Color space export issues...

Well. This has been going on for a while. Sometimes it doesnt happen but most of the time when I export my images in srgb the view once uploaded is much depreciated. I proof in srgb 2.1 and embed upon export. The same thing happens with using the boarderfx export plugin. In addition, it seems to happen more after exporting to PS for edit and then exporting the tiffs to jpg later. But happens with normal jpg/raws as well. Thanks a lot for all the help and hopefully I can get this solved
Aaron

I don't mean "Quick Look" in Leopard. I mean Quick Preview in Aperture (a little button in the lower right corner that turns yellow when selected). I believe that, although not as seductive as the native screen display, Quick Preview is more accurate.
Here is what I mean by accurate:
• Quick Preview changes the display significantly and matches closely prints made from Aperture when printed on the paper for which I have selected the proof profile (in Aperture under View / Proofing Profile).
• Quick Preview displays an image that is nearly identical to that printed from Photoshop, InDesign, and Acrobat when the same paper and profile are used.
• Prints made from Aperture are nearly identical to those made from PS, ID, and Acrobat using the same parameters.
• Quick Preview displays an image that is nearly identical to that displayed in Photoshop, InDesign, and Acrobat when the same print profile is selected for soft proofing in these applications.
There is a wild card though: these days I print mostly using perceptual rendering intent. Aperture does not appear to provide any direct control over rendering intent or black point comp for softproofing. Native display in Aperture (with the correct profile selected for on screen proofing) is much closer to a PS soft proof of the same image using RelCol rendering intent in PS. In this case the difference seems to be perhaps in the implementation of black point comp.
It would sure be nice if we had full documentation of this stuff and didn't have to make suppositions about its functionality based on empirical data.
If you know of a way to soft proof in Aperture (that permits my workflow instead of imposing one) that allows for simultaneous editing I would be much obliged.
OK, I just did a little more poking around. Quick Preview appears to preview the image in the working color space, and what I was calling "native display mode" is using the selected soft proof profile. But on my system it is not accurate with my printer profiles. Not even close. Like I said this might be due to lack of control over rendering intent and black point compensation. (I also just noted that the soft proof display does not incorporate BPC. You can see this by creating a preview through the print dialog and comparing the result to the screen display.)
Though soft proofing seems to be broken, at least for me, I have answered my own question: My working space is close enough to (and obviously includes the full gamut of) my print profiles that I can select my working space profile for soft proofing (which it does use accurately since Aperture is also using the same profile to convert the RAW file to for export) which will allow me to edit while soft proofing in a valid color space with consistent rendering intent and application of BPC.
Flame off, over and out.

Similar Messages

Multiprocessing color space render issue

After installing the newest update of After Effects CC 2014 I am having troubles with my renders while using multiprocessing.
The color space I'm working in is a linearized 32bpc sRGB IEC61966-2.1 When I render without multiprocessing turned on, the render turns out fine, but with it turned on the resulting render is way too bright, as though the gamma has been lifted way too high. I would really like to be able to use multi-processing, since it cuts my render times down to a fifth of what they would be otherwise. Any advice would be much appreciated.
Also, just for fun I took my file back into After Effects CC (12.2) and tried rendering it with multiprocessing without changing any settings and the render turned out just fine, making me think that this is specifically a CC 2014 problem.

This is a bug that was introduced in After Effects CC 2014.1 (13.1). My apologies about this.
First things first: to work around this bug you will need to disable multiprocessing in order to get a color-accurate render, via either RAM preview or via the Render Queue. Alternately, you can use multiprocessing but to get expected colors you must disable color management (set the project's working space to None), or if using Rec. 709 or sRGB you can leave the working space enabled and disable only the Linearize Working Space option.
If you choose to leave multiprocessing enabled and disable color management, you can create the same color transform by applying the Color Profile Converter effect. For example, before rendering via the render queue, pre-compose your final comp and apply the effect to the pre-comp.
We will evaluate a fix for this bug for a future update to After Effects CC 2014. An update is scheduled to release soon (this week or next), but a fix for this bug won't be included; this will have to wait for the next update.
Under the hood, here's what happened to cause this bug:
In After Effects CC 2014.1 (13.1), a color transform to Rec. 709 is automatically added to frames delivered via Dynamic Link when color management is enabled in the project. This is a new behavior in this version, which solved a problem with gamma and/or color shifts when sending frames to Premiere Pro or Adobe Media Encoder, which assume that all incoming Dynamic Link frames are Rec. 709.
When multiprocessing is enabled in After Effects, it uses Dynamic Link to communicate with the subprocesses. In this case, After Effects knows what color profile is being used; no additional color correction is necessary.
Combining these two behaviors we get this bug: an unnecessary color transform to Rec. 709 is being applied to frames rendered when multiprocessing is enabled. We failed to take the multiprocessing case into account when we added the new behavior.
If your project's working space is already Rec. 709 or sRGB (which are functionally the same), you wouldn't notice a difference, since the additional color transform results in no change. Using any other profile would cause a color shift. Enabling the Linearize Working Space option with any profile will introduce a gamma shift.
Again, my apologies about this bug.

Correct export color space for wide gamut monitors.

Running a photography studio I have 4 typical scenarios of how clients or end users will see my photo work. I create and edit the photos using LR 3 on a HP 2475w (wide gamut) monitor. I'm aware that there are color shifts, but trying to figure out which export color space to use to be most consistent.
A) Wide Gamut monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
B) Wide Gamut monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
C) Standard monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
D) Standard monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
A) gives the best results and that's what I run myself. No matter the color space that I export (sRGB, aRGB, or my custom calibrated ICC) the images appear to be correct 100%
B) gives mixed results...the hosting site for my photos seems to oversaturate a bit when I view the photos in their preview size which is what my clients see, when I view the original photo in full resolution (this feature disabled for my clients to avoid them downloading full rez copies of images), then the images appears a bit dull (70%). When I try this same scenario using aRGB export, it looks better (90-95%). When I export it using my monitor profile then the photo is spot on 100% however my monitor profile shows the photo incorrectly when viewing it using the standard Windows Vista photo viewer, it appears lighter and less saturated which I guess I expect since it's not color managed.
C) On a standard monitor the photos all look the same regardless of color space export so long as I use a color managed browser such as Firefox.
D) This gives pretty much the same breakdown of results as scenario B above. At the moment, it appears that when I use my custom ICC profile which is the calibration of my monitor...I get the best web results.
However my custom ICC profile gives me the worst local results within my windows viewer and when my clients load the photos on their machines, no doubt they will look just as bad on theirs regardless of which monitor they use. So aRGB seems to be the best choice for output. Anyone else do this? It's significantly better when viewing in IE on both Wide Gamut and Standard LCD's when compared to sRGB.
I would guess that my typical client has a laptop with Windows and they will both view the photos locally and upload them on the web, so it needs to look as close to what it looks like when I'm processing it in LR and Photoshop as possible. I know that a lot of people ask questions about their photos being off because they don't understand that there's a shift between WG and non-WG monitors, but I get that there's a difference...question is which color space export has worked best for others.

I am saying that since images on the internet are with extremely few
exceptions targeted towards sRGB. It is extremely common for those images to
not contain ICC profiles even if they really are sRGB. If they do not
contain ICC profiles in the default mode in Firefox, Firefox (as well as
Safari btw, another color managed browser), will not convert to the monitor
profile but will send the image straight to the monitor. This means that on
a wide gamut display, the colors will look oversaturated. You've no doubt
seen this on your display, but perhaps you've gotten used to it. If you
enable the "1" color management mode, Firefox will translate every image to
the monitor profile. This will make the colors on your display more
realistic and more predictable (since your monitor's very specific
properties no longer interfere and the image's colors are displayed as they
really are) for many sites including many photographic ones. This is most
important on a wide gamut display and not that big of a deal on a standard
monitor, which usually is closer to sRGB.
It seems you are suggesting that for a wide-gamut display it is better to
try using your own monitor's calibration profile on everything out there,
assuming on images posted with a wider gamat it will get you more color
range while there would be nothing lost for images posted in sRGB.
Indeed. The point of color management is to make the specific
characteristics of your monitor not a factor anymore and to make sure that
you see the correct color as described in the working space (almost always
sRGB on the web). This only breaks down when the color to be displayed is
outside of the monitor's gamut. In that case the color will typically get
clipped to the monitor's gamut. The other way around, if your original is in
sRGB and your monitor is closer to adobeRGB, the file's color space is
limiting. For your monitor, you want to make the system (Firefox in this
case) assume that untagged files are in sRGB as that is what the entire
world works in and translate those to the monitor profile. When you
encounter adobeRGB or wider files (extremely rare but does happen), it will
do the right thing and translate from that color space to the monitor
profile.
Wide gamut displays are great but you have to know what you are doing. For
almost everybody, even photographers a standard gamut monitor is often a
better choice. One thing is that you should not use unmanaged browsers on
wide gamut displays as your colors will be completely out of whack even on
calibrated monitors. This limits you to Firefox and Safari. Firefox has the
secret option to enable color management for every image. Safari doesn't
have this. There is one remaining problem, which is flash content on
websites. Flash does not color manage by default and a lot of flash content
will look very garish on your wide gamut display. This includes a lot of
photographer's websites.

Export Color Space, etc?

I'm a couple of days into a trial of Fireworks and I got it
only for two reasons: First to be able to create navigation bars
with popup menus on some of the menu options and second, to more
easily create photo galleries for my web site. (I'm quite
comfortable with PhotoShop and creating web-optimized images.)
Anyway, I've run into a couple of things that have got me
stumped...
If I use FW CS3 to optimize a JPG image for the web (either
from directly within FW or via the Create Web Photo Album command
from within Dreamweaver CS3) the resulting images no longer have a
color space embedded. And I can't find out how to embed one. The
original JPG images were created in PS CS3 and had the sRBG color
space embedded and the colors displayed as expected in a web
browser. The resulting "optimized" images no
longer have a color space embedded and the colors appear quite off.
This might be acceptable with some vector graphics or logos but
it's not acceptable with photgraphs, especially for a photography
web site.
(It's quite well-known, at least in photography circles that
for proper display of the colors, images designed for the web
should be in sRGB with that space embedded, as that is what web
browsers are optimized for. Anything else, including not embedding
a color space results in colors that are "off".)
A related issue is that when using the Create Web Photo Album
from within DW CS3 the resulting files all have a new suffix of
"_jpg" added to the name. Meaning that my
original "name.jpg" gets named
"name_jpg.jpg". I really don't like that, and
can't find how to turn it off.
(I went to a large bookstore to buy a FW book today but they
didn't have any. And the only one they even listed on their
computer is due to be published at the end of February!)
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Eldor - Montreal

quote:
Originally posted by:
Newsgroup User
EldorG wrote:
> As I said, PEBCAK error. But that still leaves me
with the file name 'problem'
> I mentioned... that my images get named from
'name.jpg' to 'name_jpg.jpg'.
> This happens when I use the 'Create Web Photo Album'
from Dreamweaver CS3
> (which in turn calls FW to do the work). Should I
post that in the DW forum,
> or is it a FW thing? Thanks very much! Eldor
Don't name them in FW. Allow them to be exported with the
names they
already have.
Linda Rathgeber [PVII] *Adobe Community Expert-Fireworks*
http://www.projectseven.com
Fireworks Newsgroup:
news://forums.projectseven.com/fireworks/
CSS Newsgroup: news://forums.projectseven.com/css/
http://www.adobe.com/communities/experts/
Linda, I'm
not naming the images in FW. As a matter of fact, I never
even see a FW dialog. If I optimize an image directly from within
FW, there is no problem. But doing so from Dreamweaver (through the
Create Web Photo Album command which seems to call FW to automate
the work) causes the images to be reduntantly renamed. And I don't
see an option anywhere to change this.
As I said, I'm not sure if this is something I should be
asking in the FW forum or the DW forum. But since this option
doesn't even exist in DW until FW is installed and FW is called
from DW to do this, I really don't know where to ask.
How does that FW automation work? Is there a script file or
something somewhere that I might find and modify?
That option in DW not only optimizes a bunch of images, it
creates thumbnails as well, and writes all the stuff into HTML code
to produce a table of the images. So I can't just go to FW and
manually optimize an image.
Regards...
Eldor

Color Space Issue?

This is probably a very simple issue which I'm hoping someone can easily figure out. I process my images to taste in LR4 and then export them as jpgs in the sRGB color space. When I open them in programs like "Windows Picture Viewer" they look just like they do in LR but when I upload it to my website or view it in a program like IrfanView the images look terribly over-saturated. I should also mention that it seems like I need to add quite a bit more saturation than normal to get them looking right in LR. I'm guessing that there is some setting that I have wrong. Can any one help me figure out what it might be?
Thanks! I really appreciate this great forum and all the helpful people on here!
Erik Stensland

Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață wrote:
4) Chrome IS NOT color-managed. Use the "--enable-monitor-profile" command-line switch.
I believe that even with that switch, it ignores image profiles, assuming all images to be sRGB. In other words, it can be persuaded to respect monitor profiles but not image profiles. At best it does half the job!
It used to be that way, but I've not tested it recently.

Photoshop not seeing export color space setting in Lightroom 4

MY LR or PS programs are not acting as expected.
When my Lightroom 4 is set to export to Photoshop in either the sRGB color space or the AdobeRGB color space, and Photoshop is set for the sRGB space, Photoshop gives a color mismatch error in both cases, saying the image is an AdobeRGB embedded image. However, if the color space in PS is set for AdobeRGB, even if the export setting in Lightroom is sRGB, there is no mismatch error.
Apparently, PS sees every image as embedded with AdobeRGB.
I have a Sony NEX6 camera. I have taken pictures in the camera sRGB color space and the AdobeRGB space, which I used for this test. Since I shoot in RAW, this should not matter, so I don’t think it is the issue, and, in fact, I get the same result no matter which color space the camera is in.
If LR export and PS color space are the same, why should there be a mismatch, and why is PS not seeing the sRGB space? Might there be a setting in Lightroom or Photoshop that I am missing?

howdego wrote:
I am, however, trying to decide on the right color space to use, which is how I noticed this problem. I rarely make prints of my photos. I make bluray movies using Proshow Producer. I recently got a new monitor and Samsung LED HDTV, and found that my photo videos did not display right and I am trying to find out why. I found the normal viewing settings of the TV have too much color and sharpness, so I established another group of settings for photos, which helped. However, I am still not satisfied.
These are two separate but related issues.
1) It's almost impossible to get accurate Color and Luminance level rendering inside LR if you don't use a hardware monitor calibrator to adjust your computer monitor.
2) LCD TV's use settings to "enhance" color, brightness, and contrast that is usually very, very inacuuarte. But this is what most non-photography people seem to like so TV manufacturers crank up the "default settings." I also have an older 52" Samsung TV (LN-T5265F) that I've manually adjusted for more accurate color. Try using the 'Movie' mode, which is the most accurate mode and turn the Backlight setting down. Here are the settings I use with my Samsung TV. I assume your Samsung TV's controls are similar:
Setup Screens
HDMI 1 (Cable Box) & Coax (Cable)
HDMI 2 (Panasonic Blu-Ray Player)
PICTURE - 1
Movie
Standard
Dynamic
Movie
Standard
Dynamic
Contrast
82
82
82
82
82
82
Brightness
43
45
45
43
45
45
Sharpness
25
25
35
15
15
25
Color
42
45
45
44
45
45
Tint
77 R
77 R
84 R
77 R
77 R
84 R
Backlight
5
6
7
5
5
6
PICTURE - 2
Color Tone
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Detailed Settings
Black Adjust
Off
NA
NA
Off
NA
NA
Dynamic Contrast
Low
NA
NA
Low
NA
NA
Gamma
-1
NA
NA
-1
NA
NA
Color Space
Auto
NA
NA
Auto
NA
NA
White Balance
R-Offset
13
NA
NA
13
NA
NA
G-Offset
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
B-Offset
17
NA
NA
17
NA
NA
R-Gain
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
G-Gain
12
NA
NA
12
NA
NA
B-Gain
17
NA
NA
17
NA
NA
My Color Control
Pink
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
Green
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
Blue
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
White
15
NA
NA
15
NA
NA
Edge Ehnacement
On
NA
NA
On
NA
NA
xvYCC
Off
NA
NA
Off
NA
NA
Digital NR
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Active Color
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off
Dnie
Off(NA)
Off
Off
Off(NA)
Off
Off
SETUP - Screen 2
Energy Saving
Off
Off
Off
Off
Off
Off
SETUP - Screen 3
HDMI Black Level
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Film Mode
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
Off(NA)
howdego wrote:
So it occurred to me that some colors might be wrong, or too saturated, because I am not seeing them on my monitor as they will appear on the HDTV. I am thinking that since sRGB is my final color space, I would try to do everything in the sRGB space, including setting my monitor to sRGB (I have a Dell 2413 which supports adobeRGB too). I was inn the process of trying this when I found the issue at hand. Might you have any thoughts about this color space choice
If you have a wide-gamut monitor you are better off using it in Adobe RGB mode with a monitor calibrator. But then the monitor will not look correct in non-color managed applications:
http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/srgb_wide_gamut.html
You can circumvent this issue by using your monitor in sRGB mode, but I'd still suggest you use a hardware monitor calibrator. Either way it is imortatnt that you have a proper monitor profile assigned in Windows or OS X Color Management. The monitor manufacturer provides these, but they don't always work well with LR for numerous reasons.
To insure the best image quality you should do all of your editing in PS using 16 bit TIFF with ProPhoto RGB profile format until you are ready to Export. For use with ProShow you can use TIFFs or JPEGs, but use sRGB color profile to avoid any color management issue. JPEGs are fine and a LR Quality higher than 80 (10 in PS) is a waste of disk space for slideshow images.
In short you've got a lot of "variables" between the uncalibrated monitor and out-of-the-box non-adjusted TV. The former requires a good hardware calibrator aad the latter a good "eye" to adjust it.

How to select color space for PDF export in Aperture 3

If you're exporting a book layout as a PDF for printing by a third-party album company, you may need to specify sRGB as the color space for images in the PDF. That's OK if your book is composed of JPEGs that are already in the sRGB color space. But, if your images are RAW, Aperture will export them into PDF using the Adobe RGB color space by default. Sending aRGB images to an sRGB printer will result in flat, unsaturated colors, as I learned the hard way. Apple tech support was unable to tell me how to handle this, but I stumbled on the answer myself. Select the book in the Library pane. Select File > Print Book. In the resulting printer dialogue window, pull down the Color Profile menu (default: No Profile Selected) and select sRGB or whatever target color space you desire. Then, click the PDF button and select Save as PDF. Presto! Your PDF images will now be in the appropriate color space.

Hi again, here some updates.
the issue is still there.
From Aperture, I tried to export to PDF the single images, and they look good (no posterization).
Furthermore, I created a photo book from iPhoto with the same pictures, and exported it to PDF. It also looks fine.
Also opening/exporting to PDF from photoshop does not show any problem.
The problem occurs only if I try to print the book from Aperture (option "print book" -> "save as PDF"), or if I make a book preview before placing the order (I suppose it's the same action).
Is anybody aware of what exactly Aperture does in these particular cases?
Please consider that:
1. my monitor (iMac 24") is hardware calibrated
2. the source pictures are in RAW (so no color profile on them) and (just a couple) in TIFF (16bit, Adobe RGB). I also tried reimporting in the album jpg converted versions, with no better results.
3. OS and Aperture are updated to the latest versions.
This problem is blocking me from placing the order...
Someone could give some help here?
thanks in advance
marco

Photoshop 7.0 - Problem Retaining Original Color Space After Export

I just registered for this forum & would appreciate your input.
I convert Canon RAW files to jpgs & always embed the sRGB color profile & color space in the converted files.. Once I open & edit one of these files in Photoshop 7.0 & save it, the color space is changed to Abobe RGB. I have tried many changes via Edit > Color Settings, but still the same results. I thought that the settings preset "Web Graphics sRGB Color Space" would do the trick - but it doesn't.
If I go to Image > Mode > Convert to Profile & select sRGB for both source space and destination space for an opened jpg file, the sRGB color space is embedded in the saved file - even after reopening in PS, editing, and re-saving. Must I do this for each jpg I edit?
Please educate me how to set PS so all exported files either retain the sRGB color space or have PS embed the sRGB color space upon export.
Thank you.

This is of course, an issue of permissions so there may be no solution.
Absolutely not. Don't jump to false premature conclusions. As Noel said, it solely depends on detecting a previous install/ verifying the install media. Since the latter is out of the question, the first would be way to go, the point being that it merely looks for the respective registry keys in HKEY_Local_Machine\Software\Adobe. Lucky for you, back then nobody cared to encrypt such stuff so it could be hacked in manually. Off hand I'm just not aware of the specific structure for the keys, though, but a little digging might turn up that info. In fact it would be almost identical to the ones for PS 7, which might already linger there just lacking the proper vlaues...
Mylenium

Unsupported Codec - now re-exporting QT - harm to color space?

Hello,
2 years ago, with the help from the responders of this forum, I was able to solve the
problem with several QT movies in an unsupported Codec:
DVC-Pro Codec QT Movies; open each movie in QT 2.5 player and re-export using
"Motion JPEG-B" high quality (to preserve color space). There were some concerns
about Color Space while re-exporting, that's why MJPEG-B was used).
the QT Movie is now editable/playable with QT 6.+ player. (which worked).
Question (1) Since I now have more room on my computer - can I simply open each
one of the old codec QT movies & re-export it using "None" compression - to make it editable/playable in QT 6. player?
Will this effect, or harm the color space - or any other serious issues?
Question (2) What about Deinterlacing? The final delivery will be internet.
ShouldI engage deinterlacing in QT upon re-exporting, or wait until final
compression to MPEG-2, MPEG-4 is performed?
Thanking you for any help or direction you may offer,
Kindest regards,
Luke Wonderly

Thanks Jim....yes, i'm covered on all cc monitors and quite used ot viewing output on color calibrated...as well viewing both on the same platform/monitor....The BIG question is PrPr being able to do color work---and my question is why would it have all the color effects if it did not? But i agree with you....first place to start is can you do proper color work on PrPr AT ALL? no problem to do a quick web video...but can you properly color a for television product---I seem to think NO....i could not get colors in end to match....i can view out on PrPr view my I/O box (Matrox MXO2) and see great colors that i colored the project on to my FSI color corrected monitor....but then when i view the ProRes file back (not on PrPro)...but on it's own with its own codec engine...this is where things go awry and stray from colors i originally put on the images...
But this is a PARAMOUNT subject as Pr is offering coloring....i hate to bring this in, but in FCP i can get accurate colors on my Matrox and same when rendered out to Prores file....Again, i think Apple plays well with apple.....but as you say, there are a great number of varialbes involved in the preferences etc...within PrPr...seems to me AE may be better just by reading about it...but why not both?

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

You're welcome, and thank you for the reply.
2) Yesterday I made the subclips with the In-Out Points and Command-U, the benefit is that I've seen the clip before naming it. Now I'm using markers, it's benefit is that I can write comment and (the later) clip name at once, the drawback is that I have to view to the next shot's beginning before knowing what the shot contains.
But now I found out that I can reconnect my clips independently to the format I converted the master clip to. I reconnected the media to the original AVI file and it worked, too! The more I work with, the more I'm sold on it... - although it doesn't seem to be able to read and use the date information within the DV AVI.
1) Ok, I tried something similar within FCE. Just worked, but the file size still remains. Which codec settings should I use? Is the export to DV in MOV with a quality of 75% acceptable for both file size and quality? Or would be encoding as H.264 with best quality an option for archiving, knowing that I have to convert it back to DV if I (maybe) wan't to use it for editing later? Or anything else?
Thank's in advance again,
André

Color space when exporting from RAW

Hello,
I am a new user of Lightroom and I find color spaces topic a bit confusing so far. My main question is: when exporting a photo, does Lightroom convert to a profile or assign a profile? Because there is no way to choose. I tried to export a photo with 3 different color spaces (sRGB, AdobeRGB and ICC profile from laboratory where I print my photos). After exporting them to JPEG it turned out that all of them look differently on my monitor - does it mean that Lightroom assigns a profile? If it was converting, shouldn't they have the same colours? What is more, after printing them in laboratory, results were completely different than I expected - the photo which had closest colours to what I saw in Lightroom was that in sRGB, but that with ICC of Lab was very different (much colder colours).
Where is the problem, or what aspect do I seem to misunderstand? Do I have wrong settings, should I use DNG to work with photos, should I export to TIFF, or I just have too weak monitor or wrongly calibrated one? Should I calibrate when viewing a picture in Lightroom or with the use of a photo exported to the ICC profile of Lab?
I would like to have a little bit of control over what I'm working on, depending on whether I want to publish it on a website or print. I know that my monitor can be a problem (I have an iiyama with IPS), but surely there has to be any way to make results of my work a bit closer to my expectations.
Just for information, my workflow doesn't require Photoshop, as I rather prefer to use only tools from Lightroom. I hope that my problem doesn't require the use of Photoshop.
I will be really greateful for your help - the general knowledge about colour spaces seems to be unsufficient when it comes to the usage of applications such as Lightroom.
Many thanks,
Marcin

Marcin S wrote:
Thank you for you helpful replies. Now I know a little bit more about it. But still, this is not completely clear to me.
My main question is: when exporting a photo, does Lightroom convert to a profile or assign a profile?
Both.
What you mean by both? How should I interpret it? I cannot choose "convert" or "assign", so how they both work together? What does it mean for me wanting to process photo and print in Lab?
I can only add, that those 3 photos which I exported to JPEG with 3 different colour spaces, they look different when viewing outside of Lightroom, ie. IrfanView. But when importing those JPEGs into Lightroom, differences are extremly slight. Is that because Lightroom operates in ProPhoto, which covers all colour spaces which I used, and other programs work in sRGB and those photos differently?
And the last question for now: will the hardware calibrator help in monitor which is, let's say, medium cost and medium quality? I mainly use it for preparing photos to put them on the website gallery, but would be nice if I could print better ones with a bit of certainty about what I will get from Lab.
Many thanks!!
Marcin
When you export a photo from LR, it converts to the colour space you select (e.g. sRGB) and embeds the appropriate profile in the exported file.
If your monitor were calibrated and profiled, and you view with a colour-managed viewer then images should look pretty much identical no matter which colour space you export in. (W7 Photo viewer is colour managed, the XP equivalent isn't, Mac s/w generally is. IE and Chrome aren't properly colour managed, Firefox is for all images, Safari is for images with embedded profiles. Other viewers vary.) With colour-managed viewers, the only difference should be with very highly saturated colours outside sRGB colour space (and then only if your monitor can display those colours).
LR is colour managed. If the monitor isn't calibrated/profiled then I think LR assumes the monitor has a colour space equivalent to sRGB (which is generally roughly right but won't be accurate). Internally LR uses ProPhoto RGB colour space in develop module, but uses Adobe RGB in Library, and previews are stored in Adobe RGB. However, the colour space LR uses won't explain why other viewers show things differently. It's simply that LR is colour managed (which means it converts to/from the image colour space), and I guess the other viewers you're using aren't; they just throw RGB data at the screen without converting.
Is it worth calibrating and profiling your monitor? Quite possibly. Does the colour and brightness vary with viewing angle as you move your head from side to side? If so, it may be TN technology, and perhaps not worth profiling. If it looks reasonably stable with different viewing angle then probably yes.

Color Space Issue: One Black On Screen But Two Blacks When Printed

I work at a print shop (using Windows 7 and Adobe Acrobat X) and often receive PDFs from customers that were created from PowerPoint. These PowerPoint PDFs often present a printing issue when there are black objects in the file.
On screen, there will be only one consistent shade of black but when the document is printed, it becomes evident that there are actually two different blacks in the file, one darker than the other.
I have done a lot of online research (including these forums) in an attempt to find a complete solution that will always work for these problem-files but have yet to find one.
I know that the issue stems from the fact that PowerPoint uses RGB colors and not CMYK like printers but trying to manually convert color spaces in Adobe Acrobat Pro to be uniform did not help. Whether I convert the entire document's color space to CMYK or just individual objects, I always get the two shades of black when printing. Can anyone explain why this isn't working for me?
I have used the Output Preview tool to determine that the two blacks in the documents are almost always C0-M0-Y0-K100 and C75-M68-Y67-K90. I have read that a custom Preflight fix can be created to seek out all instances of one black and convert it to the other but I did not have success when trying this method. I must be doing something wrong. After running my fix, I always get a message about how no issues are found. If someone can post a step-by-step guide on how to create a Preflight fix that will resolve this issue, I would really appreciate it.
I have uploaded three sample PDFs that I'm currently working with. Please feel free to review and troubleshoot them. My goal is to uncover a solution that I can apply to all three files to get them to print with one consistent black.
https://workspaces.acrobat.com/?w=j3nHuvLCo9XWHliKEpNX-A
Thank you all so much in advance for any insight you can offer.

So sorry about that. I have Published all three files now so they should be accessible to the public.
ColorSpace1.pdf
https://workspaces.acrobat.com/?d=W9QuI9UZSYRmGYnvoaS44w
ColorSpace2.pdf
https://workspaces.acrobat.com/?d=-AQHyT*HMSawAW-swQ9SVA
ColorSpace3.pdf
https://workspaces.acrobat.com/?d=DWuc0Dp-M8SKqnX6mTNnfw
Thank you for the reply!

Trying to Export - Quicktime to DPX - in Linear (R709) Color space NOT LOG

Hello,
I am trying to export an image sequence through compressor from a Linear (R709) color space. When I try to do the dpx image sequence output it changes the files to LOG.
Is there a way to pass the material through without any color space changes?
Thank-you,
Carl

FYI, In the Inspector, and filtes, COLOR tab> Output Color Space: Default for Encoder (CAN NOT BE CHANGED - It is greyed out)

RGB color space in LR3 - does it convert back to sRGB on export?

First off, I've only had LR3 for two days so I am a complete novice. I've been reading my book and just came across the part about RGB color space. I shoot with and use sRGB, which apparently LR will recognize. However, it states that the develop module uses Lightroom RGB. My question is, when I export my edited photos to PSE8 (or to a folder on my desktop to save and email for my daughter's business), does it export them back as sRGB? I know there is a lot of controversy over the whole RGB thing, but after my research on the matter, I have decided that sRGB is the best for my particular situation. I'm just making sure I don't have to check something or convert them back if they don't automatically change out of LightroomRGB.

ColeeLou2,
Some additional thoughts to what has been said already:
I shoot with and use sRGB, which apparently LR will recognize.
The color space you chose on your camera (sRGB, AdobeRGB) only affects the JPEG rendering in your camera. It does not affect the RAW file, as a RAW file is not in any color space. Upon import of a RAW into LR, it will be rendered in a ProPhoto RGB color space with an sRGB tone curve (Jao will correct me if I'm wrong ) for use within LR.
My question is, when I export my edited photos to PSE8 (or to a folder on my desktop to save and email for my daughter's business),
I would suggest using an sRGB color space upon export for external uses (like emailing to your daughter), but use ProPhotoRGB when going into PSE in external edit. This way you will have all the color information possible available in PSE, and PSE will recognize the ProPhotoRGB color space.
Beat Gossweiler
Switzerland

Color Space Issue with Wide-Gamut monitor

Since getting my new (and carefully calibrated) LaCie 324 monitor, I have noticed that RAW (and maybe other) images exported from Lightroom as
sRGB jpegs look washed out and slightly green when viewed outside of Lightroom (IE8, Firefox, ACDSee, windows 7 viewer). It seems not to matter whether the external application horors embedded color space profiles or not, since the unmanaged ones assume sRGB.
When I bring one of these jpegs into PhotoShop it still looks bad, and not what I see in Lightroom. However, if I Assign the Adobe RGB profile to the image, it immediately looks like the Lightroom version. And if I then Convert that image to sRGB and save it, it looks fine everywhere, even on an uncalibrated standard Dell TN LCD display.
Any ideas what I might be seeing here. A friend with the same monitor has the same problem, which is what is leading me to suspect the monitor.
The first image here is converted from Lightroom with sRGB color space. The second was first assigned the Adobe RGB color profile and then converted and saved out again as a jpeg.
Converted Only

I downloaded and ran the program. My version number appears to be 2.1 if I read the numbers right.
I am still at a loss as to why my sRGB jpegs only look right if I assign the wrong profile to them.
Here are the settings in Windows 7 for color management. The highlighted profile is the one just created for my monitor. Display 2 is my main display. Note the "viewing conditions" setting on the advanced tab. Do you think the rendering intent might be at fault here? In Lightroom, should I use Perceptual over Relative or vice versa?

Color space export issues...

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for