Color Management Question

I use LightRoom 2 and CS3. All my photo enlargements are done at CostCo on a Noritsu 3111. In the past before I started using LightRoom, I edited in CS, then saved the file to a memory stick, and took it to CostCo for printing. I always got excellent, consistent results.
With LightRoom. first I understand that the color space is ProPhoto, not AdobeRGB, and that there are two ways of getting an image printed from LightRoom:
                  1. Similar to what I had done before in CS, I can EXPORT and create a jpg file, or
                  2. I can use the PRINT module to created the jpg with print profiles enbedded.
Working through Lightroom, shouldn't I be able to get consistent color by simply using the EXPORT feature without adding any profile, and letting CostCo handle the color? This whole subject of color management has me a bit confused.
Here's what I think I know:
     My monitor is calibrated by a Huey. Therefore my on screen colors should reflect accurately in any color space selected.
     Printer profiles are needed to match a color space image to a particular printing paper.
     If no printer profile is provided, the printer manages the color. This has always worked for me in the past, but I seem to be running into problems now, and can't seem to understand what's different, other than using ProPhoto, which is just a wider gamut space.
Any suggestions on this would be appreciated.
Mike

Thank you both Pete and Jao,
Both of your answers have helped me immensely and I'm now printing acceptable images again. I have one further question in regards to your note, Jao, baout "stripping" the profiles. I'm not quite clear what you mean by that. I am quickly falling in love with LightRoom, and will probably wind up doing most of my work there, using it also to prepare printing files for CostCo's Noritsu printer. I downloaded the 3111 profile and ran a print, and am happy with the result. In Dry Creek's instructions on "Using Printer Profiles with Digital Labs", step #16 says to convert the image to the appropriate profile (Image, Mode, Convert to Profile). I forgot to do this, but still got good results. Is it a necessary step? It says Noritsu does not read embedded profiles, so you must convert the image data.
Thank you, guys, for making a confusing subject alot more understandable.
Mike

Similar Messages

Another color management question

Hi folks,
Apologies for yet another color management question, but Im getting very confused and could do with some help. I use a Canon 10D and Canon 30D. Ive come to LightRoom from Pixmantec Raw Shooter.
As Ive gotten more serious about producing high quality images for both the web and as prints, I thought Id invest in the Colorvision Spyder2 calibration product. So my monitor is now calibrated (quite a difference from what I was seeing!) and I have a calibration profile applied.
My needs are pretty obvious I want my images to look the same wherever theyre viewed including exported files (such as JPEGs) whether this be on my monitor (in LightRoom, a web browser, Paint Shop Pro, whatever) and on a printer.
Perhaps Im getting confused because Im trying to compare what LightRoom does with what RawShooter does.
In RawShooter, when exporting from RAW to JPEG, I can specify the RGB Working Space Im using and then select my monitor profile. I think that what happens is that the export mechanism takes this profile into account and, low and behold, the JPEG looks fine when viewed in any web browser - the colours are exactly the same as in RawShooter. In Paint Shop Pro they look fine too unless I enable Color Management in which case (Im guessing) the monitor profile is, essentially, applied twice! But the upshot is I seem to get the results I want.
What I cant figure out is how I do this in LightRoom. I can make the same adjustments to the RAW image as I did in RawShooter, but there doesnt seem an option for me to select my profile on export to JPEG only the standard 3 color spaces. Anyway the result is a JPEG that looks somewhat different when viewed in a web browser, or Paint Shop Pro with Color Management turned off. However, if I turn Color Management on in Paint Shop Pro, then it looks fine. So Im assuming that my profile isnt accounted for when exporting JPEGs from LightRoom.
So any pointers or explanations would be really appreciated. I also acknowledge that this is my first foray into color management, and feel free to tell me to go and read some introductory article (link please!) and then come back with a sensible question if thats whats needed!
Thanks in advance.
- Pete

Lightroom color management.
a.) Monitor profile used: The profile set as the default in your operating system (e.g. Windows xp). (your monitor profile software usually does this when you calibrate/profile your monitor).
b.) Working space: ProPhotoRGB
c.) Export color space: You can choose one of the following sRGB; Adobe RGB or Pro Photo RGB.
There is no option (afaik) to change a.) or b.) the option you choose in c.) will affect how the exported image will be displayed in color managed applications or non-color managed applications.
Non-color managed applications are not able to display Adobe RGB or Pro Photo RGB correctly. I guess if you wish a consistent display of your images in color managed and non-color managed applications then the only common factor is sRGB and you should export your images in sRGB color space.
The benefits of the other expanded color spaces are in printing and you also would have to get this end of your color management correct. Printing profiles to match your printer and each paper being used etc.
Until you can get this all sorted out you will get better results from sRGB, this is also applicable when using most commercial printing services.

Newbie color management question

hi folks
using cs4. just finished a cmyk job on a new press. colors on the final print job were pretty faithful to what i saw on my monitor when doing the design, with a few exceptions that i'd like to tweak if possible. i'm new to color management, so looking for some pointers.
according to my research, the right thing to do is to request a colorsync or icm or icc profile from my press. i did...but my press was slightly confused and sent me a bunch of .icc files and i don't know which one to load. the press people are great people and it's a good press, but i got the feeling that they weren't asked this question a lot. so i ended up using u.s. web coated (swop) v2 as a profile, which is what they ultimately recommended.
so if i can't get an icc profile from my press, the other approach according to my research is to wing it and adjust the color profile on my own so that what i see on my monitor matches the printed output. in other words, i take the printed output and hold it up to my screen and manually adjust the color profile settings. i believe this is done in photoshop under edit-->assign profile and/or edit-->color settings, and then sync the color management for all applications using the bridge. or maybe this can be done in indesign? i'm asking the question on this forum because of the great responses i've gotten here.
i don't want to screw things up and i'm a newbie with this, so... any advice out there? my basic situation is that the colors were reasonably faithful but there was a very curious thing where a c=0,m=0,y=35,k=15 color looked very green on the printed page even though it was a mellow looking yellow on my monitor. i want to try to adjust that.
thanks.........

Do you have a colorimeter and monitor profiling software? That's the place to start any color managed workflow. You also need a reasonably good monitor that CAN be calibrated. If the monitor isn't accurately showing you the colors, then nothing you do is going to matter.
Matching the monitor to the print is an old technique that works only when you have a closed loop where all work is output on the same press under the same conditions. The purpose of using device independent editing spaces, such as Adobe RGB, is that in theory any properly calibrated monitor will display the image the same, and you can convert to any known output space at the time of output.
Terms like mellow looking yellow are pretty subjective, so I don't know what you were expecting, but I wouldn't expect 35y, 15k to be very bright, nor very yellow. While I wouldn't describe the color as green on my monitor, it certainly doesn't resemble a banana, and next to a brighter yellow one might call it greenish by comparison. It's really a light yellowish gray,I think.
I'm putting up a comparison here to see what it looks like, but colors won't be accurate in a browser.

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

Color management question on having separate profiles in one document

I have a document with images in it that have attached printer profiles with different separations, I'd like to print without further conversion of these images since they are profiled to be printed with no color management, how do I go about this?
Does Indesign see the attached profiles and ignore the document profile? Or Do I have to set a document profile with no UCR/GCR that will maintain CMYK values.
Thank you

>I'd like to print without further conversion of these images
Profiles are only useful if there needs to be additional color conversions at output or exporta conversion to a new CMYK space (new press conditions) or conversion to RGB for monitor display or an RGB proofing device.
You don't want or need additional CMYK to CMYK conversions so you don't need the embedded profiles. When the profiles are ignored, the ID document profile is assigned to the images (there's no conversion) and as long as you output with the destination as Document CMYK the image values will be output with no change.
Ignoring the profiles can potentially change the ID preview of images separated with conflicting profiles (CMYK>RGB), but it sounds like you are simply separating for different black generations so you shouldn't see a preview change.

SRGB vs no Color Management question

I have two workflows for Photoshop that produce the exact same results and I want to know which one to use, but most importantly why?
WORKFLOW 1: NO COLOR MANAGEMENT
1. Photoshop Color Settings is set to "Monitor Color" which tells the PSD to not use color management.
2. I check with Proof Colors (View > Proof Colors), having Monitor RGB selected (View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB), and of course nothing changes.
3. I Save for Web and nothing changes (If I select "convert to sRGB" in the Save for Web dialog the colors wash out so I NEVER check this).
4. Export the image.
WORKFLOW 2: sRGB
1. Photoshop Color Settings is set to "North America General Purpose 2" which tells the PSD to use sRGB.
2. I check with Proof Colors (View > Proof Colors), having Monitor RGB selected (View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB), and the colors change a good bit.
3. I Save for Web and it matches what Proof Colors shows me (If I select "convert to sRGB" in the Save for Web dialog nothing changes).
4. Export the image.
Both of these yeild the exact same image. The technical difference is that the second image has sRGB embedded? From a workflow difference I perfer the first one since I never have to check if Proof Colors is selected, the image looks the same no mater what. In the second workflow I have to always check if Proof Colors is selected otherwise what I see in photoshop doesn't look the same as the exported image.
PLEASE help me to understand, that while both of these workflows yeild the exact same image, why the second one is better because I feel like the first one is not.
P.S. Majority of the work I do is for the screen (web or application UI) so I'm not to worried about print work but wouldn't mind any pointers in relation to this situation.

It's about 1:30 AM in my part of the world I need to get some rest, so I'll have to be brief.
I've never seen so many misconceptions crammed into a single post as you've managed to get in your last one.
I'll try to get at least the most glaring ones.
eddit wrote:
1. I do understand that of the millions on monitors there are none that match, and the exact reds, greens, and blues that I see on my screen differ from other screens (i have a number of computers in my home and am very aware of this).
Good, but that's not the point.
eddit wrote:
I also know that there is a huge gamma shift from PC to Mac as I use to be a PC users and am now on a Mac.
Only if the Mac user is still living in the stone age. Macs should be calibrated to gamma 2.2, just like a PeeCee. The old gamma 1.8 standard is a relic left over from the day of Apple monochrome monitors and LaserWriter b&w printers. Even Apple recommends 2.2.
eddit wrote:
why would I work with a psd that is color managed, if it will all just get dumped by the browser anyways?
Because presumably you want to have a clue as to what your image looks like and what it might look like to others.
This is totally independent from whether you embed a profile or not. Different issue.
eddit wrote:
2. I'm not talking about EMBEDDING profiles into any of the images that I Save For Web.
Neither am I.
eddit wrote:
3. I am far more interested in color consistency rather than color accuracy as G Ballard points out in his tutorials.
The only way to achieve consistency is through a color managed workflow. That's what Color Management is all about, consistency.
eddit wrote:
From what G Ballard says, in a web browser, Macs apply the monitor profile and Windows applies sRGB.
Good grief! That is so wrong or badly phrased that I feel bad even quoting it! That statement is garbage/rubbish.
Only the bloody Slowfari (Apple's Safari) throws monitor profile at untagged files, i.e. files with no embedded color profile. No other browser does that. Period. If the file is tagged, Safari will honor the embedded profile.
Firefox 3.9 (both Mac and Windows) correctly assumes sRGB for untagged files (files without an embedded color profile) with color management enabled in the guts of Firefox and/or even with color management disabled.
All other browsers on this planet, Mac and Windoze, are not color managed and assume sRGB for all files, with or without an embedded profile.
The reason the files look very similar to you is that you are dealing with the lowest common denominator (sRGB, where the s stands for sh¡t, as we know now), and probably your color monitor is pretty close to that common denominator.
If you happened to have an expensive truly wide-gamut monitor, your untagged files created in your monitor profile as working space would look like cr@p to you.
Get this through your head: you cannot turn off color mangement in Photoshop, no matter what you do, the application won't let you. You're just messing up with color management the way you work, you are not "turning it off" as you seem to think.

Basic color management questions

Having difficult understanding some concepts in color management - would appreciate any guidance to further understand it.
What is the difference in backgrounds between additive and subtractive process color systems?
How is white formed differently in additive and subtractive process systems?
How are the non-process colors like orange formed differently in the additive and subtractive process systems? What colors from each system forms an orange?
Why is the difference in the process of color formation of major concern with the use of computers in the preparation of materials for 4-color process color printing?
Why is the difference in the process of color formation of major concern with the use of computers in the preparation of materials for 4-color process color printing?

Sarah,
Deep subject, so this will only touch the surface.
What is the difference in backgrounds between additive and subtractive process color systems?
How is white formed differently in additive and subtractive process systems?
RGB blends "light" to generate colors. CMYK blends "inks". Starting with RGB and light.....pure white blends high levels of red, green and blue wavelengths in approximate equal amounts, which we perceive as white. In Photoshop parlance, using 8-bit, this translates to 255R, 255G, 255B. When we see an object, we are actually seeing the light that reflects from that object, not the object itself. So, a bright white object reflects most of the visible light spectrum and reaches our eye, which the brain interprets to be white. A black object "absorbs" light so nothing is reflected to the eye.
To print, you need inks on paper, not light. If you were to use red, green and blue inks, you'd have a big problem printing colors like yellow. So, they devised the subtractive color process (RGB is additive, ie, adding all three lights together gives you white). They took the opposite colors of Red, green and blue, which are Cyan, Magenta and Yellow. In theory, you should be able to create the same spectrum of colors with the CMY subtractive colors that you can with the RGB additive colors, but in practice, that is not the case, for at least two reasons. The CMY inks are not pure and as intense as the RGB primaries, and second, you have to apply these inks to paper, which drastically limits dynamic range. To deal with the ink purity problem, (and to give better type), they add Black to the CMY mix, for four inks....Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, and Black. To get white, you rely on the paper alone, without any ink. In theory, pure black would be either 100C, 100M, 100Y, or it could be 100K (black), or it could be 100% each of CMYK. But, these three do not give the same results, due to ink purity, ink limits, paper, process, etc.
How are the non-process colors like orange formed differently in the additive and subtractive process systems? What colors from each system forms an orange?
Why is the difference in the process of color formation of major concern with the use of computers in the preparation of materials for 4-color process color printing?
In the CMYK world, orange is a mixture of Yellow and Magenta inks, with more yellow than magenta. For example, 52M, 94Y gives a fairly vibrant orange. Again, hue, saturation and brightness are dictated by the mix percentages, paper, ink limits, ink purity, etc. In the RGB world, this same color is defined as 255R, 143G, 33B (depending on the "flavor" (color spaces) of RGB and CMYK you are using. There is a relationship between RGB and CMYK, and this example is no exception. When red is maxed out at 255, cyan is the opposite, in this case zero. In this orange color, Green is 143, near the middle of the range, and so is its opposite, Magenta, which is near the middle of its range, at 52. Blue is 33, at the very low end of its range, and its opposite, Yellow, is near the top of its range at 94. Since this is a bright color, there is no black ink used at all. If it were a darker orange, there would probably be some black in as well.
Some colors can be created in RGB that cannot be duplicated in CMYK. The opposite is also usually true, that there are colors in CMYK that cannot be duplicated in RGB (depending on the color space you use). If your intended output is a monitor, the internet, email, or a printer that needs "light" you would generally use RGB. If the intent is to "print" the job, on a press, inkjet, laser, etc, then CMYK is generally used. Even if you send an RGB file to your inkjet, the printer driver translates the RGB colors to CMYK in the background before output. Most, if not all, printers use CMYK subtractive inks for printing, These can generate a large portion of the printable spectrum. Some printers add light cyan and light magenta inks, or even red, green, blue, orange, and other colors to help extend the color gamut of the printer so it can achieve colors that would be "out of gamut" using CMYK alone.
Another difference is that CMYK is a four color process, unlike RGB, which is three color. A given color has only ONE definition when defined in RGB, HSB, L*a*b*, or other 3 component color schemes. With CMYK, many colors can be created using different mixes of CMYK, which adds complexity, but also offers opportunities and flexibility, especially on press.
Like I said at the beginning, this is a very deep and complex subject, and this only touches on the basics.
Lou

Printing with HP B9180 and Photoshop Elements 8 and Color Management

I've got a bit of confusion about certain settings in the printing process and I've posted a rather long discussion of my 'issues' and confusion. I hope someone can give me some guidance here. I've seen a lot of these issues addressed in many places but I can't seem to find an integrated response. Thanks to anyone who takes the time to read and respond.
Color Management Questions
My problems started when I was getting pictures that were too dark from my HP 9180 printer after having gotten very nice prints for a long time. I had obviously started to do something differently inadvertently. The only thing I think that is different is that I got a new 23 inch monitor, which does produce much brighter on-screen images. So, I started to do some research and know just enough about color management to be slightly confused and have some questions that I hope someone can give me some help with.
Equipment Background
I use both a Canon 20D and a Canon PowerShot SD600 camera. Both have the default color space as sRGB, although the 20D can be also set as RGB.
I also use Photoshop Elements 8, where there are a variety of settings possible for printing.
My monitor is an HP S2331, whose color space is sRGB and cannot be reset to RGB (I think) except for temperature; the default is 6500K.
My printer is an HP Photosmart Pro B9180 Printer, where there are also a variety of settings possible.
I’m running XP-Pro.
Here’s Where I Get Confused
Everything I have read about color management (various web sites, forums, books, etc) says to have the image, monitor, and printer all in the same color space.
Everything I read about PSE 8 (same sources) says to set PSE 8 to ‘Always Optimize for Printing’ under Edit>Color Settings in order to get the best prints. This displays photos based on the Adobe RGB color space.
I am taking pictures in sRGB, and telling PSE 8 to process them in RGB by selecting ‘Always Optimize for Printing’. Is this something I should be concerned about? Should I reset my camera for RGB?
Further, by selecting ‘Always Optimize for Printing’, I am setting PSE 8 for RGB while my monitor displays sRGB. Is this an important issue or is it also much ado about technicalities that an amateur should not worry about? It does violate the ‘keep them in the same color space’ rule.
Next, when I go to File>Print and get the Print window and then do the Page Setup and Select Printer, I then go to More Options in the lower left of the window. Under the More Options window, I select Color management and select Photoshop Elements Manages Colors. Next, there is Image Space, which is fixed and not subject to selection from a drop down menu.
I understand that this is the image space of the image I took with my camera and that information is embedded in the image. Correct?
Next, there is Printer Profile. But, from what I have read, this is where the IEC profile of the paper being printed on is supposed to be selected, isn’t it?
Shouldn’t this more appropriately be called Paper Profile, or Printing Media Profile? Further, this drop down menu appears to be somewhat erratic, sometimes showing all of the paper profiles I believe are loaded, sometimes not. It also shows listings such as Working RGB-Adobe RGB (1988), Adobe RGB 1988, Dot Gain 10%, 15%.... along with a lot of paper profiles. Aren’t those profiles unnecessary here?
I’ve used both Relative Colorimetric and Perceptual Rendering and am happy with either one.
Next, when I go to Printer Preferences, in order to “…disable color management in the printer preferences dialog”, under the Color Tab, I select Application Managed Colors from the Color management drop down menu, and also have the option of selecting ColorSmart/sRGB and Adobe RGB (1988).
Is there any time when I should use either ColorSmart/sRGB or Adobe RGB (1988)? If I were staying with my camera’s sRGB setting, given the fact that the monitor is sRGB, would the appropriate selections be ‘Printer Manages Colors’ and ‘ColorSmart/sRGB’?
Finally, under the Features Tab, I go to look for the same paper I selected under Printer Profile (Question 4 above). If it is one of the pre-loaded (by HP) profiles, it is there, but if it is a profile I downloaded, say for an Ilford paper, it isn’t listed, and I need to guess at an equivalent type of paper to select.
Is there any way to get that listing to appear under the Paper Type drop down menu?
I know that this is a long post, but it helped me to clarify my ‘issues’. Thank you for any and all suggestions, answers, guidance and help.

RIK,
Some printers have long names, esp. HP printers, and PSE gets ":confused." In control panel>devices and printers, right click on the default printer, go to printer properties, and rename the default printer to something short, e.g. "Our Printer." That may fix it..

Color management in Illustrator CS6 and InDesign CS 6-settings & workflow questions.

I've read the color management posts and the Adobe help file regarding the Pantone + libraries and the new differences between CS5 & 6. However I'm still a bit confused as to just what my settings should be, and a few posts offer different pieces of advice, so I'm looking for clarification. I don't need to work with legacy CS files, so I don't want to swap out the old Pantone libraries for the Plus ones. However I still have my old Pantone Solid, Coated and Uncoated swatchbooks and until I can afford the new Plus swatchbooks, I'll depend on those. I'm hoping the difference between Pantone 321U and Pantone+ 321 is not great.
If I'm preparing a file for print and to be placed into an InDesign CS6 document for print, I know both document color modes should be CMYK—got that. In Illustrator CS6, I'm assuming I would use a Pantone+ Uncoated swatch (remember I'm using the old Pantone Uncoated swatch book as a visual guide and praying that the difference isn't too noticeable.)
1. In the Swatch settings pallette, should I set the Spot Color option to use the first choice—use LAB values specified by the book manufacturer, or use CMYK values from the manufacturer process books.
2. In the View menu, should I select Overprint Preview to get a (more or less-I know the drill) closer monitor color to what will be printed.
I don't want to fool around with trying to set the CMYK values as listed in Pantone Color Bridge CMYK EC (found on Scribed here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/33104/Pantoner-Color-BridgeTm-Cmyk-Ec ), and I'm not even sure of the point in doing so or what it would do for me.
What I want is to depend on a swatch book, select the named swatch from the Pantone library, have all my settings set properly, then place it in InDesign, then send the file to a digital printer and get as close an approximation to the swatch book selection as possible. I need monitor color settings to reflect the swatches as best possible.
When I can afford it, should I opt for the Pantone+ Coated and Uncoated swatchbooks, or the Color Bridge? I'm usure of the difference, and if there are any Illustrator or InDesign settings that would need to be changed depending.
As a corollary to this questions, once the settings are OK in Illustrator, what do they need to be in InDesign? There are settings for Ink Manager (all spots to process or use standard LAB values for spots, the Color palette has check options for LAB, CMYK, RGB.
I'm not sure what needs to be set in InDesign to make sure colors are consistent between what is set in Illustrator and then what InDesign does.

Let me try to help you further:
1. In Illustrator's Swatch settings pallette, should the Spot Color Mode option be set to use:
a. CMYK
b. LAB
c. Book Color (not sure if this refers to the pantone swatchbook)
- I would use "c" - Book Color. This is the file going to the printer which will use Spot Color on press. For a copy of the file to be output by your Canon, use "a" - CMYK.
2. In the View menu should Overprint Preview be checked, and why, and would it differ based on the settings for #1.
- Only if the color was transparent ( which it isn't ) would overprint preview be of any use or you use a tint value of the Spot color and a black, but even then you may not be able to detect any change in the screen view. I typically do not use any overprint preview and I do not rely on the monitor for any color deisions. You could be different and that is OK. Let me know if you are able to detect any deviates using overprint preview.
I'm sorry for being a little short. There is a lot of confusion about these issues and Adobe and Pantone are not making things any easier.
The key is your Canon will not be able to print accurate Spot color without a RIP for the necessary color tables and conversions for that particular printer. In your case, it will be necessary to build a CMYK file to print a somewhat approximate representation of that specific Spot color. Another frustrating part of this matrix is CMYK cannot match all Pantone Spot Colors.

Printing, Soft Proofing & Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions

Printing, Soft Proofing, and Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions
There are 2 common ways to set color management in Adobe CS2:
1. use managed by printer setting or,
2. use managed by Adobe CS2 program.
I want to ask how Color Management for Adobe LR 1.2 differs from that in CS2?
As is well known, Color Management by printer requires accurate printer profiles including specific model printer, types of ink and specific paper. It is clear that this seems to work well for LR 1.2 when using the Printer module.
Now lets consider what happens one tries to use Color Management by Adobe LR 1.2. Again, as is well known, Color Management by printer must be turned off so that only one Color Management system is used. It has been my experience that LR 1.2 cant Color Manage my images correctly. Perhaps someone with more experience can state whether this is true or what I might be doing to invalidate LR 1.2 Color Management.
Specifically, I cant use Soft Proofing to see how my images are changed on my monitor when I try to use the edit functions in LR 1.2. Martin Evening states in his text, The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book that it is not possible to display the results of the rendered choices (Perceptual or Relative) on the display monitor. While it is not clear in Evenings text if this applies to LR 1.2, my experience would suggest that it still applies to the 1.2 update even though the publication date of his book preceded this update.
Can someone with specific knowledge of Adobe LR 1.2 confirm that Color Management and Soft Proofing with LR 1.2 hasnt been implemented at the present.
The writer is a retired physicist with experience in laser physics and quantum optics.
Thanks,
Hersch Pilloff

Hersch,
since just like me, you're a physicist (I am just a little further from retirement ;) ) I'll explain a little further. computer screens (whether they are CRT or LCD) are based on emission (or transmission) of three colors of light in specific (but different for every screen) shades of red, green, and blue. This light stimulates the receptors in your eye which are sensitive to certain but different bands of red, green and blue as the display emits, making your brain think it sees a certain color instead of a mix of red green and blue. Printers however, produce color by modifying the reflection of the paper by absorbing light. Their color mixing operates completely differently than displays. When you throw all colors of ink on the paper, you get black (the mixing is said to be subtractive) instead of white as you get in displays (the mixing there is additive). The consequence of this is that in the absence of an infinite number of inks you cannot produce all the colors you can display on a monitor using a printer and vice versa. This can be easily seen if you compare a display's profile to a printer profile in a program such as Colorsync utility (on every mac) or
Gamut vision. Typically printers cannot reproduce a very large region in the blue but most displays on the other hand cannot make saturated yellows and cyans.
Here is a flattened XY diagram of a few color spaces and a typical printer profile to illustrate this. Most displays are close to sRGB, but some expensive ones are close to adobeRGB, making the possible difference between print and screen even worse.
So, when the conversion to the printer's profile is made from your source file (which in Lightroom is in a variant of prophotoRGB), for a lot of colors, the color management routine in the computer software has to make an approximation (the choice of perceptual and relative colorimetric determine what sort of approximation is made). Soft proofing allows you to see the result of this approximation and to correct specific problems with it.

Confused about Color Management in CS5 (Photos appearing differently in all other programs)

I recently noticed this and it's been driving me crazy; when I view photos in Photoshop CS5 they appear significantly lighter/more washed out than when viewed in other programs like Zoombrowser, Digital Photo Professional or just in a regular Windows folder using Filmstrip mode (Windows XP). When opening the same photo in both CS5 and Zoombrowser and switching back and forth between the two windows the difference is very apparent...for example, one of the photos I compared was of a person in a black shirt -- in CS5 (lighter/washed out) the folds in the shirt were very obvious, but in Zoombrowser (darker, more contrast/saturation) the folds were nearly invisible and it looked like just solid black. Now, after messing around with the settings in both Photoshop and in Zoombrowser I've found a few ways to get the photos to look the same in the two programs; one way gives them both the lighter/more washed out appearance and another way gives them both the darker appearance with more contrast and saturation. My problem is that I'm not sure which view is accurate.
I use a NEC MultiSync LCD1990SXi monitor with SpectraView II calibration software and calibrate it every 2 weeks using these calibration settings (screenshot): http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/8826/settingsx.jpg
In the SpectraView II Software under Preferences there's an option that says "Set as Windows Color Management System Monitor Profile - Automatically selects and associates the generated ICC monitor profile with the Color Management System (CMS)." This option is checked. Also, when I open the Windows' Color Management window there's only one option displayed, which is "LCD1990SXi #######" (the ####### represents my monitor's serial number).
I assume the above settings are all correct so far, but I'm not sure about the rest.
Here are my current default Color Settings in CS5 (screenshot): http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/666/photoshopcolorsettings.jpg
Changing these settings around doesn't seem to make the photo appear much different. However, when I go to Edit -> Assign Profile, then click off of "Working RGB: sRGB IEC61966-2.1" and instead click Profile and select "LCD1990SXi ####### 2011-06-21 18-30 D65 2.20" from the drop-down menu, the picture becomes darker with more contrast and saturation and matches the picture in Zoombrowser. Also, if I select "Adobe RGB (1998)" from the drop-down menu it's very similar in terms of increased darkness and contrast but the saturation is higher than with the LCD1990SXi setting. Another way I've found to make the image equally dark with increased contrast and saturation is to go to View -> Proof Setup -> Custom and then click the drop-down menu next to "Device to Simulate" and select "LCD1990SXi ####### 2011-06-21 18-30 D65 2.20" again.
Alternatively, to make both images equally light and washed out I can go to Zoombrowser -> Tools -> Preferences and check the box next to "Color Management: Adjust colors of images using monitor profile." This makes the image in Zoombrowser appear just like it does in CS5 by default.
Like I said, I'm confused as to which setting is the accurate one (I'm new to Color Management in general so I apologize for my ignorance on the subject).
It would seem that assigning the LCD1990SXi profile in CS5 would be the correct choice in order to match the monitor calibration given the name of the profile but the "Adjust colors of images using monitor profile" option in Zoombrowser sounds like it would do the same thing as well. Also, I've read that Photoshop is a color managed software whereas Zoombrowser and Windows Picture and Fax Viewer are not which makes me think that maybe the lighter/washed out version seen in Photoshop is correct. So which version (light or dark) is the accurate one that I should use to view and edit my photos? Thanks in advance for any help or info.

Sorry for the late reply;
But before we go there or make any assumptions, it's important for
you to determine whether you're seeing consistent color in your
color-managed applications and only inconsistent color in those that are
not color-managed. For that you'll need to do a little research to see
if the applications in which you're seeing darker colors have
color-management capability (and whether it is enabled).
I opened the same picture in 7 different applications and found that the 6 of the 7 displayed the photo equally dark with equally high contrast when compared to the 7th application (CS5). The other 6 applications were Zoombrowser EX, Digital Photo Professional, Windows Picture and Fax Viewer, Quicktime PictureViewer, Microsoft Office Picture Manager and Firefox.
However, at least two of these programs offer color management preferences and, when used, display the photo (from what I can tell) exactly the same as Photoshop CS5's default settings. The two programs are two Canon programs: Zoombrowser EX and Digital Photo Professional. Here's the setting that needs to be selected in Zoombrowser in order to match up with CS5 (circled in red):
And here's the setting in Digital Photo Professional that needs to be selected in order to match up with CS5 (again, circled in red):
*Note: When the option above "Monitor Profile" is selected ("Use the OS settings") the image is displayed exactly the same as when the monitor profile is selected. It's only when sRGB is selected that it goes back to the default darker, more contrasty version.
So with the red-circled options selected, all three programs (CS5, ZB, DPP) display the images the same way; lighter and more washed out. What I'm still having trouble understanding is if that ligher, more washed out display is the accurate one or not...I've read several tutorials for all three programs which only make things more confusing. One of the tutorials says to always use sRGB if you want accurate results and *never* to use Monitor Profile and another says that, if you're using a calibrated monitor, you should always select Monitor Profile under the color management settings...so I'm still lost, unfortunately.
What I also don't understand is why, when the monitor profile is selected in CS5, the image is displayed in the dark and contrasty way that the other programs display it as by default but when the monitor profile is selected in Digitial Photo Professional it displays it in the lighter, more washed out way that CS5 displays it using CS5's default settings (sRGB). Why would selecting the monitor profile in DPP display the photo the same way as when sRGB is selected in Photoshop? And vice versa...why would selecting the monitor profile in Photoshop display the photo the same way as when sRGB is selected in DPP?
I feel like I'm missing something obvious here...which I probably am. Again, I'm very new to this stuff so pardon my ignorance on the topic.
By the way, I find that the way that the non-color managed programs (Windows Picture and Fax Viewer et al.) display the photos is more aesthetically pleasing to the eye than the duller, more washed out display that CS5 gives the photos, but ultimately what I want to see in these programs (especially PS5 where I'll be doing the editing) is the accurate representation of the actual photo itself...i.e. what it's supposed to look like and not a darker (or lighter) variant of it.
So just to reiterate my questions:
Why does selecting Monitor Profile under the color management settings in DPP give the same display results as the default sRGB profile in CS5 and vice versa? (CS5 with monitor profile selected having the same display results as DPP with the sRGB profile selected)
When using CS5 with it's default color management settings (sRGB), using DPP with the Monitor Profile selected, and using Zoombrowser EX with "Adjust color of images using monitor profile" selected this results in all three programs displaying the same lighter, washed-out images...is this lighter, more washed-out display of the images shown in these three programs the accurate one?
I noticed when opening an image in Firefox it had the same darker, contrasty look as the other non-color managed applications had. Assuming that the CS5 default settings are accurate, does this mean that if I edit a photo in CS5, save it, and upload it to the internet that other people who are viewing that image online will see it differently than how it's supposed to look (i.e. in a non-color-managed way?) If so, this would seem to indicate that they'd see a less-than-flattering version of the photo since if their browser naturally displays images as darker and more contrasty and I added more darkness and contrast to the image in CS5, they'd be seeing a version of the photo that's far too dark and probably wouldn't look very good. Is this something I have to worry about as well?
I apologize for the lengthy post; I do tend to be a bit OCD about these things...it's a habit I picked up once I realized I'd been improperly editing photos on an incorrectly calibrated monitor for years and all that time and effort had been spent editing photos in a certain way that looked good on my incorrectly calibrated monitor but looked like crap on everyone else's screen, so the length and detail of this post comes from a desire to not repeat similar mistakes by editing photos the wrong way all over again. Again, thanks in advance for all the help, it's greatly appreciated!

Color Management

Though color management is very important when using Photoshop some aspects of it though is a waste of money for me. You see I'm like 10% of the men is the world am a little colorblind. This does not mean I do not see colors I see color quite well. Perhaps my color world is a more pleasing one then yours. I only calibrate my displays using web test pages and software tools. Perfect color on a screen has little value for me. People also have different taste when it comes to color when it comes for images many prefer over saturation then true life like looking images. Even when it come to black and white images. I have even heard people criticise Ansel Adams image as not being right. Ansel of course was creating art not mer real look pictures. Most of us have see Ansel Adams's images in books and print. If you have not seen a print made by Adams's himself you have not seen what he is famous for.
Being colorblind I do color correcting more by the numbers then by trusting colors my eyes see. I may transpose numbers from time to time I can still see them and use them for fixing color problems. I also have problems understanding many articles written about fixing colors when they state you fix image by finding neutral gray areas in the image. While that is true if the image has a color cast those areas will not be gray till the image's colors are corrected. Anyway I do numbers better then color. When it comes to art colors used is up to the artiest and their vision. Still I want my images to look good for people with normal color vision they look good in my world too. Ansel did color too but BW was where his love and ART is at.
Photoshop is also a toy and can do a great job with numbers for you. Using the gradient tool and square images you can get perfect black and White and color gradients. Using these you can see how Photoshop is able to blend thing. When you add to this blend if gray with its sliders that can be split you will find you have more the a toy at hand.
Playing around with Photoshop can be very educational here is a little example.
Simple gradients created in ProPhotoRGB 16 bir color and saved for the web in PNG-24 converted to sRGB.
Now to blend them and animated gif is not going to heck it for the web. CS6 does some video and color mangement what will it do with 16bit ProPhotoRGB???
How well does this web sit embed video??? only allows some web sites
how about a link to mine http://www.mouseprints.net/old/dpr/BlendingModes.mp4

Hi craigpop1,
So we can better assist you, please let us know what operating system is on your computer (version of Windows or Mac OS X), as well as what type of paper you are planning to print on.
If this is a time-sensitive matter, additional support options are available at Contact Us.
Did this answer your question? Please click the Accept as Solution button so that others may find the answer as well.

Safari's Color Management Policies

Hello, I'm a graphic designer from Germany. I've encountered that Safari can handle color management, which is indeed quite up to date. But Safari always assumes that untagged RGB image data has to be translated with the "Generic RGB"-profile (Apple's system profile, right?) instead of sRGB - the official standard color-profile in the web.
Well, that's not a problem at all if every image has a sRGB profile attached. But the only practical web file format handling ICC is the JPEG (PNG works also but is a bit difficult to use thanks to the png-internal gamma "correction" and his chunk of a sRGB-profile). As a result, I'm limited to the JPEG. But the real problem is not only Safari: Macromedia Flash data isn't color managed too, and there is NO WAY of importing images with color-profiles into a Flash movie. Additionally, no browser (except IE5 for Mac) bothers about color management.
To sum things up: Safari handels images with color profiles correctly, but untagged image data is displayed wrong (sRGB is official). IE5 for Mac DOES emulate a sRGB environment in the browser's window. IE5 displays untagged data correctly, it's using sRGB.
I'm not searching for a plug-in for Safari or anything else. The customers, to which my graphics are sold, don't bother about such a plug-in. They want to use Safari right out-of-the-box. As a graphic designer I have two choices:
First, I only use JPEGs and maybe PNGs with color profiles. Firefox for Mac won't care, but at least Safari can translate colors.
The second is, that I always use untagged data and accept that Apple users just see the web a bit lighter. Images without an ICC profile are way smaller, a good reason to abandon profiles at all (by the way, profiles in the web should be obsolete anyway, browsers just have to interpret every RGB-value as sRGB).
My question is, does Apple plan to change Safari's color management policies to a standard sRGB environment or do I really have to see Flash pages an the like a bit lighter than it is intended to be? What is the best way to handle my images? Attach profiles or leave it untagged, so that Windows users (sRGB) will see it correctly and Mac users a bit lighter?
Thanks for any answers that will come! Greetings, Peter.
iMac 17" Intel Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Welcome to Apple Discussions
Good questions about rendering color on the web. Not being technically savvy when it comes to this type of thing, I'll leave the technical questions for others more versed in web design.
Suggestions to Apple for future versions of their OS and software can be made here.
iMac G5 Rev C 20" 2.5gb RAM 250 gb HD/iBook G4 1.33 ghz 1.5gb RAM 40 gb HD Mac OS X (10.4.6) LaCie 160gb d2 HD Canon i960 printer

Vista 64 bit and CS4 and color management

This is a question about Vista 64 bit and CS4 and color management. I scan 4x5 film and sometimes end up with up to or even bigger than 1 GB files. Obviously that needs as much memory as possible. Windows XP is limited in this regard and I am in the market for a new speedy computer which won't force me to stay at a snail's pace. In this month's Shutterbug, David Brooks in his Q&A column says to avoid Vista for color management reasons, but offers no explanation or support for his opinion. He implies one should wait for Windows 7 for some unstated reason. With a calibrated monitor and printer and Photoshop controlling color files sent to the printer, why would Vista be any different or worse than XP? Is he on to something or just pontificating? Does anyone know any reliable info about Windows 7 that would make it worth waiting for?
Thanks.

Zeno Bokor wrote:
Photoshop has direct access to max 3.2gb
On Mac OS X, PS CS4 can use up to 8 GB of RAM, but only directly accesses up to 3.5 GB. (Figures quoted from kb404440.) In using PS CS4 on Mac OS, though, direct Memory Usage maxes out at 3 GB even. If you set usage to 100% (3 GB), then plug-ins (including Camera Raw and filters), as well as actions and scripts, can access RAM above that 3 GB to between about 512 MB and about 768 MB total (seems to vary depending on which filters et al that you are using), leaving the rest up to 4 GB for the Mac OS. If you have more than 4 GB, then the amount of RAM above 4 GB is used by PS as a scratch disk. This increases performance significantly for most things because writing to and reading from the hard drive is much slower than doing so with RAM.
I haven't done the testing for actual RAM usage and such for PS CS4 on Vista 64, and Adobe's documentation is very much lacking in detail, but, based on the statement "If you use files large enough to need more than 4 GB of RAM, and you have enough RAM, all the processing you perform on your large images can be done in RAM, instead of swapping out to the hard disk." from kb404439, it seems that PS would be using RAM in very much the same way as I described above for Mac OS, except that the scratch disk usage in RAM wouldn't be limited to 8 GB (instead to how much you have installed). Has anyone done any performance/load testing to know for sure? I didn't see any such studies published, but I am curious if one has been done.
I will agree that there is a definite performance advantage when using PS CS4 (64-bit) on Vista 64, which I've experienced, especially when working very large compositions.
My initial recommendation to the OP to use Mac was based upon reading those articles about bad color management. As I stated before, I have never experienced that problem, and clearly the views of all that have posted here so far indicate that the problem may not be a real issue. (Perhaps this David Brooks fellow and Steve Upton both like to mess with their computers and broke something in Windows?)

Color Management in Bridge CS6

Hello,
I'm having a strange color management issue in Bridge (64 bit). Essentially, Bridge is not displaying images in either the thumbnails or preview pane using the correct color profile.
Background: I'm on Windows using a dual monitor setup (both independantly calibrated) but I have the issue even when I use only one monitor. Photoshop has no issues with color settings. I've tried resetting all settings (hitting Ctrl as Bridge starts). I've tried purging my cache and having Bridge generate monitor-size previews.
The weirdest part is when I start Bridge, for a split second images appear to be in the correct profile, and then Bridge adjusts everything to the wrong color profile.
Any thoughts?
Thanks!

Omke Oudeman wrote:
about A:
I don't get that, I have a custom made monitor profile based on D65 and with or without this profile the only difference one would spot would be in the total picture, this screenshot shows what I see and that is not as much difference between the Bridge thumb and preview (and in the metadata placard you can see they are 16 bit ProPhoto with on top of it the floating PS panel with the same image. It is one picture of one screen, without my monitor profile (and without knowing what happens during the adding process to the Adobe site) or with, the difference between both applications would not change, only the total picture. (or I really don't understand anything anymore about color management )
The first threshold question is whether you're using a wide gamut monitor. I'm going to assume the answer is yes. The reason it's essential to embed your monitor profile in your screenshot is if you do not have a wide gamut monitor, someone looking at your image who does will be able to tell since the gamut will be smaller than it should be. If you are not using a wide gamut monitor, that would explain why you cannot see the difference. Additionally, whether you have a wide-gamut monitor or not, if you do not embed a profile, the untagged image will appear way oversaturated when brought into Photoshop (this is happening for me) unless I can guess the approximate color space of your monitor.
Admittedly, if you are using a wide-gamut monitor, then although the image will be way oversatured without a profile (until I assign one), both the Photoshop portion and Bridge portion should be way oversatured by the same amount. However it's not particularly helpful to use guesswork and approximation when trying to narrow down a problem like this. You say "this screenshot shows what I see," but you have to keep in mind you are looking at it on your monitor. Even though your screenshot will obviously look right to you on your monitor, someone looking at it on a smaller gamut monitor won't see what you're talking about.
about B:
There you have a point but this was a current project at hand and at this moment there is a bit over saturation in the wood. In real life I also almost never have to deal with the bright colors of your example. I don't want to go again messing my workspaces to create a screenshot for the files you provided but I can assure you I have less to none difference between both files in both Bridge and PS, like I never have seen your problem on my current computer (Mac Pro, 2 x 2,4 6 core intel Xeon mid 2012 and a lot of RAM and SSD etc including ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024 MB VRAM running OSX 10.8.3) as well as my former MacPro with same graphic card - and two others - that I used since 2008 during OSX 10.5 to 10.7 with all used versions of CS.
Yea, I understand why you don't want to mess with your workflow. I wouldn't either if I were in the middle of a project. But (assuming you have a wide-gamut monitor) if you finish a project and do get the chance, I encourage you to try the ProPhotoRGB color patch in Photoshop versus Bridge. When you really stray from sRGB, you, like me and Yammer, should see a major difference. I suppose there's the possibility that the Mac version of Bridge works differently, but that doesn't seem likely. It's possible you've never noticed the difference before because (again, assuming you have a wide-gamut monitor) you've never been looking for it, or you don't shoot many subjects with colors vastly outside sRGB - things like flowers, dyes, clothing, bright lights, etc.
And as for the quote, I also never make my choices based on colors for DNG in Bridge, in fact, I always shoot with manual WB set to 5500 K, whether in daylight or artificial light, I just don't bother because I want my colors to be adjusted in ACR and refined the way I want them in PS. The plus side of manual WB is that all colors are off in the same way and can be adjusted in the correct direction in one go for a series
That's an interesting idea and really illustrates the beauty of shooting RAW - tons on flexibility. And in fact, whether you use manual white balance, or don't, with RAW everything can be corrected or adjusted from a certain baseline by the same amount after the fact anyway.

Color Management Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for