Color management workflow for beginners..

I am making a movie. I have several hundred clips, shot over a period of almost 5 months. Indoors, outdoors, morning, afternoon, mid day etc. I have gained experience with my Panasonic HMC 151 over the months, and during this time used a variety of settings. I will also use still photos, and use some computer generated graphics made in Daz3D Carrara. All in all - I have a lot of material which look very different.
When layering my clips in After Effects, I want to do it right, and not paint myself into a corner.
When compiling my scenes (compositions) I also want to do it "right".
Most important to me is to get a coherent look and feel. This is the main priority. Later I might wish to change the overall color if I find out I want my movie to look more like a movie than a "video show". For example, I have shot some scenes late in May at noon, ans some scenes in the afternoon in September, and they belong to the same dialog where people talk to each others.
The target media is DVD for home TVs.
Any links to workflows and step-by-step guides (video tutors) on basic approaches on how to avoid the big mistakes is very much appreciated!
ingvarai

ingvarai:
Color Management in indeed an important aspect, but from your description, it seems that you should be concerned with "color correction" first.
Color Management is about getting reliable and predictable color rendition. It's not really about defining the "look" of your project. If your shots are not properly exposed, for example, Color Management will only make it more reliable to assure they're not properly exposed. Color correction is all about fixing those problems, or stylizing the overall look. If two takes don't intercut well, for example, then you have to correct color balance, exposure, so one matches the other.
After Effects includes a ton of effects which can be used for color correction, including Levels, Curves, Hue/Satuarion, etc. And it also includes a streamlined color correction plug-in called Color Finesse. I think the Color Finesse documentation is a good starting point, regardless of what you end up using. If you go to the folder in which After Effects is installed, and look into the "Effects" folder, you should see a folder called Synthetic Aperture. The Color Finesse manual should be inside that folder.
Also, After Effects Help has a section on Color correction and adjustments. It includes a number of links to other resources.
Mark Christiansen's book After Effects CS4 Visual Effects and Compositing Studio Techniques is very recommended.
As for the Color Management workflow, there's a specific white paper on the Adobe web site on this very subject, but I am not sure that's a good starting point. Instead, I think the AE help page on Color Management is better to get your feet wet, and then go through the white paper. Again, there are several links to other resources in the AE Help page about Color Management.

Similar Messages

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

InDesign color management workflow help

Hello,
I recently had to create a 60 page color booklet for a University on a very tight schedule. The booklet was to be printed to press. I was not given any specifics as to the output specifics.
So, I was creating vector graphics in Illustrator as CMYK, and importing them in InDesign. And receieving e-mail with bitmat images in formats from JPG, TIFF, PDF, PNG. and I would place them directly into InDesign. If I had to do any photoshoping of a picture, I would conver the sRGB original to CMYK.
I have been reading discussion about color management workflow. But I am still not clear what I should have been doing with the roughly 100 image files sent me to be in the booklet?
Somewhere I read the way I did it was okay, as long as I let InDesign handle image conversion on the output? Is this correct? When I went to make my Package for the printer, I did get the Triangle "warning" that some images were sRGB. The PDFs looked great.
What should I have done as all these images came in? It was a crazy deadline. I can't imagine having to open every image in Photoshop -Convert to CMYK-Adjust colors and resave and import?
And what do you do if you don't know the specific output printer? I default to SWOP.
So, will InDesign, convert any incorrect (sRGB etc) images on the final output to the proper colorspace to be printed properly?
Thanks
Robin

InDesign will convert RGB to CMYK when you're exporting as PDF files IF (big IF) you choose PDF/X-1a as your PDF preset. Some of the other PDF presets (e.g., Press Quality) don't do this conversion. Their color conversion setting is No Conversion.
SWOP is a reasonable output assuming your printer didn't give you a customized CMYK profile to install with instructions to install it (most North American printers don't do this).

Can't access Color Management options for HP 6700 under Mac OS 10.8.5 (Mountain Lion)

Hello.
I've got the HP Officejet 6700 Premium e-All-in-One and I can't find any way to access Color Management options.
The printer is attached (Wi-Fi) to my iMac running Mac OS 10.8.5 (Mountain Lion).
I want to correct a magenta cast to photographs that I've printed. I've had the magenta-cast problem under Lightroom and using Preview to print the photographs, so now I want to work with color profiles in Photoshop Elements.
Photoshop Elements recommends that I "disable color management in the printer preferences dialog".
However, I'm not able to find color management preferences for the 6700 in any of the settings under Mountain Lion:
Not under (Apple) > System Preferences > Print & Scan.
Not under (HP Utility) > Open Embedded Web Server.
Not under (HP Utility) > Printer Settings.
Not under Preview's print dialog.
Nor can I find any clear direction in the online help (at HP or elsewhere) that I've read so far.
Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thank you!
Michael
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Please note that in the Print dialog I get "Color Matching" not "Color Management."
Still, I am (at this point) able to control color from Photoshop Elements, so that's good enough to proceed.
Thanks again.

Color management settings for the best print output

Color Management while Printing has been one of the challenging areas which has been discussed a lot over user forums and has been a painful area in terms of clear understanding while taking print outputs.
Here is an easy-to-understand KB (Knowledge Base) article ‘Color management settings for the best print output’ to help you get the best from your printers using PSE and bridge that knowledge gap.
This article explains color management in Photoshop Elements, how to get better prints, and addresses some of the following issues like horizontal/vertical streaks in print output, too dark or too light print output, ICC profile problems and Color differences between prints from PSE and other applications.
Thanks,
Garry

Thanks Noel.
Yes have shared in PSE forum as well. But I usually drop such posts on PS General forum so community moderators as well as our power users who mostly use both PS or PSE or are aware about can communicate to their students, audiences etc.
The idea is to reach out the message to as many as folks via relevant forums. Most of my otehr posts have found mentioned only on PSE forum.
Thanks for the feedback Nice to hear such a great feedback within 5 mts of publishing
Regards,
Garry

Best Color Management Settings for Web in CS3

I've seen tons of info on what color management settings can be used in CS3, but most seemed to favor work for printing. I'm just wondering what settings people think are best for color and B&W photo web work in particular... I already have both the monitor and PS set for 'sRGB IEC61966-2.1', but other than that, there seems to be a lot of opinions. I just want everything to have the best chance of looking the same on other comps as it did on mine. I also have Proof Setup set to 'Monitor RGB'.
Thanks,

1. Calibrate (I use ColorVision's Spyder http://aps8.com/spyder.html , but any hardware calibration device will be better than calibration by eye).
2. Set the Working Space to sRGB.
3. Set the Color Management Policy for RGB to Convert to Working to be sure you are converting content to sRGB. (2 & 3 addressses pfigen's concern about making sure all images are sRGB.)
4. Make sure your monitor is set to use the ICC profile generated by the calibration device.
5. Turn off Proof Colors.
6. Embed profiles or not, but if you do use the sRGB profile. Whether it gets used or not is another story.
As far as B&W, pfigen suggests Gamma 2.2, which would seem to be right for PC. Mac users might consider Gamma 1.8.
This should work well for most situations, but guaranteed consistency is an impossible task at this point.

Need color management settings for photoshop version 8.0

I need to reset the color management settings for photoshop 8.0. Can someone let me know what are the correct defaults?

Probably the most commonly used is "North American Prepress 2" but which you choose depends entirely on the kind of work you are currently doing.

Problem: Color Management/Save for Web on Wide Gamut Monitor

Hi,
I've got a problem with color management - I thought I understood it, but it seems as if didn't. So I'm trying to kindly ask for help.
I'm printing, and also trying to save an image for Web.
My setup:
- Win 7, CS 5
- Calibrated Wide Gamut Monitor (eizo cg223w)
- Photoshop set to ProPhoto (I don't want to start a discussion adobergb vs prophoto)
- Save for Web and Devices, Embed Color Profile, Convert to SRGB
- Viewing in Firefox 3.6 with Color Management enabled
Problem:
Image: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/311345/luchs-1024.jpg
If I compare the file in Firefox and Photoshop, the Firefox presentation is slightly more saturated - and I have no idea why.
I thought it should work with the above workflow.
Here is a screenshot where you can clearly see a difference (Note: the additional over-saturation here is caused by the wide gammut monitor when taking screenshots, in reality its not as dramatic as that): http://imgur.com/MFPbU but you can clearly see the difference.
I would be very very thankful for any pointers what I'm doing wrong in my workflow!
Thanks in advance,
Christoph

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
ch_bla wrote:
- Monitor calibrated
- Edit under ProPhoto RGB, 16 bit raw files
- Save for Web and Devices, Embed Color Profile, Convert to SRGB
Is this the preferred way?
It's a reasonable and correct way to do it, assuming you want to embed a profile in the images.
Since at least in some browsers and cases the colors selected within the HTML elements must match image colors, one can sometimes make a case for not embedding any profile at all, but that's really looking backwards. Browsers are moving forward toward not only managing colors in images but also in the HTML elements themselves. If you want your images accurately portrayed in as many places as possible you're doing the right thing looking forward.
Personally I embed the sRGB profile in my web images, as you are doing. And I check things primarily with IE and Safari.
Unlike you, I prefer to edit using the sRGB color space, but that's just personal preference. I find it more convenient to use File - Save As instead of File - Save For Web & Devices, and I get caught by gotchas less often this way. Your preference ensures you don't lose any colors at the extremes of the gamut while editing and it could easily be argued that that's better, depending on what image products you produce.
As for the article you mentioned, anyone who would set their preferred working space to Monitor RGB or use Proof Colors in normal editing is asking for trouble, and may not understand color management at all.
-Noel

In PS C6 I'm getting a warning that "No color management" setting for printer isn't supported. Why?

I'm using Photoshop Extended CS6. I'm printing to either an Epson Stylus Pro 9900 or an Epson SP4900. In the print dialog, I get a warning I haven't seen in a long time. It says the setting "No Color Management" at the printer is not supported. This is patently false. I am given a link to download the Adobe Color Print Utility (which gives abominable results; I know this from repeated uses in the past), and a service note saying this issue is for Photoshop CS5. Clearly there is a problem, possibly a bug.
I have never had CS5 installed on this machine. I do have PS CS5.5 and PS CS6 on this machine (I have used all versions of CS in various suites from the start of the product line).
Can anyone explain this annoying intrusion on my workflow? Of course "no printer management on printer/Photoshop manages color" works... There must be an explanation.
Thanks.

An excellent question, and worthy, in fact of an essay, if not a chapter in a book on color management and proofing issues. And as you suggested earlier, it's a philosophical question (not strictly conceptual to my way of thinking).
It's also a question I can't answer, in terms of practicality and a personal sense of efficacy in dealing with a monolithic process (producing a print). That is, I can't answer for you, or anyone else I'd venture to say.
Stepping back for the briefest of moments, we should remember we live, on computers, in a virtual world. Whatever we see is a simulation, or if you prefer a simulacrum. Plato would probably say, not much better than the play of shadows on the cave wall from the flickering flames.
It's called soft proofing for a reason. The only hard proof is a print. I am old enough to remember the days when producing a color print from a chrome (requiring an internegative) or even directly from negative images, was an art, best left to skilled technicians in a lab. And even then it was an iterative process. Making an image ready for accurate color rendition in lithographic reproduction was the same things, maybe times ten. And required sometimes a whole team of skilled technicians, the last of them being the press operator. You can't appreciate the full impact of these facts of life back then unless you have been "on press" in some plant, invariably in the hinterlands, looking at actual press proofs under 6500K calibrated proofing lights, comparing them against the original chrome, the separation proofs used to make the plates. You had to understand not only the physics (and biology) of RGB imaging, but the intricacies of subtractive technology, aka CMYK. As in so much else in life, less is more, and so you had to understand that sometimes the least adjustment was the best (because you were also dealing with the physical constraints of layers of ink on paper), so if an image looked too green on the press sheet, it might be best to throttle up on the magenta just a touch, rather than cut back on the yellow and cyan. You balanced one against the other, because of the possible effects on other parts of the image.
This long-winded, probably tiresome if not boring, anecdote is meant to be illustrative of the analogous situation in which we find ourselves printing images with digital technology, combined with electromechanical devices spraying pigmented fluids in drops measured in picoliters of volume on substrates of varying physical properties related to absorbency, refractive index, contribution to an arcane phenomenon known as metamerism.
We can't hope to see anything but a, pardon the expression, simulacrum of the combination of the effects of these phenomena (and other phenomena as a result of the interdigitation of these different technologies, at the software level, and even more so at the hardware level), at least not on a screen (which introduces a whole other set of variables). We can't see what we will get unless we actually go through the ordeal and expense of producing a hard proof. And then using our experience and deductive skills to make adjustments, not unlike maneuvering a rover on the moon from a control station on earth, that will produce the desired outcome within a very narrow (I assume) set of parameters.
Personally, I prefer working in Lightroom and in Photoshop in order to produce the image I would like to see in an ideal, if you like a Platonic, world. If what was on the screen could somehow be transferred magically to the surface of a lovely unsullied sheet of Arches cold press watercolor paper, 350g/m^2 coming out of an Epson 9900... (I've done it). Not so easy.
What the soft proofing capabilities of Photoshop are good for, from my point of view, is to show me how far off the image I am looking at as ideal will fall short on the intended target substrate. I must always remember, it is not a wholly accurate rendition of what the printer will do with a sheet of paper from a particular production run, with the particular combination of inks (with varying dates of origin of manufacture), never mind the vagaries of temperamental nozzles in the printhead, not to mention conditions of humidity, temperature, etc.
What the softproof tells me is that the red in that scarf on my subject really needs bumping up, if I expect the level of vibrancy I see I need in the ideal rendition. And I make the adjustment in the RGB representation on the screen, etc. When I have made my by guess and by gosh adjustments to all problem areas as suggested by the soft proof (it is only as accurate after all as the RGB image is in depicting any realistic expectation of a final result—the only assurance I have is that if I really want people to see my image as I see it on the screen I had better show them the screen...), I make a print. Sometimes I have to make two or three until I am satisfied this is truly the best I will get from the beautiful, but arcane, surface of the paper I have chosen.
In short, it's a risky business, and expensive.
If you want fast and affordable, frankly, stick to premium grade high gloss surfaces, preferably from Epson, in your case, or the manufacturer of your printer in general (Canon, incidentally, produces spectacular results on their Pixma Pro series printers and their own papers, especially the Pro Luster surface... I don't even bother with soft proofing... so there is an exception even to this rule I am taking a lot of time to point out to you). High gloss papers tend to have the widest gamut, give the deepest blacks, and the best renditions of saturated color, red and blue particularly, for some reason often the hardest spectral colors to render with the level of saturation you might like. Especially if you tend to shoot vividly colored subjects.
If you regularly use matte surface, or so-called fine art or watercolor surfaces, I think even if you adhere to the workflow implied in your question... Just set the computer and screen to "soft proof" in effect in Photoshop and work from their, and hope for the best... you are in for massive chronic dissatisfaction.
One last thing, I produce what I consider a basic working image in Lightroom, add further effects using a battery of third party effects software (from Google Nik, OnOne, Imagenomic, AlienSkin, etc.) and then go to work further on the image in Photoshop, but I never save the image, except as a revised file, once I'm done with Lightroom adjustments (which are never applied to the RAW file, but kept as meta-instructions separately in the LR database). So any effects added produce a new file. Any changes in Photoshop produce a new file. And when I am working, finally on an image to make into a committed hard print, I NEVER save the settings I use to produce a print, including a print I deem acceptable for exhibition. If nothing else, I can honestly tell a print buyer they are getting a unique "hand-made" image. I don't feel I'm operating a factory after all, but a studio. Further, changes in technology occur dynamically and continuously. I don't know what I would do with the settings I derived from working solely in the "soft-proofing" mode you think you might prefer in your workflow, if a new paper or ink set, or printer came along that solved the problems I had to fudge around to get a decent print with the existing technology at the time. At least if I work solely in RGB trying to achieve an "ideal" rendition, I will always be able to start from that same point, the next time I want a print worth saving of that image.
We've gone, or I've gone, way off topic here, and I beg the indulgence of anyone else who might be reading this, hoping for a simple fix to the original simple problem.
H

Complete color management workflow?

Quick question for the color management pros:
How do you profile your camera or scanner to close the color management loop in Aperture? As far as I can tell, there's no way in Aperture to profile a photo of a target like the GretagMacbeth Color Checker SG. There has to be a dozen plugins that do it in Photoshop-- including some amazing ACR javascripts.
The only way I can see creating a RAW camera profile for Aperture is to run the target image and my shots through ACR first to embed the corrected profile to all the images. Is anyone else trying to mange and profile devices from the camera through to the montior and printer? How does your workflow work?

Quick question for the color management pros:
How do you profile your camera or scanner to close the color management loop in Aperture? As far as I can tell, there's no way in Aperture to profile a photo of a target like the GretagMacbeth Color Checker SG. There has to be a dozen plugins that do it in Photoshop-- including some amazing ACR javascripts.
The only way I can see creating a RAW camera profile for Aperture is to run the target image and my shots through ACR first to embed the corrected profile to all the images. Is anyone else trying to mange and profile devices from the camera through to the montior and printer? How does your workflow work?

Photoshop CS3 color management "Save for Web" problem

This problem is getting the best of me.......
After spending 3 full days researching this problem, I am no closer to finding an answer than when I started. I still cannot produce a usable image through the "Save for Web" feature of Photoshop CS3. I have read web page after web page of "Tips, Tricks and Recommendations" from dozens of experts, some from this forum, and still I have no solution... I am exhausted and frustrated to say the least. Here's the simple facts that I know at this point.
I have a web design project that was started in PS CS1. All artwork was created in photoshop and exported to JPG format by using "Save for Web". Every image displays correctly in these browsers (Safari, Camino, FireFox and even Internet Explorer on a PC).
I have recently upgraded to PS CS3 and now cannot get any newly JPG'd image to display correctly. My original settings in CS1 were of no concern to me at the time, because it always just worked, and so I do not know what they were. I have opened a few of my previous images in CS3 and found that sRGB-2.1 displays them more or less accurately. I am using sRGB 2.1 working space. Upon openning these previous image files, I get the "Missing Profile" message and of course I select "Leave as is. Do Not color manage". CS3 assumes sRGB-2.1 working space, opens the file, and all is well.
The problem is when I go to "Save for Web", the saturation goes up, and the colors change. The opposite of what most people are reporting. Here's another important point... new artwork created in CS3 does exactly the same thing, so it's not because of the older CS1 files.
I have tried every combination of "uncompensated color", "Convert to sRGB", "ICC Profile", etc. while saving. I have Converted to sRGB before saving, and my monitor is calibrated correctly.
I have tried setting the "Save for Web" page on 2-up and the "original" on the left is already color shifted before I even hit the "Save" button. Of course, the "Optimized" image on the right looks perfect because I am cheating by selecting the "Use Document Color Profile" item. Why do they even have this feature if doesn't work, or misleads you?
Does anyone have any ideas what could be happening here? Why is this all so screwed up?
CS1 worked fine out of the box.
Final note: I do have an image file I could send along that demonstrates how it is possible to display an image exactly the same in all 4 of the browsers I mentioned with no color differences. It is untagged RGB and somehow it just works.
I am very frustrated with all of this and any suggestions will be appreciated
Thanks,
Pete

>> First of all... I'm using an Adobe RGB image master... I open it and get the Profile Mismatch Screen... I choose Use Enbedded profile... all looks well. Next I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... again all looks well, no change that I can tell.
This has further confused the issue on several points, not the least of which version PS you are doing this with?
>> AdobeRGB> Convert to Profile > Working Space sRGB-2.1... all still looks well... but now, when I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... I see the insane oversaturated look that is driving me nuts.
That is your strongest clue...it sounds like you have a bad system or bad monitor profile. To rule out the monitor profile: Set sRGB as your monitor profile in System Prefs> Displays> Color.
>> Adobe RGB image master... I open it and get the Profile Mismatch Screen... I choose Use Enbedded profile... all looks well. Next I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... again all looks well
That doesn't make sense, stripping an embedded AdobeRGB profile should desaturate the color in Softproof MonitorRGB, especially the reds -- you have something wacky going on there.
At this point I think you need to review the links and get a grip about how color management and profiles work...
BTW, forget about setting ColorSync in PS COlor Settings, use Adobe ACE.
MO,
I think SFW is fixed under CS3 :) By default it Converts to sRGB and strips the profile.

Possibility to assign a color profile in the color management tab for more video formats

Presently, in After Effects CS5, in the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box the possibility to assign a color profile to footage is grayed out for many video formats.
Formats that allow to assign a color profile include Quicktime/JPEG2000, Quicktime/Motion JPEG A, Quicktime/Motion JPEG B, Quicktime/MPEG-4, Quicktime/Animation as well as various image sequences, like tiff-sequences. (Motion JPEG A,B and Quicktime/MPEG-4 are not very helpful in this context because they have a small color shift when reimported to After Effects.)
Formats that do not allow to assign a color profile include Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V. (Here, H264 main concept has anyway the disadvantage that it has a color shift when reimported into After Effects.)
In After Effects CS4 it was possible to assign a color profile to Quicktime/H264, Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, but in CS5 this is no longer possible.
Those video formats that do not allow to assign a color profile automatically are interpreted as having the color profile HDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr in case that the videos have 1920x1080 format; similar applies to PAL formats which get SDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr color profile.
(I did not find anything of this automatic assignment to HDTV or SDTV color profile in the "interpretation rules.txt" file, therefore it must be written into the programme itself.)
With growing popularity of wide gamut monitors it becomes necessary to produce footage and other videos that have a color profile different from HDTV or sRGB. When such footage is reimported to After Effects it has the wrong color and the only workarounds are either to use (in After Effects) the effect "Color profile converter" which necessitates extra render time or to use somewhat unpopular formats, like JPEG2000 that has very large filesize.
Presently many footage is produced in Quicktime/PhotoJPEG and therefore it would be very desirable to allow to assign a color profile to such footage in the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box.
Does anyone know why in AE CS5 the video formats Quicktime/PhotoJPEG and Quicktime/H264 do not allow to have an arbitrary color profile assigned (although it was possible in CS4), is it a bug, or does it have a deeper reason.
In this context I have a related question, often I read that Quicktime videos have a gamma tag. Does this mean that part of the color profile (the gamma value) is actually embedded/remembered, like you have it for images where the gamma is part the embedded color profile.
I use AE CS5 on Mac Pro 2009 with OS 10.6.7.
Thanks,
Volker

Thank you Rick for this interesting explanations and the links to articles.
In the past few days I performed a few tests in After Effects and it is interesting that you mention that cameras, like the Sony EX3, allow videos to have embedded color profiles. I am not working myself with cameras but either get footage from the internet or sometimes videos from our video department which produces videos with professional SONY cameras, usually I get them in a matrox mxf format.
As far as my test with After Effects show it is not possible to embed color profiles in the videos rendered with After Effects. Independent of the color profile in the working space and independent from the color profile in the output module I always get the same reaction if I reimport videos rendered by After Effects back to After Effects:
In AE CS5 videos made in the formats Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V are always interpreted as color profile SDTV/HDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr (even if I made them in other color profiles, such as Adobe RGB, Photo RGB, sRGB); and there is no possibility to change this interpretation rule.
In contrast videos made in the formats Quicktime/JPEG2000, Quicktime/Motion JPEG A, Quicktime/Motion JPEG B, Quicktime/MPEG-4, Quicktime/Animation are always interpreted as sRGB (even if if I made them in other color profiles, such as Adobe RGB, Photo RGB, HDTV); only this time I can change the interpretation rule. Therefore if I know for example that if I had selected Photo RGB in the Output module I can change after the reimport the interpretation rule from sRGB to Photo RGB and only then I get again the original colors.
The only exceptions are picture sequences, such as tiff-sequences, where the original color profile is automatically selected in the interpretation of the footage.
Therefore, unfortunately for videos produced by After Effects your advice "If it says something like sRGB and you can change it, in most cases you shouldn't change it because the guess is probably right. If there is no color profile assigned then you should assume that is correct." is not so easy to be applied. You have to know how you did it originally in the Output module and hope that you can change it to the proper color profile, in case that the original color profile in the Output module was different from sRGB and HDTV/SDTV. But it is interesting to hear from you that with cameras there seem to be more possibilities.
For this reason it would be nice if in future versions of After Effects one could change the color profile in the the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box also for formats such as Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V.
Of course one can always circumvent shortcomings by using tiff-sequences, QT/jpeg2000, or QT/Animation as formats for storing, which is anyway better for lossless or nearly lossless storing, but the files are then too large and also cannot be played easily with a player.
Volker

Color management settings for HP Photosmart d7460 printer?

Hi,
HP Photosmart d7460
Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
I have the above printer, and I have recently used Datacolor devices to manually calibrate both my monitor and printer. I notice that when, for example, I use Adobe Photoshop Elements or Corel Photopaint X4 to print photos, that I am advised to select software to handle color management. I also receive a message informing me that i should switch off printer color management in printing preferences (i.e. the printer driver software). Unfortunately the only options available in the printer driver 'color management' drop down menu appear to be either Colorsmart/sRGB or AdobeRGB. I understand that there should be another option, either 'no color management' or 'application controlled' but it is not present. There is also no option, in this menu, for the ICC profile that I have created for the printer, although the profile is present in the Adobe Photoshop Elements application, and in Corel.
How do I switch off color management by the printer and allow the application to solely control color management? I understand that having both the application and printer control color management can lead to poor colours.
Regards, Chris

does anyone have any suggestions, any help appreciated.
regards

Color Management-Looking for registry setting

We have 100 people in our office. Currently, in order to enable color management, we have to go into each person's Bridge Center Color Management Color Settings panel, select our custom color settings file and hit apply. That takes care of 1 out of 100 people.
How can we automate this process...
We would like to create a script that sends a custom color setting file to individual user's stations. Does anybody know the registry setting that controls synchronization of settings on a user level?
Thanks,
Dan

Dan,
Did you ever find such a mechanism? I am looking to do pretty much the same thing. I can get the .CSF file to the workstations no problem, but I need to set the apps to look at it for their Color Settings. My guess is that there is a registry settings somewhere, but for the life of me I cant find it.
Matt

Turn off the Printers color management function for the Pro-100

I've tried everything to get this printer to print realistic colors. I had the Pro-9000 MK II and it was spot on. I'm running Mac OS 10.9.1 and downloaded all the current drivers for the Pro-100. The colors are way off. I am using Print Studio Pro, Under color management I'm selecting the ICC profile for the paper being used, the printer profile was downloaded from Canon's web site and that's selected the same paper type. Color matching is grayed out.
My monitor has been calibrated so I know that's not the issue. Especially since the Pro-9000 was right on the mark. Any suggestions???
Thanks in advance.
Rob
Mesa, AZ

Rob:
“I am using Print Studio Pro, under color management I'm selecting the ICC profile for the paper being used, the printer profile was downloaded from Canon's web site and that's selected the same paper type. Color matching is grayed out.”
I use the same setup as you and I print with, Print Studio Pro and LR4. My monitor is not calibrated. I only use Canon ink and Canon paper and the corresponding ICC profiles. My color output is exceptional. Black & white is good but not exceptional.
When I purchased this printer (a couple of months ago) I just followed the installation instructions and it worked great (for color prints) right out of the box. You may want to try a reinstall to see if that solves the issue. The Pro-100 is a very good printer.
Tinman
Mesa, AZ
Nikon D600; Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G, 85mm f/1.8G, 70-300mmG f/4.5 - 5.6 VR

Color management workflow for beginners..

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for