Colour management in PS and monitor calibration

I've calibrated my monitors colours with an Eye One Display 2 colorimeter, and for photoshop i've assigned the monitors colour profile it has created to the work area (Edit > Assign Profile).
But for photography i take photos with AdobeRGB colour profile setting on my camera... should i be using this colour profile instead when working on the photos in PS? They look a little washed out. I'm guessing i should keep using my calibrated monitors profile instead?
And when saving photos a jpgs for the web, should i tick the "ICC Profile" box that lists my monitors colour profile when saving? Because i've noticed that now some browsers have started supporting ICC profiles. So in Firefox 4 BETA for instance, if i dont use the ICC Profile setting the colours look washed out on other monitors.
(Note that the ICC Profile setting for jpg is only available in File > Save As... if i go to File > Save for Web & Devices it has Embed Color Profile which is basically the same thing).

Beany3001 wrote:
... after doing this and testing the images on other monitors this does not happen, dont know why it does it on my monitors but as long as the colours are ok on other peoples monitors, and the closest to my displays i can get them, this seems to be the best option.... When opening any sRGB or AdobeRGB images in PS CS5 they always look washed out (like the saturation has been turned down), i can directly open a RAW image taken with my camera that uses AdobeRGB and it will still look washed out.
This only now happens after calibrating my monitor. Before this i could view any sRGB or AdobeRGB and they would look fine, not washed out in any way. I dont know why this happens, but i've seen other people mention this about PS as well after calibrating there monitors with a colorimeter (not sure if it's just with wide gamut displays). Do you have any explanation for this?...
This is not normal and indicates a bad monitor profile. I have a wide gamut monitor too and I had some problems before properly profiling my monitor, after that images look perfect - in fact way better than any sRGB monitors that I've seen. This is especially obvious with sRGB photos from digital cameras because the manufacturers create algorithms that save the captured images with colors using the ideal sRGB color space which can be more accurately displayed on a wider gamut monitor when it is working properly.
Beany3001 wrote.
...I've calibrated my monitors colours with an Eye One Display 2 colorimeter
I'm not an expert with using these devices and I can't tell what could be the reason for generating a wrong color profile - it could be the device itself or wrong settings or probing. When choosing a colorimeter, I searched a lot for feedback and found various links like this one saying that Eye One colorimeters are not very accurate yet with probing wide gamut monitors. But I also read a lot of comments saying that they are fine and some people claim they are better. However only the manufacturer of Spyder 3 claim officially on their web site that it is wide gamut capable, so I got that one and so far it's working fine.
Beany3001 wrote:
... It's why i would have liked to use my monitors profile as it's the only way i can get colours looking properly saturated and not dull...
As I said earlier, by working on an image with a monitor profile, you are in fact turning off the color management and if you don't like the results when the color management is on that indicates that the color management is not set properly and is so wrong that you are better off without it. I think you should start the troubleshooting with properly generating an accurate monitor profile. Unfortunately I'm not a big expert with that as I got my colorimeter only several months ago and also ColorEyes Display Pro which is a profiling software from a different company. I set the calibration and probing settings following the instructions from the tech support of the profiling software and since I liked the results, I never spent time to understand in depth all settings and options.
Beany3001 wrote:....
I've read multiple times that the AdobeRGB colour space can do more colours than sRGB? I thought that only when you save in a limited format like JPG that the amount of colours are the same....
Wider gamut does not necessarily is more colors. When you see those charts plotting gamuts as different 3D volumes or 2D cross sections, this is not the number of colors but saturation. You can have millions of colors on a narrower gamut than, let's say 10 colors with a much wider gamut. Think of the numbers as steps between colors and the gamut as how intensive the saturation can go. The number of colors depends on the bit depth 8 bit, 16 bit integer, 16 bit float, 32 bit float. JPGs are limited to 8 bit but the limit is to the number of colors (shades) not gamut. Check this link - it has jpgs saved with different profiles of various color spaces (gamuts)

Similar Messages

Color Management Confusion-Photoshop and monitors

Ok, so I am asking this question because I am literally at my wits end with this color management stuff. I have become so confused in the past few days that I can’t even think straight. Anyway, I am hoping you all can help me “understand” how it all work. Let me start with some background information (since I know it will probably be asked)
am a photographer, I utilize Lightroom 4 and CS3 (I know its old but I am planning on getting CS6 soon).
put my pictures on the web that I will assume will be viewed on multiple different browsers.
also will be sending my pictures to print at mpix or whcc. I may decide to print my own but haven’t really made that determination at this point.
have a mac book pro that I work from.
Ok, so I need to get a monitor to work with but I am unsure if I should just buy the thunderbolt mac monitor or get a wide gamut monitor. I have heard so many people say that the wide gamut monitors just messed them up. Also, I am bit confused on the nature of monitor profiles and how they work with photoshop and lightroom. I would assume the monitor applies a profile at all times? I also don’t understand the existence of the prophoto and wide gamut profiles for the mac monitors… they clearly are not wide-gamut monitors, so how do these profiles exist for them, and why would they be useful (if you set the profile to prophoto for example, it is all washed out as expected). Are these profiles “assigning” a profile to the color? I am assuming so because if they were converting them to just a standard rgb then you wouldn’t have the faded colors (correct?).
I just am so nervous that I am going to create something that looks great in Lightroom or Photoshop but that looks awful on the browser, or worse, on a different monitor (standard monitor) and I would have no idea that it looked bad. Or, if I send something to a printer only to get a mess back.
Also, please let me know if I correct in this. If I am in photoshop and I have an untagged image (send via a friend), and lets just say it is really a prophoto image (although my friend didn’t tell me) and I say to assign the prophoto profile (upon import to photoshop). If that truly is the correct profile, the image should look correct. Now consider two scenarios from there: 1) I embed that profile in the image, if I upload that to the web (I know to be cautious, you should always use srgb for web), if the person has a color managed browser, the image would properly appear, because the browser would recognize the profile (in this case “prophoto”) and convert it to whatever it needed to be. But, if it was not a color managed browser, I run the risk that the web browser will just assign a profile, which will wash the photo out most likely, correct? Ok… and scenario 2) after I get the image from my friend and assign the prophoto profile (since that is the correct profile the image was actually created in, although it was untagged when it was sent to me), the image will look correct… BUT, is photoshop displaying the prophoto profile, or is it converting to RGB for my viewing, or is my monitor converting it to rgb for my viewing? I guess I just don’t understand how the monitor fits into all of this. You HAVE to use your monitor to see your images, and since most monitors (including my current one are standard gamut) it would make sense that you actually can’t see anything in the prophoto profile, and you are truly looking at an srgb profile since that is all your monitor can display.
Oh ya, and what benefit is the color match rgb? It seems everyone speaks of the srgb, prophoto, and argb.. but never some of the others.. so maybe I am just lost. I would even appreciate a link to some tutorials if you think those would be helpful.
I am seriously confused.. I would really appreciate the help.

I am not surprised you are confused about colour management because its a confusing subject. Luckily you own a Mac so you can get to grips with what the problems that colour management solves using the "colorSync Utility" and you will find this in Applications >> Utilities >> colorSync Utility. If you own a windows computer then I am sorry but you will be out of luck here and you should know better when you buy your next computer!! I am not sure why Apple gave us this application but it is really useful and all will help you understand Color Management.
1. Launch Applications >> Utilities >> ColorSync Utility.
2. You will see a list of "Installed ColorSync Profiles". Choose Adobe RGB 1998 which I hope you have chosen in you camera preferences.
3.You will see a 3D representation of the Adobe 1998 Colour space. This represents all the colors this colour space will hold.
4. Top left hand corner you will see a little arrow pointing down next to "Lab Plot". Click on this and a drop down menu will appear.
Choose "Hold For Comparison"
5. Now somewhere in the "Installed ColorSync Profiles" list you will find the profile for you monitor. Choose this.
6. You will now see a new colour space inside the Adobe 1998 Colour space. If you have a cheap monitor the colour space will be small
inside the Adobe 1998 profile. This means that you monitor cannot show you all the colors that are missing.
7. Now choose a printer profile say, if you use them a profile for an Epson paper or any printer profile you have and you will see another profile in the Adobe 1998 box which shows you the only colors that your printer can print. If you like choose your monitor profile then hold for comparison then the printer profile and it will clearly show the mis match between you monitor and printer.
8. Now choose SRGB and this will show you what colors a person using an average Windows monitor can see, poor people.
So this is the problem, all devises can reproduce only a certain range of colors. The adobe 1998 profile does not show all the colors our eyes can see " choose Generic Lab" profile, then "hold for comparison" then Adobe 1998 and you will see Adobe 1998 is a small profile but is a good average of our collective colour vision.
So how to solve all these missing colour problems. Well if you think of each devise, including you camera as speaking a different language from you monitor and printer then it is easy to understand that you need some sort of translator so that they all know exactly what colour is being talked bout pixel by pixel in an image. This is held in the ICC profile, but an ICC profile has o do more than this.
Say you camera can produce a specific red we will call for demo purposes "001" and your monitor cannot produce it, how do you solve this? Well it is very easy to fool our eyes. Our eyes work by comparison so if the profile maps red "001 to the nearest red that the monitor can show and then proportionally remaps all other reds to fit within the reds the monitor can show us then we actually think we are seeing a full range of reds. The problem comes if we use the wrong profile for this. The red 001 could be re mapped anywhere and could be outside what the monitor can show. Say that happens but the printer can reproduce that red 001. We would see an image on the monitor with not many reds and when we printed it we would be shocked to find reds on the print. Worst, we would see an image on the monitor without reds and would correct for this and end up with a print with heavy reds and would not be able to work out why.
So to solve this we should:
1. use the correct camera profile when we are opening "Raw" files.
2. Make sure you have the correct monitor ICC profile selected in "System Preferences" >> Displays.
3. In photoshop we should make sure that the " Edit >> colour settings " are set to Adobe 1998 for RGB.
4. If you are going to print you own photo in Photoshop go to "View >> Proof Setup >> Custom" and a box will
open. Choose the profile of your printer and paper and choose "Perceptual" for rendering intent and then " OK". If you cannot find
a profile for you printer and paper go to the printer of paper manufactures web site and download the profiles and instal
them.
5. You can now adjust the colors and contrast and photoshop will simulate how the output devise will deal with this. If you
are using an outside printing house, they will supply you with their ICC profile to download so just follow the same procedure and
choose their ICC profile and and do you colour correction.
If you have a cheap monitor you will still not get a 100% result but you will get closer. You really need a monitor that you can calibrate
regularly because generic ICC profiles are just that. They are made from the results of many monitors and so are 90% or worse accurate.
If you want to see a flag ship monitor at work go to http://www.eizo.com/global/support/db/products/software/CG223W#tab02 and go
to the bottom of the page and download the Eizo Coloredge CG223W monitor profile, instal it on your mac then open then ope
Launch Applications >> Utilities >> ColorSync Utility choose Adobe 1998 the hold and compare it with the Eizo Coloredge CG223W
profile. This is not the top of the range Eizo monitors that we use but you will see that this monitor will show most of the missing colour you monitor does not. This is actually a good tip if you are buying a monitor. Download the monitors profile and see how good it really is.
The weak link still is printing. The colors you see in RGB on a back lit RGB screen are very hard to reproduce by CYMK inks on paper. Here you really should have a profile made for your printer and chosen paper. If you don't want the expense of buying a calibrator and doing it yourself, there are on line services that will do this for you.
One final point you must remember. If you are using soft proofing in Photoshop ( "View >> Proof Setup >> Custom" as explained above), when you print you MUST choose in "Colour Handling" "Photoshop Manages Colour" and in the next step when the printing box appears
you will see a drop down box with "Layout" in it. Click on this and choose "Colour Management and choose "Off No Colour Management". If you do not do this Photoshop will manage the colour then the printer will do it again and the print will be a disaster.
This is a starting point really. Colour management is difficult but just try to remember that you need a translator between each step in the process to make it work so you have to make sure the correct profiles are being used by you camera, the program you use for opening the Raw photo files (Please don't use jpegs straight from the camera, but thats another subject), the correct monitor profile and output profile. If you don't check these it is like chinese whispers and your picture will be printed in Double Dutch!!.
Hope that helps. I am on location In Italy for a couple of months so will be unlikely to be able to reply to any questions for a while. Will try to check back and see how you are getting on. Drop me a line at [email protected] if you have any questions. Good luck.
Paul Williams

VISTA color management and monitor calibration

Elements 7.0
VISTA Home Premium SP1
Nvidia 8600
Samsung SyncMaster 213T
Canon XSi
Multiple printers
Since getting new system with Vista, I haven't been able to get a print that looks like my screen. I tried Costco today and everything was much darker than I expected, but the reds were much richer. I read a lot about calibrating my monitor, but it is possible that there is more do it than that? Learning to adjust skin tone etc. in Photoshop, only to have the prints look bad is pretty frustrating.
Is the other option to invest in a quality printer, or go to a real lab instead of Costco?
Please use small words, since I'm not a professional.
Regards,
Michael

Michael, color management is certainly a difficult issue to perfect. My monitor is color calibrated but it doesn't guarantee that the prints will match. With the same image, I get different results from different printers and labs. I get the best results from labs in the local camera/photo shops, and the pricing for enlargements is still on par with like Snapfish or Kodak.
Check this setting in PSE: Edit>Color Settings...>Always Optimize for Printing. I would suggest color calibrating your monitor, then try different labs until you find the best results.

White Balance - Eye Dropper and Monitor Calibration

Does the eye dropper correctly set the white point even if the monitor is not correctly calibrated? I do calibrate monthly with the XRite but I'm not sure that the calibration is perfect.
I use a grey card, and the eye dropper in LR. So even though I calibrate - must the monitor be correctly calibrated for the eye dropper to work?
... and now tell me what monitor you love for photo editing. Thanks

Thanks for this answer,
I am using a Dell LCD monitor and have been happy with the color, but can not get skin tones right in my prints, they look washed out after I do a grey card white balance. So I just ordered a Eizo CG222WBK, now I'll only have myself to blame if my images don't look right
Dan

Color Bars and Monitor Calibration

Hy,
Trying to calibrate my monitors using the FCP internal color bars is completely different from using the camera's color bars...!
What is your experience in that?
I absolutely dislike the image I get on my monitors when I try to calibrate it with the internal Bars. Actually I almost can't get the lower right, light gray stripe come visible. I have to push the brightness to the maximum and the image is terrible.
On the other hand, using a recorded camera's bars, it looks nice.
What's up?
I'm using a PAL sequence by the way.

Luis
Are you saying you are using PAL clour bars to adjust your Mac computer displays?
If you are, then that is wrong
You can only calibrate computer monitors using a computer display profiling system using a probe.
such as:
http://www.gretagmacbeth.com/index/products/productscolor-mgmt-spec/products_cm-for-creatives/productseye-one-display.htm
If you are adjusting a PAL monitor, you should use, preferably a test signal generator, or the bars connected direct from the camera to the monitor
Dont use Final Cut Pro or bars recorded to tape as the test signal, you must iliminate any interference to the signal caused by misaligned electronics.
G

Safari - colour management

Hello!
I've purchased and calibrated my monitor using an X-rite Eye One Display 2.
I'm pretty sure my Safari is not colour managed, as I have turned on colour management in Firefox and when I compare both, the colours look significantly different.
Is there a setting somewhere for Safari to turn colour management on/off?
Thanks.

You could easily just pick another profile for your monitor, but that would be wrong, and it would not solve the problem. The only correct profile for your monitor is the one generated to represent your monitor's behavior and target and you have already done that. If you change your monitor profile to some other profile not related to your monitor, to try and fix Safari, the only result will be to screw up Aperture, Photoshop, and all the other programs that are doing color management correctly.
There are three ways to try and fix the Safari problem.
1. Try re-calibrating but this time set your gamma to 2.2 instead of 1.8 and use the resulting profile. This might actually be enough. I have used my Eye One to calibrate all my Macs to gamma 2.2.
2. Embed profiles in the images you view. If the problem is with images outside of your control, then there is nothing you can do here.
3. Wait for Apple to fix Safari so that it stops the unhelpful behavior of assuming the monitor profile for untagged images.
Safari color management is a subject of intense debate.
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://blogs.smugmug.com/don/2007/02/14/this-is-your-mac-on-drugs/

Colour management on HP 8750.

My prints are much darker and with a strong blue cast than seen on the monitor. I have tried "let photoshop manage colour", "let printer manage colour"; "no colour management". I have just calibrated screen and printer with a Colormunki to try to solve this, and it is no better. What am I missing? Is there something else also managing colour? I have had superb results and I don't know what I've done to alter the settings..
Quietly desperate...
many thanks
johnsl66

Hard Reset – While printer is powered ON, pull the power cord from the printer then from the wall. After 30 seconds reconnect power to wall and printer. This will trigger a ‘dirty power up’ and restore the printer to a known good condition (if it is possible). No user settings are lost with a ‘hard reset’.
This ‘Hard Reset’ is one of the most powerful tools to use when the printer hardware is not functioning properly!
Although I am working on behalf of HP, I am speaking for myself and not for HP.
Love Kudos! If you feel my post has helped you please click the White Kudos! Star just below my name : )
If you feel my answer has fixed your problem please click 'Mark As Solution' and make it easier for others to find help quickly : )
Happy Troubleshooting : )

Colour management in CS6 for Internet

Hi, I am using CS6 but I am having trouble with my colour management for web pages. When I save the CS6 image for web and view it I always have to go back in and reduce hue by -20 to get colours on the web that I see originally in CS6.
Workflow: Windows 7, Capture camera RAW Adobe RGB, in CS6 color settings Adobe RGB (1998), work image in Adobe RGB but if target web I view proof colors internet standard RGB, finally i edit conver to profile sRGB, using Adobe color engine on perceptual intent. I then save for web. When I view the images on the web or microsoft office 2010 the colours are too vivid, I have to go back into CS6 and decrease hue (especially reds) by around -20, to get on the web what I originally saw on CS6.
Any help most welcome. Steve

Agreed.
With a wide-gamut monitor like the Eizo CX240, Firefox is definitely the best browser, with gfx.color_management.mode set to 1, as twenty-one describes. It's the only way of seeing correct colours of untagged photos or graphics (most of which will be sRGB, i.e. quite different from the Eizo's colour space).
But bear in mind that many Windows programs are not colour managed, including Microsoft Office and the Windows desktop. As you found, colours are going to be over-saturated on a wide-gamut monitor unless colour-managed - that is, the monitor has to be correctly profiled/calibrated (as yours is) AND the program displaying the colours has to use colour management.
PS - you didn't mention this, but check if your xrite software is creating "v2" or "v4" profiles. If the software doesn't give that as a choice, then it's almost certainly creating v2 profiles. Some software misbehaves with v4 profiles, and I recommend v2. However, if you are using v4 and get any problems, try v2 just to eliminate that.

A Colour Management tutorial from an amateur

Archiving at the end of a long project I came across a document I assembled at the start when I wanted to teach myself about colour management. I spent several weeks reading, experimenting and putting together these notes, but it all came to nought. To quote from the notes:
…I chose not to use colour management when printing my books on a Xerox iGen3. I converted the InDesign files to PDF with all colour management turned off, and asked the printer to print ‘direct’. The iGen RIP converted RGB images to CMYK, and CMYK images were printed as per the colour numbers. Using certain colour settings for my monitor, and for Photoshop and InDesign, I was able to obtain a very close match between what was on screen and what was on paper without the need for profiles…
I've asked a fair few questions here over the years, and this forum has been a great help, but I rarely offer anything in return. Well, here's a little something that some people might find useful. A mob of information about colour management, collated from various sources with my tuppence worth here and there to make it flow. It was put together before my InDesign days when I used Pages, so forgive the mediocre layout.
Colour Management (450k) can be downloaded here: http://www.mediafire.com/?86edp6742ac6zlv (If Peter Spier is reading this: Peter, that's a hot link now; I've upgraded my Mediafire account so there are no more banners).
If anyone visits here in the future and that link doesn't work (which will happen if I upload a new version), try this one, a link to the folder: http://www.mediafire.com/?an9n0o36nymwv
Please let me know if there are any gross errors in the PDF and I'll fire up Pages and correct them.

geoffseeley, Welcome to the discussion area!
1) amber light keeps flashing but internet works - is this a problem?
I believe that indicates that you do not have wireless encryption enabled. If you enabled wireless encryption, the light should turn green.
3) how does iTunes work through the extreme box? am i supposed to plug my home cinema into the extreme box somehow?
The AirPort Extreme base station (AEBS) has no special features to support video/audio directly. iTunes has nothing to do with the AEBS.
The AirPort Express (AX) has an audio out port for streaming music from iTunes.

Colour Management & Dot Gain

Im looking for clarification on how i should approach colour management settings when my rip compensates for dot gain for the different paper types.
I am sending litho plates out via a pdf based workflow utilising a harlequin rip.
My questions..
If my workflow (harlequin rip) is calibrated to adjust for dot gain depending on different paper types ( FOGRA Coated/Uncoated) should i then just be sending files to it that are not tagged with profiles/colourmanaged to prevent multiple conversions?
Should i colour manage pre-rip and allow for dot gain (2 conversions) or is only 1 or the other necessary?
For example...
1. I am assigning a FOGRA coated profile to my images in photshop
2. Then placing my image in my indesign layout and exporting it to pdf using FOGRA coated settings
3. pdf is then dropped into the workflow
4. pdf is ripped and dot gain allowance is applied
5. Plate is then outputted
Any thoughts please
Andy barrington
www.barringtonprint.com

I'd want to see your InDesign Color Settings. The RIP should have a choice in its calibration methods whether to honor .icc profiles and application settings. So, hypothetically if you feed it a PDF job that includes profiles and honors existing application color setups ( PS, Ai, ID, etc., etc. ) and the RIP is set to honor app color settings and profiles, then no duplication of dot gain adjustment will take place. If the RIP is set to not honoring app color settings and/or profiles, then it will adjust for dot gain. Look into your RIP's calibration and whether or not it honors application color settings and .icc profiles. Should it somehow apply a second round of dot gain adjustments, then deselect dot gain adjustments in your desktop applications. You only need dot gain adjustment done once.

Adobe Bridge colour management problems

It appears that jpeg images, converted from Neffs, are not being displayed correctly in Bridge, V2.1.1.9. They display overexposed and open from Bridge into Photoshop CS3 overexposed (faithfully overexposed to Adobe Bridge's representation) and yet shift clicking, or opening in Photoshop CS3 directly from the file the images display correctly. I have tried purging the cache for one of the offending folders but this has not resolved the issue.
I have also Optioned clicked, on launch, and cleared all prefs - this rectifies the problem but once Adobe Bridge is relaunched the files initially preview correctly but then Bridge decides to amend (I can see this happening) and display overexposed thumbnails once again.
It appears that all Canon jpegs saved from RAW (.CR2) files are okay. All Nikon NEFF files display correctly, as do Tiffs saved from the NEFFS, the error appears to be restricted to jpeg images saved from NEF files.
I am using Leopard MacPro 2.8 quad - all Adobe and Apple software up to date, freshly installed and monitor calibrated - correct monitor profile being used, not hosed, as CS3 is good. I am not running the CS3 suite just Bridge, ACR and CS3.
I didn't suffer from this problem on my previous PowerMac G5 (it recently died hence new MacPro), with the same images, using Tiger, Adobe Bridge and CS3 - could this be one of Leopard's many teething problems?
I have some low res screen grabs to demonstrate the problem but I am not sure if, and how, I can upload them to this forum?

PROBLEM SOLVED, sort of any way.
I figured out my problem and it really has nothing to do with Bridge.
Basically my D300 along with other digital cameras is adding additional information into the RAW format that Bridge and other programs like Apeture and Lightroom ignore. Stuff like D-Lighting, Color settings and other information that can make the picture look a specific way is simply dropped at import when opening in bridge because those certain settings are specific to Nikons RAW NEF files. Canon does the same thing on their RAW files as well.
The reason people see the graphics change is because Bridge and other programs usually use the camera's JPG preview with all tweaks to first pull up the thumbnail image in Bridge. When the user clicks on a thumbnail to view the RAW file info or import it into Photoshop, Bridge interprets the RAW info as it can and opens the file. The extra information that helps the photos look a specific way are simply dropped because Bridge does not know how to apply that information.
So unfortunately for now, I guess I am stuck with Capture NX from Nikon if I really want to see the image as it was taken originally without having to do extra work inside of ACR. And before anyone says it, I know you can build profiles that will import the RAW files the same way every time, but so far I have not been able to tweak the settings where the images look exactly the same to this point. It also looks like Nikons software does a much better job of importing the RAWs with less color noise. Too bad their program is slow and completely crappy to use. Kinda sucks, but I guess that is the name of the game right now.
Laters,
Joel

Deleted Colour Setting in Bridge, but Photoshop wants to Colour Manage every time I open a file.

I installed a Colour Setting in Bridge as per a printer's instructions. After I did this, every time I open something in Ps, It asks if it can colour manage the file and gives a few options. I deleted a Creative Suite Colour Setting from finder Bridge, but Photoshop still generates the popup every time. This interferes with Scripts in Ps and it's very annoying.

Deleting something in Bridge certainly won't help.
Change the color settings in Photoshop...

Mapping and Monitoring all the User and the Field exits

Hello Dears,
Are possible, with the Solution Manager to map and monitor all the user and the field exists existing in my ECC6 Productivity Environment?
Anyone has some documentation?
Regards to all.
FS.

Hello Gurus,
Someone has any information about this question?
Regards to all.
FS.

"monitor calibration software" "LCD color management and conversion" is defective.

My photoshop is not working and A message pops up saying to rerun monitor calibration software. How do I do this?

Which calibration tool are you using? With my Spyder4Elite it's just about running a recalibration with its software...

How do I fix colour picker to work across different colour-managed monitors?

Hey everyone!
I'm assuming this problem I'm having stems from having colour-calibrated monitors, but let me know if I'm wrong!
To preface, this is the setup I have:
Windows 7
3 monitors as follows, all have individual colour profiles calibrated using the Spyder 3
Cintiq 12WX
Dell U2410
Dell 2409WFP
Photoshop CS6 - Proofed with Monitor RGB, and tested with colour-managed and non-colour-managed documents
I usually do most of my work on the Cintiq 12WX, but pull the photoshop window to my main monitor to do large previews and some corrections. I noticed that the colour picker wouldn't pick colours consistently depending on the monitor the Photoshop window is on.
Here are some video examples:
This is how the colour picker works on my Dell U2410: http://screencast.com/t/lVevxk5Ihk
This is how it works on my Cintiq 12WX: http://screencast.com/t/tdREx4Xyhw9
Main Question
I know the Cintiq's video capture makes the picture look more saturated than the Dell's, but it actually looks fine physically, which is okay. But notice how the Cintiq's colour picker doesn't pick a matching colour. It was actually happening the opposite way for a while (Dell was off, Cintiq was fine), but it magically swapped while I was trying to figure out what was going on. Anyone know what's going on, and how I might fix it?
Thanks for *any* help!
Semi-related Question regarding Colour Management
Colour management has always been the elephant-in-the-room for me when I first tried to calibrate my monitors with a Spyder colourimeter years ago. My monitors looked great, but Photoshop's colours became unpredictable and I decided to abandon the idea of calibrating my monitors for years until recently. I decided to give it another chance and follow some tutorials and articles in an attempt to keep my colours consistent across Photoshop and web browsers, at least. I've been proofing against monitor colour and exporting for web without an attached profile to keep pictures looking good on web browsers. However, pictures exported as such will look horrible when uploaded to Facebook. Uploading pictures with an attached colour profile makes it look good on Facebook. This has forced me to export 2 versions of a picture, one with an attached colour profile and one without, each time I want to share it across different platform. Is there no way to fix this issue?
Pictures viewed in Windows Photo Viewer are also off-colour, but I think that's because it's not colour managed... but that's a lesser concern.

I think I've figured out the colour management stuff in the secondary question, but the weird eyedropper issue is still happening. Could just be a quirk from working on things across multiple monitors, but I'm hoping someone might know if this is a bug/artifact.
Going to lay out what I inferred from my experiments regarding colour management in case other noobs like me run into the same frustrations as I did. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - the following are all based on observation.
General Explanation
A major source of my problems stem from my erroneous assumption that all browsers will use sRGB when rendering images. Apparently, most popular browsers today are colour-managed, and will use an image's embedded colour profile if it exists, and the monitor's colour profile if it doesn't. This was all well and good before I calibrated my monitors, because the profile attached to them by default were either sRGB or a monitor default that's close to it. While you can never guarantee consistency on other people's monitors, you can catch most cases by embedding a colour profile - even if it is sRGB. This forces colour-managed browsers to use sRGB to render your image, while non-colour-managed browsers will simply default to sRGB. sRGB seems to be the profile used by Windows Photo Viewer too, so images saved in other wider gamut colour spaces will look relatively drab when viewed in WPV versus a colour-managed browser.
Another key to figuring all this out was understanding how Profile Assignment and Conversion work, and the somewhat-related soft-proofing feature. Under Edit, you are given the option to either assign a colour profile to the image, or convert the image to another colour profile. Converting an image to a colour profile will replace the colour profile and perform colour compensations so that the image will look as physically close to the original as possible. Assigning a profile only replaces the colour profile but performs no compensations. The latter is simulated when soft-proofing (View > Proof Colors or ctrl/cmd-Y). I had followed bad advice and made the mistake of setting up my proofing to Monitor Color because this made images edited in Photoshop look identical when the same image is viewed in the browser, which was rendering my images with the Monitor's colour profile, which in turn stemmed from yet another bad advice I got against embedding profiles . This should formally answer Lundberg's bewilderment over my mention of soft-proofing against Monitor Colour.
Conclusion and Typical Workflow (aka TL;DR)
To begin, these are the settings I use:
Color Settings: I leave it default at North American General Purpose 2, but probably switch from sRGB to AdobeRGB or ProPhoto RGB so I can play in a wider gamut.
Proof Setup: I don't really care about this anymore because I do not soft-proof (ctrl/cmd-Y) in this new workflow.
Let's assume that I have a bunch of photographs I want to post online. RAWs usually come down in the AdobeRGB colour space - a nice, wide gamut that I'll keep while editing. Once I've made my edits, I save the source PSD to prep for export for web.
To export to web, I first Convert to the sRGB profile by going to Edit > Convert to Profile. I select sRGB as the destination space, and change the Intent to either Perceptual or Relative Colorimetric, depending on what looks best to me. This will convert the image to the sRGB colour space while trying to keep the colours as close to the original as possible, although some shift may occur to compensate for the narrower gamut. Next, go to Save for Web. The settings you'll use:
Embed Color Profile CHECKED
Convert to sRGB UNCHECKED (really doesn't matter since you're already in the sRGB colour space)
and Preview set to Internet Standard RGB (this is of no consequence - but it will give a preview of what the image will look like in the sRGB space)
That's it! While there might be a slight shift in colour when you converted from AdobeRGB to sRGB, everything from then on should stay consistent from Photoshop to the browser
Edit: Of course, if you'd like people to view your photos in glorious wide gamut in their colour-managed browsers, you can skip the conversion to sRGB and keep them in AdobeRGB. When Saving for Web, simply remember to Embed the Color Profile, DO NOT convert to sRGB, and set Preview to "Use Document Profile" to see what the image would look like when drawn with the embedded color profile

Colour management in PS and monitor calibration

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for