Color management - Indesign with PS calibrated images?

How to:
In PS CMYK color space looks great using laser printer. Printer and monitor are calibrated - so what you see is what you get - but only in PS.
When the images are imported to Indesign or or converted to a PDF the colors look awful, dirty, with cast.
What is the best way to preserve color when using images in different design software.
Should color space be changed even though is all printed on same CMYK laser printer.
Any help would be great. Thanks.

>> In PS CMYK color space looks great using laser printer. Printer and monitor are calibrated - so what you see is what you get
Photoshop (Ps) is apparently making a good Conversion to your Print Space-Profile (or you are getting lucky they are close).
>> When the images are imported to Indesign or or converted to a PDF the colors look awful
Be sure you embedd profiles and set up your Adobe Color Settings to use the embedded profiles.
>> What is the best way to preserve color when using images in different design software
Establish device-independent 'native' Color Spaces (Working RGB and CMYK) and CONVERT to your PROOFING (print/monitor/Web) ICC profiles as a last step in the printing process and/or Saving a production copy in the target color space.
>> Should color space be changed even though is all printed on same CMYK laser printer.
Your Source Spaces will typically be different than your Print Space and your Monitor Space and your Web Space — CMYK is different in that it may be also be both Source/Target spaces — I create/work/edit in high-bit, high-gamut RGB and CONVERT to CMYK in the Printer Utility or in a final production copy when I know the target CMYK profile.
I recommend reading up on how Adobe Color Management Systems use ICC profiles...

Similar Messages

Color management problem with calibrated monitor

I'm using a Samsung Syncmaster T220 LCD profiled and calibrated with a Spyder2Express. PC runs Vista 32 SP2, Photoshop CS4. Using Adobe RGB for workspace profile. System profile is set to the Spyder2Express profile.
Open up photo in Photoshop. Colors fine.
Resize for web, convert to sRGB, then check preview in "Save for web..."
Under preview, I preview the following:
-Monitor Color
-Windows (no color management)
-Macintosh (no color management)
-Document Profile
The Preview of Windows, Document Profile settings look exactly right, whereas the Monitor Color setting looks badly darkened. I preview with Firefox, save and view image using IrfanView and Firefox. It's badly darkened. I'm stumped. I don't know what I'm doing wrong. This is similar to another recent posting here, except that I am using a calibrated display with profile.
Anyone know what I'm missing?
Thanks, Luke

I'm a little confused. Previewing through "Monitor Color" and "Windows (no color management)" are both technically not color managed. Perhaps we should distinguish further between "colorspace aware" and "device profile aware". So I can understand when you say that Irfanview will do some color management, but does not use the monitor device profile. But I would have thought that Firefox in non managed-color config would still use the monitor device profile.
I would have thought (and I might turn out to be wrong) that previewing using "Windows (not color managed)" would be the standard for previewing images for stock browser configurations. What photoshop shows me is correct rendering of the image based on what I edited in this mode. But the browser shows me a version that looks like it is not device aware, counter to photoshop's prediction. What is going wrong here? Do none of these major window apps use device profiles? Why does photoshop think that they will?
Another thing that has been suggested is that my monitor is calibrated so far from the stock configuration that sRGB photos displayed on it without the benefit of device profiling will come out far off the mark. But I profiled the monitor in stock hardware configuration and made no adjustments, and don't think that the hardware config of the monitor has changed.
If this turns out to be just a practical issue, then it leaves a major question. What did I accomplish by calibration if my calibration doesn't look like anything I actually display with? I can guess that prepress work will be more accurate in most respects, or I hope so anyway. But how should I manage workflow for developing images for web content if I am unable to match up what I'm editing with what the end user will see?
Or maybe I'm just doing something wrong...or maybe photoshop is...or I don't know what. Where do I go from here? Is WCS implicated in this somewhere?
Luke

Color management, printing with InDesign CS3

RGB output devices (this includes essentially all inkjet printers from every manufacturer, when driven by the manufacturer print driver). Inkjet printers driven by a PostScript RIP are considered CMYK output devices, and thus this post does not apply to them.
When printing to RGB output devices from InDesign using the same ICC profiles and settings as in Photoshop, you still get crummy results, in terms of color, that differ from both IDCS2 and other Adobe applications including Photoshop CS3.
InDesign CS2 previously did all rasterizing and color space conversion in InDesign prior to submitting the print job to the OS. In CS3 this was changed to submit PostScript + colorspace information, which is then supposed to be normalized by the OS. Except that it doesn't work. Mac OS X drops the color space information.
The work around is to check "Print as Bitmap" in the advanced section of the IDCS3 print dialog. This causes IDCS3 to do the conversion and generate a bitmap prior to submitting to the OS, rather than depending on the OS to do color conversion or rasterizing, which is the default behavior with IDCS2. Thus you can use the same ICC profiles and print driver settings as with all other Adobe applications, if you choose this option.
Chris Murphy
co-author Real World Color Management 2e

Chris,
First, I am surprised that there has been no response to your post since there were more than a few complaints about the problem in this forum when IDCS3 first came out. So thank you for the solution to this vexing problem.
But I find some of the language in your post a bit problematic:
>InDesign CS2 previously did all rasterizing and color space conversion in InDesign prior to submitting the print job to the OS.
and
>... rather than depending on the OS to do color conversion or rasterizing, which is the default behavior with IDCS2.
The second quote seems incorrect on two counts:
1. It contradicts the first quoted statement.
2. In my mac IDCS2 (version 4.0.5 build 688) in the options area of the color management pane of the print dialog, the only available choice for the Color Handling pop up is "Let InDesign Determine Colors".
So the default behavior with IDCS2 seems to be "Let InDesign Determine Colors".
I am not at all taking issue with the main point of your post, which I welcome wholeheartedly. I just find the second quoted phrase from you post confusing. Can you please clarify.
Returning to your main point, are there any downsides of using the Print as Bitmap method?
Thanks,
Al

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

Color management issues with Flash CS3, please help?

Hello everyone.
I am having issues with color from a Jpeg image produced in Photoshop CS4
after importing onto the stage in Flash CS3. The color in Flash changes the image to a lighter less saturated state. Yuk.
Here is a link to a screen capture to show you what's happening (for a bigger view):
http://www.rudytorres.com/color/weirdcolor.png
As you can see the front image is the Photoshop image showing the sRGB color profile embedded but Flash (behind) changes that color.
This client is quite picky and she will notice this difference.
If any one can help, please.
- Rudy
P.S. It's a button somewhere, Right?

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

Color management issues with colorsync utility

hi all,
I'm trying to properly color manage my workflow from camera to monitor to printer and I read through the entire manual on the "colorsync utility" which is supposed to do this. That's an hour of my life I'll never get back. Anyway the color is different on my camera's screen from my computer monitor and the final output is radically different.
I've used the ICC profile for my camera (Canon Rebel XT) and I've visually callibrated my monitor. I'm using a Canon IP 4600 with a continuous ink system (non OEM ink).
What I need to know is how do I change the color space visually? What I mean is without spending hundreds on colorometers etc. I know how to manually callibrate my computer monitor, but how do I ensure that my camera matches my screen and how do I compensate for the non OEM ink?
thanks for any help

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

Dell XPS 15 Color Management Problem with "True Color"

I recently purchased a Dell XPS 15 (6845slv). Overall I have very happy with it...but have been getting frustrated with color management issues and was hoping to get some advice.
Intermittently, the display had been changing the color scheme (to a suboptimal scheme). It lasted for anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes and then returned to the original (and more normal appearing) color settings. It did not seem to happen while running any particular applications. All drivers are up-to-date.
I turned off the dell application "True Color" which I thought may have been making automatic adjustments to the color scheme and since turning it off the issue hasn't happened again. However now I'm concerned that by inactivating that software, that I may not be maximizing the potential of the high quality HD display. And now--though maybe it's in my head--the colors seem to be a little flatter since turning off True Color.
Does anyone have any suggestions for getting the most out of the display? Has anyone had similar issues with True Color? Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks for your help.

I ended up fully uninstalling it from programs and features...I haven't had the problem since. I've been happy with the display since making this change.

Accurate proof with inaccurate monitor? [color management question]

At the risk of sounding really dumb, here goes:
I have never had a true color managed workflow despite dabbling in it and even delving into custom profiling.
I don't want to shut the windows in my upstairs office and be dependent on unnatural light sources. I'm content to design knowing that what's on my monitor is not accurate.
But I do want to be able to print my own inkjet proofs and know that what I see on paper is at least 90% accurate to what I'll get off press. And I want to try my best to provide clients with PDF proofs that come as close as possible to press. (This last bit's probably a pipe dream given that the clients don't have calibrated monitors, but perhaps Acrobat 9's new Overprint Preview default settings will help somewhat?)
Is this realistic? Everything I know about color management starts with monitor calibration and I'm reluctant to take that step for fear of working in a cave-like environment.
Would love to hear thoughts from the community.

I'm still using my Sony Artisan, and dreading the day it fails to calibrate, but I'm definitely in the minority now. Adobe Gamma is useless for LCDs, and no longer ships, but the modern hardwares solutions are all supposed to be compatible. I suspect you'll get good results with a good monitor.
As far as being worthwhile, absolutely. My office uses North light and daylight balanced fluorescent lighting, so there isn't a harsh color change through the day. Things are probably most accurate at the time of day when the calibration was last done, but they are definitely better any time than they would be without it.
Peter

Print with no color management CS4 + Snow Leopard broken

I have seen comments in this forum about problems with printing with CS4, but wasn't sure that they were going to apply to me. They do, big time.
I print to an Epson 9800, I convert the image to the Epson profile for that paper, and then print using no color management. With CS4 + Mac OS 10.6 the colors are completely off, and the results unusable, and I could not resolve it by printing from CS3 instead. I finally ended up installing 10.5 on a new partition, deactivating CS3 on the 10.6 partition and installing on the 10.5 partition (because Adobe's licensing treats the same program running on the same computer with different boot partitions as two different "installations"!), and then actually going back one generation in the drivers for the printer. Basically this resurrects my computer as it was in 2007, and I can now print flawlessly. I'm not sure whether the latest printer drivers introduce problems or not, and got tired printing test images.
Of course, this means that I edit the photo in 10.6 + CS4, then reboot to 10.5, print in CS3, then reboot back into 10.6. And of course I can't use CS4 while printing from CS3. Very frustrating.
My questions are: (1) is there an Adobe document that discusses this problem, (2) are Adobe aware of this problem, and (3) are there any other work-arounds that people know of other than reverting to CS3 + OS 10.5?
A

Thanks Chris,
I didn't try older Epson drivers + 10.6. I wasn't quite sure if I was getting the exact same colors with the newest Epson drivers + 10.5, so I reverted to the previous version drivers + 10.5 and am able to print perfectly with that.
I must say that Adobe's licensing really gets in the way when there are problems like this. I only updated to 10.6 (yes, perhaps a little prematurely) after reading Adobe's reports on compatibility and searching these forums for any news of problems. But now that I have updated to 10.6, I really don't want to go back to 10.5 permanently. And, as I said, you can't run the same version of Photoshop on the same computer on two different boot systems, without using up the two licenses. This is very frustrating, and violates my understanding of the license that Adobe gives its users: the ability to run the software on either of 2 computers, as long as you don't run on both at the same time.
I hope you figure this out, let us know as soon as you can.
A

Color Management With CS2 & Lightroom

I think I have finally figured out how to sync all my color management settings with CS2, Lightroom, my Nikon300, and my jpg viewing software. All are set to color profile sRGB and a picture looks almost exactly the same in every program.
My main use with these programs and the desire for good color is shooting a ton of basketball game pictures and color correcting and painting them in Photoshop.
My question: Is sRGB the best choice color profile, or does anyone have an opinion on an alternative profile.
Thanks for your opinions.

Okay, that's what I'm looking for is an opinion or two. I take these "Photoshopped" files and print 8x10's on my Epson R800 and I'm still fighting a little with what's on my screen versus what prints. I know that's another whole issue, but I just wanted to feel I was at least on the right track with the color management and color profile choices.

Need help understanding profiles and color management

I made the big leap from inexpensive inkjets to:
1 Epson 3800 Standard
2 Spyder3Studio
I have a Mac Pro Quad, Aperture, PS3, etc.
I have a steep learning curve ahead, here's what I've done:
1 Read a lot of books, watched tutorials, etc.
2 Calibrated the monitor
3 Calibrated the printer several times and created .icc profiles
What I've found:
1 The sample print produced by Spyder3Print, using the profile I created with color management turned off in the print dialog, looks very good.
2 When I get into Aperture, and apply the .icc profile I created in the proofing profile with onscreen proofing, the onscreen image does not change appreciably compared with the no proof setting. It gets slightly darker
3 When I select File>Print image, select the profile I created, turn off color management and look a the resulting preview image it looks much lighter and washed out than the onscreen image with onscreen proofing turned on.
4 When I print the image, it looks the same as was shown in the print preview...light and washed out, which is much different than what is shown in edit mode.
5 When I open PS3 with onscreen soft-proofing, the onscreen image is light and washed out...just like displayed in PS3 preview. If I re-edit the image to look OK onscreen, and print with the profile and color management turned off, the printed image looks OK.
So, why am I confused?
1 In the back of my simplistic and naive mind, I anticipated that in creating a custom printer profile I would only need to edit a photo once, so it looks good on the calibrated screen, and then a custom printer profile will handle the work to print a good looking photo. Different profiles do different translations for different printers/papers. However, judging by the PS work, it appears I need to re-edit a photo for each printer/paper I encounter...just doesn't seem right.
2 In Aperture, I'm confused by the onscreen proofing does not present the same image as what I see in the print preview. I'm selecting the same .icc profile in both locations.
I tried visiting with Spyder support, but am not able to explain myself well enough to help them understand what I'm doing wrong.
Any help is greatly appreciated.

Calibrated the printer several times and created .icc profiles
You have understand that maintaining the colour is done by morphing the colourants, and you have understood that matching the digital graphic display (which is emissive) to the print from the digital graphic printer (which is reflective) presupposes a studio lighting situation that simulates the conditions presupposed in the mathematical illuminant model for media independent matching. Basically, for a display-to-print match you need to calibrate and characterise the display to something like 5000-55000 kelvin. There are all sorts of arguments surrounding this, and you will find your way through them in time, but you now have the gist of the thing.
So far so good, but what of the problem posed by the digital graphic printer? If you are a professional photographer, you are dependent on your printer for contract proofing. Your prints you can pass to clients and to printers, but your display you cannot. So this is critical.
The ICC Specification was published at DRUPA Druck und Papier in Düsseldorf in May 1995 and ColorSync 2 Golden Master is on the WWDC CD for May 1995. Between 1995 and 2000 die reine Lehre said to render your colour patch chart in the raw condition of the colour device.
The problem with this is that in a separation the reflectance of the paper (which is how you get to see the colours of the colourants laid down on top of the paper) and the amount of colourant (solid and combinations of tints) gives you the gamut.
By this argument, you would want to render the colour patch chart with the most colourant, but what if the most colourant produces artifacts? A safer solution is to have primary ink limiting as part of the calibration process prior to rendering of the colour patch chart.
You can see the progression e.g. in the BEST RIP which since 2002 has been owned by EFI Electronics for Imaging. BEST started by allowing access to the raw colour device, with pooling problems and whatnot, but then introduced a primary ink limiting and linearisation.
The next thing you need to know is what colour test chart to send to the colour device, depending on whether the colour device is considered an RGB device or a CMYK device. By convention, if the device is not driven by a PostScript RIP it is considered an RGB device.
The colour patch chart is not tagged, meaning that it is deviceColor and neither CIEBased colour or ICCBased colour. You need to keep your colour patch chart deviceColor or you will have a colour characterisation of a colour managed conversion. Which is not what you want.
If the operating system is colour managed through and through, how do you render a colour test chart without automatically assigning a source ICC profile for the colourant model (Generic RGB Profile for three component, Generic CMYK Profile for four component)?
The convention is that no colour conversion occurs if the source ICC device profile and the destination ICC device profile are identical. So if you are targetting your inkjet in RGB mode, you open an RGB colourant patch chart, set the source ICC profile for the working space to the same as the destination ICC profile for the device, and render as deviceColor.
You then leave the rendered colourant test chart to dry for one hour. If you measure a colourant test chart every ten minutes through the first hour, you may find that the soluble inkjet inks in drying change colour. If you wait, you avoid this cause of error in your characterisation.
As you will mainly want to work with loose photographs, and not with photographs placed in pages, when you produce a contract proof using Absolute Colorimetric rendering from the ICC profile for the printing condition to the ICC profile for your studio printer, here's a tip.
Your eyes, the eyes of your client, and the eyes of the prepress production manager will see the white white of the surrounding unprinted margins of the paper, and will judge the printed area of the paper relative to that.
If, therefore, your untrimmed contract proof and the contract proof from Adobe InDesign or QuarkPress, or a EFI or other proofing RIP, are placed side by side in the viewing box your untrimmed contract proof will work as the visual reference for the media white.
The measured reference for the media white is in the ICC profile for the printing condition, to be precise in the WTPT White Point tag that you can see by doubleclicking the ICC profile in the Apple ColorSync Utility. This is the lightness and tint laid down on proof prints.
You, your client and your chosen printer will get on well if you remember to set up your studio lighting, and trim the blank borders of your proof prints. (Another tip: set your Finder to neutral gray and avoid a clutter of white windows, icons and so forth in the Finder when viewing.)
So far, so good. This leaves the nittygritty of specific ICC profiling packages and specific ICC-enabled applications. As for Aperture, do not apply a gamma correction to your colourant patch chart, or to colour managed printing.
As for Adobe applications, which you say you will be comparing with, you should probably be aware that Adobe InDesign CS3 has problems. When targetting an RGB printing device, the prints are not correctly colour managed, but basically bypass colour management.
There's been a discussion on the Apple ColorSync Users List and on Adobe's fora, see the two threads below.
Hope this helps,
Henrik Holmegaard
technical writer
References:
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?14@@.59b52c9b/0
http://lists.apple.com/archives/colorsync-users/2007/Nov/msg00143.html

Lightroom color not consistant with PSCS4/Bridge. Help please.

Hi All,
I started with a search, but didn't find an answer that covered what I'm seeing.
OK, first of all, let me set this.
I'm running a MacBook Pro 2.2, OSX 10.6, with a 23" Apple Cinema Display (non-glossy screen) attached as my main work monitor for my LR, PSCS and all my other photography and graphics work. Any reference here is referring to the 23' ACD as that is my calibrated color reference point. And for the record, both the ACD and the MBP are fully hardware calibrated on a regular bases.
What I'm seeing is gorgeous color and pop in LR, but more muted colors in PSCS4 and Bridge. I have noticed that if I open a single image in both PSCS4 and Apple's 'Preview' app, the PSCS4 rendering matches the Bridge preview dead-on. While the 'Preview' app's rendering looks more like the LR previews. So it would seem to me that LR is 'talking' to the systems color rendering, while PSCS4 and Bridge are more, 'on their own', yet talking to each other.
I work almost completely in Adobe 98 color space. I export out of LR into PCSC4 as Adobe 98 PSD files. I continue to work in Adobe 98, and even re-enter the PSD files back into my Lightroom catalogs with their attached color space. In LR, I get the same 'look'. Nicely saturated color with a little pop, but if I open up the files again in PSCS4 they again, look somewhat 'muted'. But, I have tried this using multiple file types (psd, jpeg, raw) as well as sRGB color space. The results are the same. It seems application specific, NOT file-type specific.
Now I can understand maybe a slight color difference between PSCS/Bridge and say maybe Corel 'Painter'. But I am not understanding this obvious color difference between supposed related Adobe apps such as LR and PSCS4, again, while working on the same calibrated monitor.
FYI, my Epson 2400, using Epson's custom profiles, looks fantastic printing out of LR's Print module. (I love the LR Print module!).
My problem here is, I need to send files out to certain print houses for album printing and such (usually in sRGB color space). I have confidence with what I'm seeing in the Lightroom previews of my files. But the PSCS4 files are just too 'dull' looking. Kind of nervous to let them go out the door.
Final note, my entire Adobe Creative Suite is set to 'North American Prepress 2'.
Thanks for any help you can send my way.
-Sol

One thing I would try is to run with only one monitor (close the MacBook's lid and unsleep it by hitting a key on an external keyboard or only use the built-in display) and see if the problem persists.
Lightroom and Photoshop use the exact same color management module with just a few small differences. In general, you should get identical rendering of colors but for a few exceptions. One is that Lightroom always uses perceptual intent rendering and Photoshop always uses relative. Some color calibrators generate v4 profiles with a built in perceptual profile. The colormunki is one of those. With profiles like that you will see very subtle differences between Lightroom and Photoshop. Generally not something as strong as what you describe. Another difference is that Lightroom in the Develop module does NOT apply the color noise reduction when zoomed out, only when zoomed in at 1:1 or higher. The result of this is that sometimes, if you have lots of saturated color fine detail, the Develop module shows you a falsely oversaturated image when zoomed out. A good example of this happens with flowers in a grass field, finely detailed fall color leaves, or neon lights. You can see the effect by switching back and forth between Develop and Library or simply by zooming in at 1:1. Library will appear far less saturated as will the 1:1 display. You can solve this issue by lowering the color noise reduction to zero. Lastly, you wouldn't be the first to be fooled by the relatively dark background in Lightroom. This can make everything appear more saturated than the equivalent display in Photoshop which usually has a lightish grey as background or simply your desktop. This is a small effect but I have found it to be surprisingly large a few times. You can change the color of the background in Lightroom to play with this by control (or right) clicking in the matte area.

Color Management - Am I Doing Something Wrong

I am encountering a problem that I see a great deal of discussion about but to which I am not finding a solution (if there is one). After converting a jpeg to sRGB, I am seeing oversaturation, particularly in reds, in some applications and on a digital photo frame.
So far this has cropped up in two scanned negatives that I did not have tagged from the scanner, moved into Lightroom (as a 16 bit TIFF), moved into CS5, converted to ProPhoto RGB, and edited. I then flattened, converted to sRGB (trying it 3 alternative ways, e.g from the LR export module, from PS edit>convert menu, & from the Save for Web and Devices Module). On my color managed applications the colors look fine. I first noticed this in the file thumbnails for the images and then when viewed on a digital frame. Also in some applications (but not others) I see this oversaturation. The only workaround I have found is to assign my monitor profile to the image.
I do not have a wide gamut monitor (HPLP2475W), although I think that would create the opposite problem, and I reprofiled my monitor with an Eye One after this problem first appeared.
After trying many different things, searching around on the web and rereading my color management stuff, I still haven't figured out where I have gone wrong. Any ideas? The only hint I have as to what may be wrong is that in soft proofing, my Monitor RGB seems to be much more saturated than the image as it appears outside of soft proofing. As I indicated, I reprofiled my monitor but that phenomenon remains.

Based on what you have said above and after hitting the books, this may be where I have gone "wrong." Let me know what you think. I am scanning color negatives and as such cannot create a custom profile for the scanner output. (At least that is the conventional wisdom from everthing I have read, mainly because of the number of variables that could make a profile next to useless). I brought the image into Lightroom with the full gamut of the scanner but without any tag or embedded profile. I then exported them to CS5, but I probably should not have converted to ProPhoto RGB at that point because, as you note, I was "approving" its appearance at that point even though the image had no starting profile to begin with and except for a global Lightroom adjustment, I had done nothing to correct it. Thus, I am assuming that what I did was to start down the color management path with an incorrect assumption about the accuracy of the color values in the image from the beginning. And that would cause my output at the end after conversion to sRGB to look wrong on an unmanaged sRGB device. Do I have that right?
Instead, I probably should have done any of the following:
(1) Using Nikon Scan (also an option in SilverFast), let the scanner software profile an image in my chosen color space (as opposed to the full color gamut of the scanner) as best it can, and move forward from there. Nikon Scan uses a one size fits all canned scanner profile and then (presumably) converts it to the color space of choice. Silverfast must do essentially the same thing for color negatives but, as a starting point, gives you profiles for various kinds of negatives, with the caveat that it also cannot hit the accuracy mark dead on because of the variability of negatives. Either of these options present the easiest, least challenging, but perhaps suboptimal, solution.
(2) Bringing the untagged image into the CS5 Working Color Space from Lightroom and then previewing the image under different profiles until one is found that comes closet to matching the expected colors and gamma of the image, and assign that profile. Then edit the image from there, converting as necessary.
(3) Leaving the image unmanaged, but in the working color space handed off from Lightroom (ProPhoto RGB), manually color correcting without the aid of a starting profile, and only converting to a desired color space (e.g. sRGB) for a specific output device (e.g., a photo frame or the web).
(4) Assigning the working space handed off from Lightroom (ProPhoto RGB), manually color correcting without the aid of a starting profile, and converting to other color spaces as necessary for a specific output.
I'm not sure there is a huge amount of difference between #3 and #4.
Do these sound like the correct options to you?
Thanks,
Brian

PS, Epson Color Management in OSX 10.6

I know this is a problem way from way back but I thought I would revisit. It's clear that OSX 10.6 broke color management between Photoshop (PS)and my Epson R800. Since Epson no longer considers an R800 as a current printer I've resigned myself that there will be no new drivers that will fix this.
Before I buy a new printer, my question to the Mac community is: does anyone have PS (CS5) controlled color management working with an Epson R1900 or R2800 on an OSX 10.6.4 system? If not is there an equivalent quality-output Canon or HP model that does support this. I prefer Epson but would consider switching. Their support of Mac is truly atrocious. I don't find printer controlled color management to be good enough. I got such beautiful pictures with CS4 and 10.5
Thanks for any help and advice

From what I've been able to read SL 10.6 broke a critical conversion between PS and the printer.
Hmm, that actually isn't possible. Photoshop doesn't give a whit which printer you're going to. You can still choose "Photoshop Manages Color" in the print dialogue.
Your issue may have been lack of a 10.6 print driver for your R800, because even when you choose to let PS manage color, you must then be able to choose "No color management" in the print driver's dialogue box so ColorSync isn't applied to the image twice.
You can also tell Photoshop to let the printer manage color. Then when when you go into Print Settings, you choose ColorSync and choose your printer profile there. The result should be identical.
What is different in Snow Leopard is that the print dialogue does not come up after clicking Print in Photoshop. It's now all done in the same place. It's under the Print Settings button of the same dialogue box in PS.
For instance, if I choose "Photoshop Manages Color" to a Xerox 6280DN, then I have no color choices in Print Settings. They are automatically grayed out. If I tell PS to let the printer manage color, then I can control the printer's color from the Print Settings.
It's actually a better setup since it prevents you from applying color settings in both places.
Again for me the critical point is to have PS manage my color that always got me the best prints.
It kind of doesn't matter which one does the ColorSync chores, as long as you use the same printer profile. Controlling the color from PS though does allow you to choose rendering intent, and whether or not to use Black Point Compensation. Something not many print drivers have. Usually only a way to choose your printer profile.

Color-managed printing to Epson 870

I have never succeeded in getting a color-managed print workflow to my Epson Stylus Photo 870 printer using PSE5 (or 4 or 3). The prints are consistently darker than what I see on screen, though the colors otherwise seem about right.
I'm pretty familiar with color management generally, and I have read the tutorials in the Missing Manual and at computer-darkroom.com. I will describe my recent experiments.
Perhaps someone who uses this printer (or a similar Epson printer) can offer some insight. What is noteworthy about these Epson printers is that they come with only a single ICC profile, rather than one profile per media type. The processing to compensate for media differences occurs within the driver. This complicates the color management story.
1. Computer setup: Windows XP SP2, Samsung SyncMaster 193P LCD display.
2. Monitor calibration: This monitor has programmable internal color conversion. I used the MagicTune utility to tune the monitor to sRGB. I then used Adobe Gamma to confirm that this is essentially an sRGB monitor; that is, the profile produced by Adobe Gamma yields an appearance that is indistinguishable from the standard sRGB profile.
3. Photos are JPEGs tagged as sRGB by the camera. I am printing them from PSE5 Organizer. Color management set to "Print" (AdobeRGB). Paper is Epson Glossy Photo Paper. Media type selected in the driver is Photo Paper.
In the following experiments, I varied the Print Space setting in PSE's Print Options and the Custom > Advanced color settings in the Epson driver.
Experiment 1: Print Space: "Same as Source". Driver: "ICM". Result: somewhat dark prints.
Experiment 2: Print Space: "Epson Stylus Photo 870". Driver: "No Color Adjust". Result: even darker prints, with a slight color cast.
Experiment 3: Print Space: "Epson Stylus Photo 870". Driver: "ICM". Result: same as experiment 3.
Experiment 4: Print Space: "Same as Source". Driver: "PhotoEnhance". Result: by far the closest to what I see on the screen, and (subjectively) the best rendition of the original scene.
Of course, experiment 4 is depending on some magic processing in the Epson driver, rather than being a true ICC color-managed workflow. I'd like to figure out why my attempts at a color-managed workflow aren't working right.

"So it seems that Organizer and Editor do color management differently when
printing.... I would not have expected this; it seems like a bug."
My Epson 870 finally died. But, while it was working I did manage to get it
to work very well in a fully color managed workflow. I calibrated my
monitor with a hardware calibration device. The generic 870 ICC profile
that came with the printer gave me prints that were too dark compared to my
calibrated monitor. I had a custom profile made for the printer for each
specific paper I use and that made all the difference. For PSE 3, I always
printed only from the editor and used a fully color managed work flow
specifying the custom printer profile as the print space. The Epson printer
driver was set to custom and in the advanced tab, the "No Color Adjustment"
setting for color management was selected.
I didn't like to print from Organizer because I didn't care for the way it
handled things. The creations portion of Organizer didn't pick up all the
organizer color settings either if I recall correctly. The different
behavior is not so much a bug as it is two different programs that are
packaged together and loosely interact -- Organizer began life as Adobe
Album.
I don't know about PSE 4 and 5 as I went to Photoshop CS2 instead of
upgrading PSE. I still have PSE 3 installed, but I seldom use it anymore.
I would have thought that the newer versions would have done something about
the Organizer printing issues but it sounds like that hasn't happened yet.

Color management - Indesign with PS calibrated images?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for