Color management: Response and addendum

In course of seeking answers to my own question (5/21--photo displays), I saw a whole series of discussions about color and monitor calibration. (Have not but will read.) Although a two-year newbie to Elements, this is one area I believe I have acquired some expertise after many discussions and meetings with professional color lab owners, techs, photo store photographers, and techs at the leading colorimeter makers, so I can share some thoughts with all. Hopefully, it will not mislead--I also have a question for y'all set out at bottom:
     1. Anyone interested in color issues should (polite form of must) buy themself a copy of Bruce Fraser, Murphy and Bunting's Color Management. I have only made my way a small part thru, but it is an eye-opener and essential reading for anyone involved with photography. Even if you do have to read it several times over to understand fully.
     2. I had some bad tech support experience with my first colorimeter, and nothing but good results and support with the second (Eye One Display 2, made by X-Rite).
     3. When I first started doing Elements editing, I was very disappoionted with the diffence between what I was seeing on monitor and what was coming back from processor. That is another world of explanations. But that is the origin of my having sought over many months good advice, and there is much bad or ignorant advice out there.
     4. (And BTW, is there ever a difference in color production as one goes up ladder from Walgreens/CVS to Wolf (the first two named are sometimes in reverse order) to local higher quality camera store (no chain), to professional photgraphy color lab (and even between some of them!)
     5. In trying to replicate as much as possible what I see on monitor (and I replaced my entire computer and monitor in order to maximize my photography) I make adjustments to monitor in conjunction with colorimeter so that I am within the X-Rite suggested ranges on that end and yet reasonably close to the processed print.
     6. Even with all that, I do some tweaking of photos at end of editing process in order to further the replication process. It has been a process learning the variable extent I can do this, but because some of this gets into "thou shalt not's" and other frowned upon techniques, I will only say that one must make one's own decisions, balancing factors etc.
     7. I am reminded to do a resetting of the colorimeter every three weeks--I generally go 4-6.
If I can help, let me know--because my inbox gets flooded when I click the get email option, I am going to check the forum for next few days. Hopefully there are many far more knowledgeable than I who may give me new insights.
Now for my question: Our son is going thru the Mac vs. PC debate after his laptop died of old age. Which brought me to google "mac vs. PC" (some good pieces there--one entitled "PC vs. Mac: the Straight Scoop" and the Popular Mx article. Both very balanced. I have too many other pursuits so after listening to the debate over the years, had decided I can do without. BUT:
Q.No 1: Is there any consensus among photoshop/elements users in favor of one over the other? (Some refs to better apple monitors caught my attention, although in light of colorimeters etc., I don't know that it would really do that much).
Q.2: Assume there was some very strong reason to switch to Mac, what happens with all the photos now stored? (It would have to be an extraordinary reason to get me to go through al the hassle of switching all my programs so I am >90% certain I would not, but just wondering if I am a missing participant on another "fourth dimension".) Thanks.

I've got the Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and Color Handling > Color Mode is grayed-out in CS2 and CS3 using the Mac driver 6.6 on OSX10.5.8. I'm not sure why that part of the driver's print dialog is disabled, but no matter. Take a look at my screens below ( note: these are from Tiger OSX10.4.11 via CS2, but should apply to your arrangement:
Above just use the RGB from your PS Color Settings, here I set it for Adobe RGB and whatever paper you are using...
And above I set Color Management using "Color Controls" and again, the reference to Adobe RGB in the "Mode".
So, I believe I would use the Color Management > Printer Manages Color ( see next screen shot below from OSX 10.5.8 and CS3 )...
In all dialogs, Adobe RGB is used mainly because it was established in the document's Color Mode Settings from Photoshop.
Try these settings above, they work for me.
Message was edited by: John Danek

Similar Messages

LR Color Management - Calibration and Monitor (not your typical post)

Hi everybody,
I see that there are still many issues around color management and printing in LR. I have had similar problems in past and Im still trying to work though them. The most touted problem is not calibrating or having a bad monitor profile. Well, I have tried calibrating my display with worse results. I get better results with an un-calibrated display, not exact results, but closer than with a calibrated display. My only computer is a Dell Latitude D830 with an LCD display and Nvidia Quadro 140M graphics card with a Spyder2 Suite calibration tool.
After doing a fair bit of research online and speaking to other photographers (pro and amateur) Ive learned that laptop displays are notoriously difficult to calibrate due to their inability to display a wide range of color and contrast. There is also no way to adjust white point, RGB or any other setting on my display, only brightness and contrast. (perhaps a big part of the problem?)
I was told that only high end displays (NEC, LaCie, Eizo etc @ $1000,00 this being the low end, and up) were the only way to get accurate colors. Others had said that LG and Samsung make a decent display at the $300.00 price point that would deliver good results but not pro level color management. Other than that go, back to an old CRT display. What is a semi-pro level display that renders excellent color that I wont have to re-mortgage my house to pay for?
So heres my question to all of those who have said you need to calibrate and you have a bad profile can you please tell us your system set up (i.e. display, calibration tool, room lighting and set up etc..)?
Im really interested in what you are doing more, better or differently than everyone else.
Thanks,
DC

>Im really interested in what you are doing more, better or differently than everyone else.
Nothing much. Same calibrator in addition to another Huey Pro which gives almost indistinguishable results. I use both a Apple Mac Book Pro and a Mac Pro with a 30" DELL wide gamut adobeRGB display. Colors on the two are identical (if they're not outside of the laptop's gamut) and identical to prints from labs and direct prints. Of course these displays are between far better and quite a bit better than the display on a typical Dell laptop that are notoriously bad. One of the things I have to do on the laptop is to get the display at the right angle. The trick I use is to have a window open with this image: http://www.normankoren.com/monitor_test_txt22.png
from this website: http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html
If you're looking at your monitor at the right angle and you have calibrated the display correctly, the color should look homogeneous (i.e. completely neutral and the same grey everywhere). If you cannot find an angle at which this is correct, than it is likely your monitor can simply not be calibrated or that your calibrator is defective (there was a batch of defective Spyders a while ago). In general, it is certainly not true that laptop displays cannot be calibrated.
>I was told that only high end displays (NEC, LaCie, Eizo etc @ $1000,00 this being the low end, and up) were the only way to get accurate colors. Others had said that LG and Samsung make a decent display at the $300.00 price point that would deliver good results but not pro level color management.
They are quite wrong and a rather snooty thing to say. The point of these high priced displays is that they will give better color in [B]non[/B]-colormanaged applications, but with a good calibrator, a reasonably good screen and [B]correct color management [/B](such as that in Lightroom, Photoshop, preview.app, Safari, etc.) you will get about as good color as the more expensive displays. Some of these, such as the EIZO give you wider gamuts higher bit color, or hardware adjustable white point, which are also a major selling points if you're doing very critical work but only if paired with good calibration and managed apps. Pro level color management is a function of the calibrator and the software - and only in part of the display. Most displays, with a few exceptions, can be made to give good color, as long as you use a hardware calibrator and managed apps.

Color management, PS5 and Epson 3880

Hi
I need help with printing on my new 3880 through Photoshop CS5 on an iMac 10.6.8. Using Photoshop CS5 as 'color handling'-- the color mode is greyed out (can't change it) in the print settings. How can I change the color modes? Mostly turn off color management so I can use ICC printer profiles?
Thanks
L

I've got the Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and Color Handling > Color Mode is grayed-out in CS2 and CS3 using the Mac driver 6.6 on OSX10.5.8. I'm not sure why that part of the driver's print dialog is disabled, but no matter. Take a look at my screens below ( note: these are from Tiger OSX10.4.11 via CS2, but should apply to your arrangement:
Above just use the RGB from your PS Color Settings, here I set it for Adobe RGB and whatever paper you are using...
And above I set Color Management using "Color Controls" and again, the reference to Adobe RGB in the "Mode".
So, I believe I would use the Color Management > Printer Manages Color ( see next screen shot below from OSX 10.5.8 and CS3 )...
In all dialogs, Adobe RGB is used mainly because it was established in the document's Color Mode Settings from Photoshop.
Try these settings above, they work for me.
Message was edited by: John Danek

Horrible Color Management in Windows 8.1 and PhotoshopCC (solution)

Perhaps you what happened to me. Windows 8.1 and in my case a laptop Asus Intel Core I5.
CC install the brand new Photoshop (or other) and color management is Horrible ... no ... the following.
The black and white is sepia ... And the colors are nothing real touch all settings and no result ... I almost went crazy. I think the solution is going to cost more people. And when they discover is a great relief.
We go to the control panel
The first will .... Color Management.
The second will .... Advanced Options.
And choose "Adobe RGB 1998".
And thus solved
En español. Seguir este link. http://rapulsel.blogspot.com.es/2013/12/gestion-de-color-horrible-en-windows-81.html

Rapulsel, color-management cannot successfully be taught on a forum in a "for dummies" fashion. It's been tried and usually it leads to trouble.
Color-management is non-trivial, and it's the kind of thing that can make you want to run away from it screaming before the light finally goes on and you get your head around it.
However, after that you will understand it and you will find you can solve your color-management problems and produce imagery and work products that are predictable. You results will be second to none.
The problem you are having most likely is that someone (the manufacturer?) associated a color profile with your display that does NOT actually describe the color response of your display. It happens. And it consistently screws things up when it happens.
A first step you can take to undo that, before going and learning how to make a color profile that more precisely describes your display, is this:
Open WIndows' Color Management panel, in the Devices tab choose [ ] Use my settings for this device,
[Add...] the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 color profile.
If it is not marked as (default), select it and press the [Set as Default Profile] button.
This sets your default profile to a common default set of color characteristics that many displays are designed to implement.
This may make your colors more tolerable, and they'll match that displayed e.g., by Internet Explorer.
Then go off and do some reading. It's well worth taking the time and spending the effort to learn how color-management works. I advise reading about it in multiple places online, always keeping in mind that some (maybe a lot of) people who don't really know much more than you do try to teach it to others. Understand that there aren't really good "just do this" or "set it and forget it" answers, and that just because something is published online or even in a book doesn't make it gospel worthy of blind faith. Read multiple sources, and try to distill out the essence of what they are saying.
Good luck.
-Noel

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.

Managing Color with LR and the Canon Pixma Pro 9000 10.1.2.0 printer driver

I would like help understanding how to manage color in LIghtroom with the Canon Pro 9000 10.1.2.0 printer driver. When I ask LR to manage color in the Printing Module Color Management Profile, it warns me to turn off the printer managing color. But I cannot find where to do this in the driver.
The Color Options menu in the driver gives an additional choice for "Color Mode", but there are no choices here except "Standard", "Linear" or "Tone". The only Canon documentation I can find shows a choice to turn off printer management here, but this driver doesn't give me that choice.
If I look in the driver's "Color Matching", I see only two choices: ColorSync or Vendor Matching. ColorSync brings up Canon profiles like "Pro9000 Fine Art Photo Rag", but selecting one of these gives a warning of unexpected results. This pushes me back to Vendor Matching. But is this turning off the printer driver and leaving it to Lightroom?
Right now, I am getting the best results from choosing "Managed by Printer" in LR's Color Management Profile, and setting "Color Matching" in the Canon driver to "Vendor Matching". If I instead choose one of the Canon profiles in LR's Color Management Profile (and it tells me to turn off the printer managing, which I cannot do), then my prints have a slightly bluer color cast.
Is there a way to turn off the printer managing color in this driver and turn this over to LR, or am I getting the best results possible with the printer managing color anyway?
I am using a 2.4 GHz Intel iMac with OS 10.5.4, 2 gigs SDRAM, standard ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro video card. I downloaded the Canon printer driver from their website, so I assume this is the latest. there is another driver available at their website, but for a lower bit depth. Should I abandon the 10.1.2.0 for this other one? I work with Nikon D300 NEFs, and I assumed the higher bit depth printer driver will work better with these images.
Any help will be greatly appreciated!

Dear DYP: Unfortunately, those choices are not available in the 10.1.2.0 Canon Printer driver. There are only 2 radio buttons, ColorSync and Vendor Matching. ColorSync then provides a drop-down menu, with no choice for turning off the printer driver.
But I think I found the answer. I found a deeply buried FAQ on the Canon site (no direct URL; sorry!) Here it says:
"Issue: How do I disable the printer driver color correction when using the CUPS driver in Mac OS X 10.5.x?
Solution: Change color management options for printing (Mac OS X 10.5.x)
Change color management options for printing
Open the document you wish to print.
Click 'File' and then click 'Print.'
Note: If the Print window contains only two pop-up menus, click the triangle beside the Printer pop-up menu for expanded options.
Select 'Color Matching' from the Print Options pop-up menu.
Select 'ColorSync' if you want the application you are using, and not the printer driver, to control the color management of the printed output.
Note: If you are using Adobe Photoshop CS2 or CS3 and have selected 'Let Photoshop Determine Colors', the 'Color Matching' from the Print Options pop-up menu is automatically set to 'ColorSync.'
Select 'Vendor Matching' if you want the printer driver to control the color management of the printed output."
I tried it, and chose "Automatic" as a choice in ColorSync. The choices under "Color Options" are then greyed out, implying that the Canon driver is now turned off.
The prints came out great, with no color cast, and a little brighter than the printer managed prints.
So, Vendor Managed means printer manages, ColorSync means LR manages.
Thanks, everyone, for keeping me going on tracking this down!

Color managed workflow for web and camera raw

I recently calibrated my monitor and was wondering what is the preferred workflow for the web? I shoot with my camera in sRGB and my working space in Photoshop is sRGB aswell. The problem that has arised now is that the color managed colors in Photoshop are way different than the non-color managed in my web browser. Is this normal? And what I don't quite get is how a photo that has an embed sRGB profile looks the same in Firefox (that understand embed profiles) and Photoshop, but in Google Chrome (that does not recognize embed color profiles) shows the colors very differently, although the browser should understand the photo is in sRGB by default and show the same colors that are in Photoshop, right? So what happens here, because the colors are not the same? What information does Photoshop assign to the embed color profile that makes the colors so different?
Anyway, I assume the problem here seems to be my newly calibrated monitor profile. The only way I can get the same colors to my photo in Photoshop and to a photo in web is to use soft proofing set to my Monitor RGB AND save without a color profile. Is this the way to go? But here comes another problem. I shoot in RAW and use camera raw to edit my photos. Camera Raw doesn't allow soft proofing, so I'm stuck with these color managed colors that are so different from non-color managed colors I get in my browser that any color correction in Camera Raw is simply useless. Unless everyone was using color managed browsers and I could start to use fully color managed workflow, but that's not the case I suppose. So, what's the solution here?

First off, you need to be working in sRGB, or converting to sRGB when you save out files that are destined for the web. You can change the color space that Camera Raw (ACR) send your raw files to by clicking the blue text in the bottom center of the ACR window. This is probably that safest workflow for you until you get a handle on color management. If the color of your images is very important, you might consider embedding a color profile in them, which will help color managed browsers render your color properly.
If your display's color gamut is different than sRGB (many are), you'll find matching colors for non-color-managed browsers to be impossible. But consider the average display and take heart. The best you can do is correct to a standard and hope for the best.
Both the convert to sRGB and embed color profile options are in the save for web dialogue box.
More about the ACR workflow options here:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WS739D7239-24A7-452b-92F9-80481C544F25.html
More about matching colors for the web:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WSB3484C68-ECD2-4fa4-B7CC-447A5FE86680.html
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WSD3F5E059-4F51-4b44-8566-13B854D3DF5F.html
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WS0B3CD652-4675-44be-9E10-445EB83C60BA.html

Color management and ICC V4 support in Firefox 4?

Could you give us an update on how color management has changed in Firefox 4 (if at all) and if V4 ICC profiles are supported again?
There are still very few browsers that really support color management correctly and this it's a pretty big deal for photography buffs and users of wide-gamut monitors.
Tried looking at FF4 FAQs and support and also Googled and Binged but I could not find any info on this related to FF4.
Thanks.

Hello Dennis,
this is the old (known since 2009-04) "qcms doesn't support ICC version 4" bug.
Have a look at:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=488800
It's a shame that ICC v4 support has not been implemented yet again.
For all others, who don't know what we are talking about, you can test the Firefox colormanagement behavior here:
http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter
Regards, Lilien

Color Managed Printing from LR 1.3.1 Inverse of Proper PS CS3 10.0.1 Behavior

Please excuse the length and detail of this post - I'm just trying to be very clear...
Also, it would be helpful if anyone having definitive information about this topic could please email me directly in addition to replying to this forum topic, in order that I might know a response is available sooner (I am new to this forum, and may not check it regularly). My direct email address is [email protected].
Bottom Line: Color managed printing using my own custom-generated profiles from LR 1.3.1 to my Epson 7600 (on Intel-based Mac OS X 10.5.2, but saw the same behavior with 10.5.1) using the current Epson 7600 Intel/10.5x-compatible driver (3.09) is broken, and appears to be doing the exact opposite (inverse) of what I would expect and what PS CS3 does properly.
I am color management experienced, and have been using my custom-generated EPSON 7600 profiles with reliable soft proofing and printing success in PS (both CS2 and now CS3) for some time now. I know how the EPSON printer driver should be set relative to PS/LR print settings to indicate desired function. Images exported from LR to PS and printed from PS using "Photoshop Manages Color" and proper printer driver settings ("No Color Adjustment") print perfectly, so it isn't the Intel-based Mac, the OS, the driver, the profile, or me -- it is LR behaving badly.
The specific behavior is that printing from LR using "Managed by Printer" with the EPSON driver's Color Management setting set properly to "Colorsync" prints a reasonable-looking print, about what you would expect for canned profiles from the manufacturer, and in fact identical to the results obtained printing the same image from PS using "Printer Manages Color". So far so good. Switching to my specific custom profiles in LR and printing with the driver's CM setting set properly to "No Color Adjustment" yields results that are clearly whacked, for both LR settings of "Perceptual" and "Relative CM". Just for completeness and out of curiosity, I tried printing from LR using the same profile (once for "Perceptual" and once more for "Relative CM") with the EPSON driver's CM setting set IMPROPERLY to "Colorsync", and the results were much more in line with what you would expect - I would almost say it was "correct" output. This is why I used the phrase "inverse of proper behavior" in the subject line of this topic. Going one step further, trying this same set of improper settings in PS (PS print settings set to "Photoshop Manages Color" with either Perceptual or Rel CM selected, but using "Colorsync" rather than "No Color Adjustment" in the Color Management pane of the EPSON printer driver) yields whacked results as you would expect that look identical to the whacked results obtained from LR using "proper" settings.
I said above that the improper settings from LR yielded results that I would almost say were correct. "Almost" because the benchmark results rendered by PS using proper settings are slightly different - both "better" and closer to each other - than those rendered by LR using the improper settings. The diffs between the Perceptual and Rel CM prints from LR using improper settings showed more marked differences in tone/contrast/saturation than the diffs observed between the Perceptual and Rel CM prints from PS using proper settings - the image itself was in-gamut enough that diffs between Perceptual and Rel CM in the proper PS prints were quite subtle. Even though the improper LR prints were slightly inferior to the proper PS prints, the improper LR prints were still within tolerances of what you might expect, and still better (in terms of color matching) than the "Managed by Printer" print from LR. At first guess, I would attribute this (the improper LR prints being inferior to the proper PS prints) to the CMM being used by LR being different from (inferior to) the CMM I have selected for use in PS (that being "Adobe (ACE)"). I can live with the LR CMM being slightly different from that use

(Here's the 2nd half of my post...)
I said above that the improper settings from LR yielded results that I would almost say were correct. "Almost" because the benchmark results rendered by PS using proper settings are slightly different - both "better" and closer to each other - than those rendered by LR using the improper settings. The diffs between the Perceptual and Rel CM prints from LR using improper settings showed more marked differences in tone/contrast/saturation than the diffs observed between the Perceptual and Rel CM prints from PS using proper settings - the image itself was in-gamut enough that diffs between Perceptual and Rel CM in the proper PS prints were quite subtle. Even though the improper LR prints were slightly inferior to the proper PS prints, the improper LR prints were still within tolerances of what you might expect, and still better (in terms of color matching) than the "Managed by Printer" print from LR. At first guess, I would attribute this (the improper LR prints being inferior to the proper PS prints) to the CMM being used by LR being different from (inferior to) the CMM I have selected for use in PS (that being "Adobe (ACE)"). I can live with the LR CMM being slightly different from that used in PS - that is not the issue here. What is at issue is trying to determine why LR is clearly behaving differently than PS in this well-understood area of functionality, all other variables being the same. (And, incidentally, why am I not seeing other posts raising these same questions?)
My "workaround" is to use "Managed by Printer" for printing rough prints from LR and to do all other printing from PS, especially given the noted diffs in CMM performance between LR and PS and the fact that printing from PS also supports using Photokit Sharpener for high-quality prints. Still it would be nice to understand why this is happening in LR and to be able to print "decent" prints directly from LR when it seemed appropriate.
Any insights or suggestions will be very much appreciated. Please remember to reply to my direct email address ([email protected]) in addition to your public reply to this forum.
Thank you!
/eddie

Color Management, (Again!)

I know this has been discussed before, but I still haven't found anything that can help me solve the issue. It's starting to become a serious barrier to professional work, so any thoughts woudl be appreciated.
I have both the eye1Display2 and a Gretag-Macbeth color checker and regularly calibrate my monitor and camera profiles. I'm working with CS5. The colors in Photoshop are consistently far off from every other applicaiton outside of it. Even Flickr. I assume this is because of the color management, but I've even turned that off, (which gives me a warning message now every time I bring in an image), and the issue still occurs. Worse, the colors displayed working with RAW images are now different to those in the main interface, and even then, they are NOT the same outside of Photoshop, whereas all the other packages are consistent. My workaround right now is to save regularly and check in other packages but this is simply not good enough for adjusting curves, HSL, etc. I do a lot of work with skintones, which are particularly color-critical.
So my quesions are - how can I turn Photoshop's color management completely off so it's not applying any lookup at all to the color in any module?
If I WANT it to apply the color profile from the i1Display and the X-Rite Color Checker Passport sofware, how can I know this is being done and carried through from the RAW processing to the rest of the package?
Many thanks
Albert Hastings

ahast42696 wrote:
I have both the eye1Display2 and a Gretag-Macbeth color checker and regularly calibrate my monitor and camera profiles. I'm working with CS5. The colors in Photoshop are consistently far off from every other applicaiton outside of it.
If what you're saying here is that a fully color-managed application, like Photoshop, is delivering color that's different from non-color-managed applications, this is just what you should expect.
There is no such thing as system-wide color management. It just doesn't work that way. Individual applications do (or don't do, or even partially do) color-management.
This is key:
Color-managed applications perform transforms on the colors being displayed in pursuit of absolute color accuracy at the expense of consistency with non-color-managed applications.
Corrollary:
Some color-managed applications misinterpret some color profiles. It happens.
Expanding on what Dag has said in post #1 above, no transform takes place if the document profile matches the display profile.
So... IF you're working with documents in the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 color space (aka just "sRGB" for the purpose of this discussion) and IF you want the display of these images to match as often as possible between color-managed applciations and non-color-managed applications, this is one possible direction you can take:
1. Set your system to associate the system-provided sRGB profile with your monitor(s). This is done via OS configuration dialogs.
2. Set your monitor(s) to as closely match the sRGB color space as possible. Some monitors were manufactured to be close, and others have the ability to be set that way. Still others can't be directly set that way, but the system response can be tweaked with the basic controls (brightness, contrast, saturation, etc., as well as the curves adjustments in the video card drivers).
When the above conditions are met, you will see the following results:
A. sRGB image documents, which are the majority of those published online and are usually the default output from digital cameras, will appear consistently the same in color-managed (Photoshop) and non-color-managed applications. Depending on your needs you can configure Photoshop to work in the sRGB color space for creating your own images (this is actually Photoshop's default).
B. In Photoshop and other color-managed apps you will get good overall color-management of image documents in other color spaces, though you'll see just the out-of-gamut colors (i.e., those colors from a larger color space that just can't be displayed in the sRGB color space) as fully-saturated and thus somewhat inaccurate. In practice, most colors in most images fall within the sRGB gamut.
C. You'll see accurate color management by the partially* color-managed Internet Explorer 9, within the constraints of item B above.
D. Since the sRGB color profile that comes with every Windows system is well formed, and is the default, there is a near zero chance that a color-managed application will misinterpret it and produce screwy color. Such misinterpretation DOES happen with other profiles, a surprising number of times, even sometimes with profiles generated by good quality color measurement and profiling devices. Color profiles are not trivial, and some software simply can't use some profiles.
The real (non-trivial) trick in this strategy is actually getting your monitor to closely match the sRGB color space without using a monitor profile. However, it IS possible to get it close, and for many people "close enough" + "consistent across more apps" is better than "perfectly accurate in Photoshop but mismatching other apps". It can even be checked with a profiling device to help with the fine tuning.
-Noel
*IE9 interprets your document color profile and always transforms it into the sRGB color space, regardless of your monitor profile. Thus the only way to make the colors come out right is to have the monitor actually BE sRGB. So far, unfortunately, it appears IE10 in Windows 8 is following this same "half baked" strategy.

Color Manage - Yes or No?

First, I'm a color management geek and fan. Almost all of my work in the past was under my total control, so I was able to select my own commercial printer. I only worked with commercial printers who had a firm grasp on color management, had current software and equipment, and access to their prepress department. My jobs always came out great, with my proof matching theirs, and the final job being a very close match to the proof. I'm using IDCS4, Mac, etc.
OK...new ballgame. I'm now doing freelance work for mixed clients. They don't seem to have the same high standards I do. They usually want to handle the print end and often don't know who will print their jobs until after the file preparation is completed. Then, they go out for bids and I am out of the loop (until the job won't RIP or they get unexpected, lousy results, of course).
So, how is everyone preparing jobs when the commercial printer is unknown?
I have been turning color management off in InDesign, converting RGB images to US Web Coated SWOP v2, stripping the profiles, and placing them inti IDCS4. This goes against my grain, of course, being a color management nut and control freak.
Any wise suggestions to help get good color and avoid problems in this type of scenario?
Lou

My point was really that you need to know the printer to claim any kind of control if you are supplying PDF X/1a. That is really self explanatory, but Lou seemed to be saying that if your client gives you junk then you are ok to send it on as junk which I think is an addressable point for a responsible designer or file preparer (which is what I do from a prepress/design seat). The buck has to stop somewhere and the printer is the worst place!
If you supply PDF/X4, how will the average printer, currently taking X/1a know that? Depending on their settings, they might apply generic conversions!
As far as I understand it, X/4 is not an accepted industry standard yet (although I expect it will be one day) and if you supply those to a prepress, they are required to make judgements about the conversion which is not their responsibility. I say that because subjective decisions may be needed and no designer worth their salt would give up that responsibility.
I find that US SWOP is a great standard for blind submission, and since we don't have a standard option for tagged PDF under industry accepted standard of X/1a, it is better than random choice. It depends on type of work, one would never supply generic USSWOP pdf for a high end book but for a throwaway flyer it is usually acceptable when files are supplied by average designer.
A good designer will find out who is printing and prepare files correctly, if it must be unknown they will speak to the third party about the problem or else risk bad jobs at remote site in the future. If their client insists on getting a PDF they can then submit to assorted unknown printers then the client would need to (a.) advise printers of type of file being supplied... or (b.) have the ability to repurpose for printer when known, which is where X4 from designer would be good. In both of these situations, the responsibility has then shifted to the client who is choosing the printer.
If the designer is dealing with the printer directly, then it must be PDF X/1a with correct destination profile.

Laptop Losing Color Management Settings When Docking or Undocking

I originally posted this to the general Windows 7 support forum; however, one of the support engineers recommended that I move it here as I'm running Windows 7 Enterprise, so here it is...
I am running Windows 7 Enterprise SP1 64-bit on a Dell Latitude E6540 with a docking station. I have color-calibrated the display on the laptop as well as an external display attached to the docking station. Whenever I undock the computer, the
system resets the color management settings and I lose the color calibration on the laptop's display. I then have to go in manually through the Control Panel and re-apply the calibration profile to get things back to normal.
I have everything set up so that the calibrated profile is the default profile for the system and I've verified that this is the case whether or not the machine is docked, but it still loses the calibration settings every time. All video system drivers
are updated and current as well.
Any thoughts or ideas on how to resolve this issue?
Thanks in advance for any advice.

Sophia,
Thanks for the link to the article. While I still suspect that the color calibration issue is related to the Intel drivers, the only response that I'm able to get from Intel is that it is a Windows operating system problem and not theirs.
To be clear, the issue described in this article does relate specifically to power savings, which are typically only enabled when running on battery. I do have this particular setting disabled on my laptop in order to maintain color accuracy for
my work.
My issue is clearly with the Color Calibration Profiles. The default profile for the laptop, which appears to have no actual calibration at all, has the screen showing a very heavy blue bias. The bias is so strong, that the frames around the
windows, ribbons in the Microsoft Office apps, etc., which should be grey, are displayed as blue. The blue bias also tends to wash out most of the other colors and makes the screen look dull and unsaturated. However, as soon as my Color Calibration
Profile is used, the Windows elements display as grey and the screen colors look much more vibrant. It really is a night and day difference.
When booting up the system or logging into my user account, even on the default blue Windows screens, you can clearly see the change when my Color Calibration Profile is loaded by the system just before it brings up the desktop. Once loaded, it remains
working, as I've said, until the computer is undocked or docked. Then it immediately reverts to the default Color Calibration Profile and the screen shifts back into the blue range again.
I think that for another test, I'm going to remove all of the calibration profiles except for mine and see if that has any affect. If it doesn't, I'll rename my profile to the same name as the default profile and see if that does anything. It's
just something that I thought of now to try. I'll let you know how it goes.

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!

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

Color management issue from Photoshop Acrobat

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

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

Color management: Response and addendum

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for