Firefox: they appear super-saturated just like in the browser, BUT the color values at least register correctly.
c) No setting I can find for Photoshop CC will make exported images look right (and match CSS colors) in ANY browser unless I accept them being super-saturated while I work on them (which of course is untenable). I'll deal with that separately: I've abandoned the new Mac Pro for Photoshop work and gone back to my old Mac (and PS CS6)--but this I assume to be Adobe's fault. I mention it only in case it's some kind of clue.
For what it's worth, here's my interpretation: Firefox and Photoshop are using the full gamut of the display, while Safari is not—and Safari looks GOOD not using the full gamut. (And at least with this Dell display, it looks "correct" that way.) Pure primary red #FF0000 (images and CSS alike) which appears normal to me in Safari and Preview and Quicklook turns to eye-burning neon red in Firefox and Photoshop (with management Off and working space set to Monitor). It's kind of amazing that the display can show a red even more brilliant than I have ever seen on a computer before, BUT it doesn't help me design web sites for the rest of the world who has a more ordinary gamut.
Maybe this is just a long-standing Firefox bug, revealed to me now that I have a large-gamut display? (But that wouldn't explain why other people have seen colors MORE saturated in Safari then Firefox.)

Color calibration issues - blue tint w/ sRGB

Need some help getting this issue resolved & wondering if there is a problem with my LCD.
I do a lot of web and video work and recently moved from a 17" Powerbook G4 to a 17" MacBook Pro. Both used with a 20" Apple Cinema display. The color temperature (tint) between the Powerbook and the new MacBook Pro are drastically different - especially when using sRGB calibration which is recommended by Adobe for this type of work. The cinema display seems correct and closely matches my Powerbook when using sRGB, but the Macbook Pro is very blue. The Macbook Pro displays more warm grays vs. the cinema display when using the default calibration settings.
Using sRGB for both displays:
http://idisk.mac.com/edgedesign-Public/Calibration/photo_sRBG.jpg
Using default calibration for both displays:
http://idisk.mac.com/edgedesign-Public/Calibration/photo_default.jpg
*Notice the 20" cinema hardly changes in either of these shots which make me think there's a problem with the MacBook Pro display.
- Are all the new MacBook Pros like this?
- Why so different than the Powerbook display and Cinema displays?
- Any calibration suggestions for Adobe CS3 and screen work?

Brief intro before I pontificate: I have a degree in imaging and used to be one of the guys you talked to at Eastman Kodak about monitor color calibration (before Kodak drove me crazy).
A few points:
First, sRGB is a needlessly small gamut color space invented by Microsoft. In the professional imaging field it is looked at with great disdain because it is imposing a needless crushing of your monitor's color profile. I've talked to one of the color experts at Adobe and he completely agrees. I don't know who at Adobe is recommending sRGB, but they are W R O N G. I personally call sRGB 'StupidRGB' in order to remind myself exactly what it is worth.
Second, the field of color calibration, color matching and color correction is complicated and requires considerable understanding to perform correctly. There are entire books on the subject, well worth reading. You can even take classes on the subject, such as at Rochester Institute of Technology (plugging my Alma matter). If you have shopped around for color calibration devices you will find they are incredibly expensive, and there is a reason for that.
Third, LCD screens generally SUCK for color matching. Here are a few reasons why:
(A) The viewing angle of most LCD screens is so small that if you tilt your head up, down, right or left you end up with a shift in color balance and contrast. Result: no way can you accurately color match. This is most certainly the case with ALL MacBooks, MacBook Pros and iMacs. The Cinema displays are vastly better. You can check this out yourself at your local Apple Store.
(B) In case you had not heard, none of the MacBook or MacBook Pro laptops are capable of showing all colors to which the human eye is sensitive. They don't do 'millions of colors' despite advertising you have read. They do about 260,000 colors and dither the rest. Dithering does NOT create colors that are not there. It just fakes them. The result again is that it is impossible to use these LCDs for accurate color matching. I have no knowledge about whether this color problem is the case with iMacs, but refer to the paragraph above regarding their viewing angle problem.
(C) The color gamut on even the very best LCD display is at the mercy of the fluorescent light bulbs inside the displays. The massive problem with fluorescent lights is that they do not have a continuous color spectrum. What you get are specific wavelength peaks with complete dropouts of other colors. Ye old CRTs with electron guns and glowing phosphors were/are not perfect either, but they were/are MUCH better at representing the full spectrum of light. Their gamut is much larger and more accurate than any LCD display. CRTs remain THE professional display for color calibration and color matching, even today.
I could rant on, but I think you get the message: Color matching on LCDs is a lousy idea, and on MacBooks and MacBook Pros it is essentially an impossible idea. The colors you need are not there on the screen. What you see is not what you get in terms of color. Give up.
That having been said, you can optimize your results for guestimation purposes. The very first thing I do with ANY display, including on Mac laptops, is go into the 'Displays' preference pane, hit the 'Color' tab and 'Calibrate...' the display. You MUST use 'Expert Mode'. Don't bother with mickey mouse mode. Fiddling with the settings will drive you nuts at first. But practice makes perfect. As long as you are not color blind you WILL get the hang of it, even if you don't understand what it is doing. Don't get psyched out. It works rather well.
When you get to 'Gamma' (you can look these terms up on Wikipedia) you want to use the same Gamma number as the other monitor you will be using for viewing. 1.8 is fine for Macs. Beats me why the 'PC' standard is 2.2. It is essentially a harsher contrast, but try it and use it if you like it, on BOTH monitors. Do NOT use 'native gamma' as it is rare that two displays have identical native gammas.
Next up is your 'white point'. Again, you want both your displays to have the same white point. D50 is the standard for viewing images in daylight. D65 is a bluer 'white point'. 9300 is the bluest of all. These numbers represent 'color temperature' as it is called. The sun has a color temperature hovering around 5000º Kelvin, thus D50 where D = Display. D65 = 6500º Kelvin, etc. Again, there is lots to read about in this field. Do NOT use 'native white point' on your displays if you are color matching because again, they won't be the same on each display.
When you get to the point of naming your color calibration profile you MUST include in the name the gamma number you used and the white point number you used. You will want to know, believe me. Here is why: You are going to want to make further color calibration profiles for different situations either now or in the future. Here's one example:
Lighting environment: Are you working on your MacBook Pro in the dark? Are the walls in the room a neutral color? Or are the walls colored? What kind of light is being used in the room? Fluorescent? Incandescent? Daylight? Details in the lighting environment in which you are working will affect how you perceive color on your display! You may want a morning color profile, an afternoon sun profile, and a night profile. If you have windows near you, these different times of day will affect the light in your work area and how you perceive color on your display. Again, go find a good book if you really want to understand this stuff.
A good basic calibration for plain old every day work, useless for color matching but nice to look at: I go through the calibration process for my lighting environment then use a gamma of 1.8 and I check off 'Use native white point'. Why? LCDs look their best at their native white point. You get good contrast with optimum color. Try it, you'll like it.
:-Derek

Color Management issues with Illustrator

Can someone help me figure out the color management issues I'm getting when printing on an Epson 3880 from Illustrator?
The image comes out severely red as evident on the face. I'm not getting the same problem when printing from Photoshop, even though I set same paper profile in printing dialog box.
I attached two printed picture (one from Photoshop CC, and one from Illustrator CC) that I took with my iphone so that you can see the printed result. Even when I try to simulate same thing using illustrator soft proofing process, the soft proof does not show me anything close to how it gets printed out. And I tried all device simulations to see if any would match it. Im using CMYK SWOP v2 for Color space in both programs.

Dougfly,
Only an hour wasted? Lucky you. Color is an incredibly complex subject. First, forget matching anything to the small LCD on the back of your camera. That's there as a basic guide and is affected by the internal jpg algorithm of your camera.
2nd, you're not really takeing a color photo with your digital camera, but three separate B&W images in a mosaic pattern, exposed thru separate red, green and blue filters. Actual color doesn't happen until that matrix is demosaiced in either your raw converter, or the in-camera processor (which relies heavily on camera settings, saturation, contrast, mode, etc.)
Having said the above, you can still get very good, predictable results in your workflow. I have a few color management articles on my website that you might find very helpful. Check out the Introduction to Color Management and Monitor and Printer Profiling. In my opinion, a monitor calibration device is the minimum entry fee if you want decent color.
http://www.dinagraphics.com/color_management.php
Lou

I want to know the color gamut of iPad mini 3 is it same as the iPad mini 2

I Want to know the color gamut of the iPad mini 3 is it same as the iPad mini 2

Almost exactly the same From this review.
http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/21/ipad-air-2-mini-3-review/

Camera Raw 4.6 Color Conversion Issues

I'm using CS3. In the Camera Raw 4.6 import window the color looks great. When I get the image into Photoshop the color looks horrible. I know it's the color profile that Raw is assigning. My question... is there a way to disable the color profile conversion coming from Camera Raw?
I've always had great results without using profiles and now this alters my color. I've even tried to go in and force the image to use a different color profile but at this point the damage has been done by the camera raw plugin.

"I've been doing professional color correction for about 15 years and know how to use the programs without the use of color profiles."
You're always using profiles no matter what, both a source and and destination for everything from your monitor to working RGB, CMYK and Lab to output profiles for proofing and print.
You need good profiles to define the hardware devices and color spaces. Without them, it's all only a guess.
"When I say "great color", I mean to say Photoshop doesn't adjust my color with profiles because I have profiles disabled."
There's not really a way to disable profiles in Photoshop. You can sort of turn them off, but the default profiles in your Color Settings dialog are still in effect no matter what. In fact, you can't even display in image in RGB or CMYK without at least two profile, and more often three.
Just having profile in the loop doesn't mean that Photoshop will "adjust" your colors. Photoshop will only do what you tell it to do.
"My monitor is corrected and I have no need to use profiles since I understand UCR & GCR conversion for printing."
You monitor is corrected? How? Have you calibrated it? After the calibration Photoshop needs, you guessed it, a monitor profile, in order to properly display your images. And how to you get from the RGB of your digital captures to the CMYK you need for offset? Yeah. Profiles. Even if you're using the archaic and outdated Custom CMYK to set your total ink and black generation, you are still in effect, using profiles. You are using the parameters defined there in the same way custom measurement are used in ProfileMaker to generate a custom ICC profile. It's just not as accurate.
"Also, when I have something printed somewhere I have them disable their profiles to provide true color. And I also force acrobat to use my color maps when building pdfs so my printer has no need for conversion of any kind."
How you do know you've made the right conversion for that printer. Most printer just ignore embedded profiles anyway, but including proper output profiles can enable them to display the files correctly on their calibrated screens, and for the more advanced printers, that embedded profile can allow them to use Device Link Profiles to convert your files to custom press or proofing profiles.
"My complaint was that the Camera Raw Plug-in forces me to convert to a profile with 4 possible choices. I was asking if there is a way to disable this?"
It's actually a choice of four different profiles not a profile with four choices. The choices are based on color gamut and gamma in order of increased gamut. There is no way to disable them. What would you put in their place? There are raw converters that will let you convert the raw data to any color space on output, including CMYK. Maybe that would be more appropriate for you. CaptureOne and Raw Developer are the two that come to mind, but they all use profiles.
Hell, even in the golden age of the drum scanner, scanners like the Hell 3010 without even being able to see an image on screen, used profiles, only they called them by a different name - lookup tables. Lookup tables for scanner input and characteristic lookup tables for the analog proofing system the house used.
"I found if I convert using the Adobe 1998 profile the color comes out close, I simply have to increase the saturation to return to the original optical image values. I would however like to bypass this step."
It sounds to me like you need to spend a few weeks getting up to date with the tools that are available now. Between hardware monitor calibration and custom CMYK output profiles that take into account different ink limits and black generation, you're missing out on a boatload of fun.
A lot of things have changed in prepress in the last fifteen years not the least of which is that little number called Direct to Plate. Since everone has gone DTP, the one thing that has gone by the wayside are any kind of overall proofing standards. Where you used to be able to send the same file to ten different printers and get back proofs that were extremely close, now they're all over the map. The only way to effectively deal with this is with custom profiles for the high end digital proofers that printers use today.
Sure, you still need to take into account the specifics of total ink, highlight and shadow values, but you simply can't rely on the positively ancient ink definitions in Custom CMYK to work very well for any of today's output. Unless, of course, you and your clients don't mind going through rounds and rounds of proofs.

Illustrator CS5 Color Picker Issue

When selecting particularly bright colors in the color picker with CMYK, when i try to select the color, one box comes up with the color and a yellow triangle error sign and another comes with a much duller shade, and no matter what I do the duller shade is what it will give me. I keep searching for solutions to this problem and everywhere it says that the color is not availiable in CMYK and it's just choosing the closest color, but the thing is, i can make the vibrant color with the color panel and it'll show up fine. It's just the color picker.

It's not a problem. You can make a lot of colors with the Color Picker which is showing which will not be translated into CMYK just as the warning says. Look at the Help files or Google "Color Gamut" to see what is available.
http://dx.sheridan.com/advisor/cmyk_color.html

Camera Raw Color Temperature Issue

Help me verify color temperature issue please.
I shoot with Canon EOS 5D.
I sat white balance mode to K - Manual Kelvin temperature - and set value to 6000K.
So my raw files should have this setting - color temperature 6000K.
Canon ZoomBrowser EX shows me the value - 6000K
Nevertheless I see different reading in Adobe Camera RAW converter (as shot)?
Photoshop CS2 Camera Raw CT=5600K Tint=+3 (! as Shot !)
Why?

Ramon seemed to have the answer in hand, then G Sch above chimed in with some random comment about coordinate systems. Weirdly, Ramon then agreed with G Sch's nonsense and thanked him for it. Suddenly the thread has suffered an ineluctable defenestration.
Is:
- camera maker's control for XXXX Kelvin wrong?
- Adobe's control for XXXX Kelvin wrong?
- the use of the designator "K" in these contexts wrong, as it implies physics reference for the measure while the camera and ACR just do their own thing?
By the logic used in this thread, 1/250sec shutter doesn't have anything to do with a time standard, nor does F4 mean an aperture, it's just a coordinate in a locally defined system, la la la. So why bother to even code it in EXIF? What's the point of providing a control in terms of K if K isn't normalized?
The question was answered at Ramon's first post: ACR doesn't read the 5D white bal metadata. The camera K setting is used for in-camera processing and by Canon utilities. But note that the raw data are white bal agnostic but white bal results are subject to a camera profile which may differ between OEM and ACR, and at which point there is room for discrepancy for interpretation of color. Which one is right? I can't say. It's important to realize the results for a given K setting may differ between OEM and ACR because of this. Contrary to what G Sch writes above, the same K setting ought to give the same results if a "Kelvin" setting is to have real meaning, but the seems to be impracticable if the developers don't agree on the characterization of the gear.

Aperture 2.1.4 to PS CS4 External Editor Color Profile issues????

Anyone else experience this?
I shoot Nikon D700 and D90 with sRGB color space. When I send a file to CS4 via external editor, PS prompts that my embedded color space is Adobe 1998. ***??????
I immediately went and checked all my settings on my camera and they're fine. Is this Aperture's doing? PS? maybe even SL?
Dazed and Confused
Message was edited by: rtd2870

Aperture uses the Adobe 1998 color space as it has a wider color gamut than sRGB. Like most things in Aperture, you choose your color space on export.
sRGB is used primarily for the web, and some printers that accept RGB files ask for sRGB because their printers can't match the Adobe 1998 Gamut.
If your camera is capable of shooting Adobe 1998, you should, but it doesn't really matter when shooting RAW.
DLS

Jpeg images and color gamuts

When I make a jpeg image in my camera, it is assigned the adobe rgb gamut.
What happens when it is imported in LR? Does the gamut change to prophoto automatically?
When I print the jpeg do I have to specify the color gamut? If it isn't prophoto rgb, there is no place to specify the gamut?
Can anyone explain?
Andy

Yes it is. You might want to read up in the manual about still importing and also about audio sampling rates.

Color rendering issue

i'm using aperture since version 1. and till today i see the same color rendering issues which occurs when applying heavy exposure correction on my canon pro camera files. when i correct overexposed images i get a strange yellow posterisation not a smooth transition like with, capture one, raw developer, adobe lightroom & arc. i decided to do a more controlled test to see whats going on. the result is kind of disapointing...... http://db.tt/xGvmhOzK not only is aperture far behind when it comes to recover overexposed areas compared to it's competitors it also shows missing colors !

well i tried adjusting them, but it makes no difference, i am thinking it is a xorg issue

Color gamut issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for