Colour Space / Workflow question.

Hi,
I have been seconded to take photos at an up and coming family wedding.
I will be using a Canon 300D Digital SLR, shooting in RAW, and performing post processing on a Mac using Aperture (yet to be purchased).
I have established that my print lab works in the Adobe 1998 colour space. So, please let me know if I have the this right:
As long as my screen is calibrated, and I work in and save my images as Adobe 1998, my prints should accurately resemble what was present on my screen?
Is there a preference for which format (jpg, tiff, etc.) the images should be saved in for ensuring accurate print output from a pro lab ? They charge per print for RAW conversion, so I'm looking at saving finals as TIFF as the logical alternative.
Also - can someone tell me if I should necessarily set the camera parameters to any particular colour space ? On the Canon, I have the option to set Adobe RGB, or a number of Canon pre-sets, or in fact set my own pre-sets for tone, colour saturation etc. Does this even matter if I'm shooting in RAW ?
Any other advice on how I can ensure consistency in this workflow for this and future projects ?
Sorry for all the questions, but many thanks,
Paul
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.7) 23" Cinema Display

I took your advice and sought more info from my lab.
They have provided me with a calibration image on CD
as well as a print of the same to do some side by
side comarison with my monitor. They also provided a
colour settings file for Photoshop. Armed with all of
this I seem to be getting closer to understanding the
necessary adjustments (although I temporarily
confused things by introducing my home printer into
the equation, until I realised that this thing also
has it's own colour settings).
To me, it sounds like the color settings file for Photoshop is most likely the color profile data I was talking about - does it end in .icc? What are the instructions for installation?
After you install it you can check the "Proofing Profile" dropdown in Aperture to see if you see anything like it - you'll need to restart Aperture after you install the icc profile (I think).
You can import the image from teh CD into Aperture and try using the proofing with the color profile sent to see how close it looks.
Basically the idea of the proofing and the profile is that by turning on on-screen proofng, you are taking the colors you have and seeing how the smaller range of color availaible in the printer will reflect what you have.. this gives you the ability to alter tones until the image you have better fits into the range of colors the printer can produce.
I haven't purchased Aperture yet, but I presume there
will be a way to invoke settings similar to the
colour settings in Photoshop so that what I'm seeing
in Aperture will be consistent ?
Yes, sorry for the above then which will be of little use until you get Aperture - basically there is a "Proofing Profile" dropdown and a command to enable or disable "Onscreen Proofing" (which is just like CS2's "Proof Colors").
Aperture makes use of any color profile defined in the system, so hopefully the installation instructions are for general OS X color profile installation. If it's an icc file you can install it for use with all of OS X.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what you're saying
it actually makes no difference what parameters I
specify in my camera if I'm shooting in RAW ? This is
good to know, as the Adobe RGB setting in the Canon
is actually quite 'washed out' - and I'd prefer to
keep it in one of the sRGB settings for my 'snaphot /
home printing' needs wheh shooting jpegs. So,
provided I export in Aperture to Adobe RGB (my lab's
preference) and work with a calibrated screen I
should be okay ?
Yes, all true. I just want to make sure to note that the choice of color profile does make a difference shooting JPG as it will affect the colors that are defined in the file (and the viewing of them in a browser), but from your comment above it seems you understood that aspect.
I calibrated my current monitor (using software only
at this stage). Does it particulary matter which
colour space I choose to start from, if I'm modifying
brightness, gamma, temperature etc. to save as a
custom profile ?
I'm not sure here what you mean by "color space you choose to start from".
Also for profiling even a cheap device like the Huey would probably be a lot better than the software profiling - I went that route at first as well but the hardware stuff is worth it.
One last, slightly dumb, question. Are "Adobe RGB
1998" and "Adobe RGB" the same thing ?
Yep, pretty much the same thing by slightly different names.

Similar Messages

Pixma Pro 100 Colour Space Questions

Hi
I Have a few questions related to Printing from lightroom I am new to this so bare with me.
1) I have a canon 7D I shoot in Raw 12-14 bit ? and most of my processing is done within lightroom so no need to export to photoshop however if i was to would this export as a 16bit file tiff or Jpeg ? If so if I was to after post processing in photoshop then back into lightroom this would only allow me to print in tiff or jpeg is this correct as a psd file/jpeg ?.
2) As I only edit in lightroom I can print directly in CR2 Raw format 12-14bit by using the canon print studio pro plugin ? or is this exported to the translator as a 16bit file ? and then use the paper manufactures ICC profile i.e (canon paper) for best results do I lose colour print quality by printing from Raw 12-14 bit rather than 16bit tiff/jpeg.
3) By using the Paper Manufactures ICC Profiles will the original raw file 12-14bit from 7Dcamera sRGB be translated to the printer by default from lightroom or is the colour space not needed as I havent converted to 16 Bit in post processing?
3) I havent had my monitor calibrated yet but intend to do so in the future, but until then I see no point in messing around with pro mode or sRGB or Adobe RGB or Pro photoRGB.
4) If I use lightrooms canon print studio pro pluggin is the colour space automatically translated from the settings in my camera or do I need to enable this in lightroom first ?.
5) I use a Mac running yosemite 10.10 and would like to know more about ICC profiles where to find the manufactures ICC Profiles how to download and where to store can you recommend a common website for learning how to do this on a mac ?.
6) As you can see I just want to print the best images from camera to printer without to much science involved however I am willing to learn but get confused with the different workspace post production softwares menu's for best results which i would prosume until i get my monitor calibrated proffesionally would be to print from Raw with the Manufactures ICC Profiles ?.
7) Are colour space and calibration settings all about printing what you have on the screen or is it mainly for extra colour depth in the print ?.
I can self calibrate my monitor to adobe RGB and have my camera shoot on adobe RGB -calibration with software but have been told i need colour monitoring devices correct ? if I was to do this and still just used the ICC paper profiles would the prints be any better ?.
My first prints were excellent very similar to what I see on the screen anyway but I checked lightrooms settings and these are on Pro photo RGB for external editing and is this the colour space for print studio pluggin also or is it just native Raw sRGB if I change the settings it says I will lose the maxium potential colour space.
sorry for the influx of questions :-)
Thomas
Solved!
Go to Solution.

You can not set the printer to match the monitor. You must set the monitor to match the printer. But the printer is already calibrated by the factory.
First, you must not let the printer set anything. Turn off every bit off control it has. You can do this with the Canon My Printer under the Printer Settings tab. Do you know how? I will guess, yes, for now but if you don't get back to me.
Second, you need to have your photo editor (like Photoshop or Lightroom) handle all the print settings and color matching. You know how to do this? I prefer Photoshop and I use AdobeRGB color space.
And lastly, it is essential you get some settings on your monitor that somewhat matches what the printer is printing. Your printer may be doing exactly what you are telling it to do and you have no idea it is, because your monitor is so far off. If you don't do this step, you can forget the other steps. However, there are only a few things that you need to be concerned with. You don't need any fancy extra add-on to do this. No additional software or gadgets, etc. No monkeys, no spiders, nothing!
Most people set their monitors too bright.
You must get the gray-scale very close. You need to get the brightness very close and you need the contrast very close.
After you do these things you can make adjustments to your prints by just looking at your screen. Because you know the monitor and printer are on the same level. One more point, you can NOT get a printer to print every color exactly the way you see it. It isn't possible as all colors and adjustments effect all others. My goal is to get the skin tones right. That is what people notice most. Remember you are dealing with two different disciplines here. One is colored light and the other is colored dyes. They are not the same thing.
For instance, I know my Pro-100 tends to print slightly darker than what I see on the monitor (typical). So, I automatically know to set it's prints 1/2 to one stop brighter in Photoshop, in my case. It also prints with a slightly warn tone. Most of the time, with portraits especially, this if OK but sometimes it is not. In that case I adjust the "temp" setting slightly cooler in PS.
All the Canon photo printers I have ever seen have this warm/magenta cast. Canon engineers must prefer this look. It can not be changed. You need to "fix" it in post.
Make sure you have the correct ICC profiles and you are using Canon brand ink and paper until you get good with the printer. Very, very important, otherwise you don't know if the printer is doing exactly what you are telling it to or not.
Important is, use the USB connection until everything is right. You are just adding another issue when you try to set up the printing and the wireless all at the same time. Just like using Canon branded products until it is a go. Use a real printer USB cable. Not just any old USB cable. Get everything right before you explore.
Good luck.
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

Which colour space for camera and LR

Thanks for the answers to my last post about sharpening and workflow.
My next question is about colour spaces. I use a Nikon D200 which lets me choose from sRGB or AdobeRGB...LR obviously has these plus ProPhoto RGB. I use a MacBook Pro and an HP deskjet printer (5850)...I bought this before I bought the camera, and although it is very good, when I eventually change it I will go for a better quality printer.
I AM NOT a pro photographer or photo-editor by any means, but I do want my pics to look the best they can. Can I get some advice please on the pros and cons of the colour spaces?
Cheers,
Nige

>sRGB should be good enough, but it's also good to hear you also shoot raw ... afterall, sRGB contains all of the color in most photographic images.
Actually sRGB encodes only about 90% of colors present in nature. adobeRGB about 97%. prophotoRGB a perfect 100%. Check this page for more info than you'd ever need: http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?ColorCheckerRGB.html . That said, usually, because of the color management problem, stick to sRGB for exports that are consumed by other people.
>So..Michael...you said 'better inkjet printing'...I assume you mean a professional print lab or high level 'home' inkjet, rather than an average home printer like I have (perhaps one day!).
There are two answers to this. They might surprise you. Concerning home printing. Even the cheapest inkjets nowadays produce color outside of sRGB and even adobeRGB. You should print to these printers directly from Lightroom using actual color profiles meant for the printers and the paper you are using. Usually those are supplied with the drivers. This will give by far the best results and will give the deepest most saturated colors. This answer does not change when printing to even better printers. In fact, almost every current inkjet printer can now print colors that no display can actually show.
Second concerning lab prints. Be very very careful with this. Most labs, even the pro ones, do not color manage at all and their photo printers are tuned to approximate sRGB. Simply send them sRGB and you'll be fine. Some labs offer actual profiles that you can convert your images to in advance. (see http://lagemaat.blogspot.com/2008/05/great-prints-from-labs.html for more info). This gives slightly better prints and will reproduce colors not in sRGB ( and not even in adobeRGB: http://lagemaat.blogspot.com/2007/11/relevant-example-for-pprgb-vs-adobergb.html ). Due to variability in displays, you might even be able to see those colors on screen if you calibrate correctly. Some of the better labs might accept files in other profiles than sRGB or a lab specific profile. They will then do the conversion for you or have a color managed print workflow if they use inkjets. Make sure they know what they are doing which you usually can find out after talking for a few seconds.

Sharpening export workflow question

I have a sharpening workflow question. Say I have pictures from a portrait session I just finished. I have to send 10 pictures the client ordered to a print lab and I also will make some small facebook sized pictures and upload them to my business facebook page. The level of sharpening needed for large prints (I upload to print lab as RGB JPEGS) and sharpening needed for the very small sRGB facebook-sized pictures is different. In Lightroom I have the option to set the sharpening on export and have a bunch of presets that alter the export size, color space, sharpening, etc(WHCC print lab, facebook, Client CD, etc). I don't see how to do that in Aperture. I see they have the option if you have a printer, but not on normal export.
For those of you that have to export batches of pictures in multiple different sizes (with different levels of sharpening), what is your workflow? I could use some photoshop droplets/actions after Aperture export but I was hoping there was a way to avoid the extra step. Am I overlooking an export feature? The BorderFX plug-in looks like the only other option.
Thank you in advance for time and help!
Scott

Frank Scallo Jr wrote:
The thing is guys - Once a file is sized down it WILL lose sharpening - what we are doing is sharpening the full size RAW file or rather what the full size output would be like. Once we export a version sized down it will lose some of the 'bite'. LR has sharpening options on 'output' which is not only smart but a necessity. Adobe realizes that output for screen needs another sharpen. Apple either doesn't know or didn't bother. It makes ANY output for screen less than best.
Bear in mind that there seem to be two separate issues going on here - sharpening adjustments not being applied on export, and resizing.
As far as resizing is concerned, Aperture appears to use something roughly equivalent to Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper setting. Because of this I've never had much problem with Aperture's exports when used for the web, but obviously everyone's taste for sharpening differs which is why an option for output sharpening would be good.
Sharpening adjustments not being applied on export is a separate issue and should be reported via the feedback form ASAP by everyone who is experiencing the bug.
Now printing is another animal - I wouldn't print directly from RAW in aperture either if I'm printing small. Again, LR beats Aperture here as well since they include output sharpening for print.
Aperture has had output sharpening for printing since 2.0 came out (unless it in was 1.5). In A3 you need to turn on 'More Options' and scroll down, I can't remember where it is in A2. I don't know how effective it is as I print via a lab, but it's there and it's been there for a long time...
Ian

Help problem with workspace e.g. colour space!

Hi everyone, made a bit of a mistake...I completed a whole short project with alot of shots from after effects. However I did not select a workspace, so for a long time now I have been going mad trying to work out why the project wasn't coming up to scratch after I exported it. The colours were becoming way to saturated, and darker.
Now I have realized that its because of the workspace, but now if I select a preset the whole scene will change. This is especially apparent with one shot which I have done with a 3D camera, and lighting. What ever colour space I select effect how the image looks, either it will be too dark, to light or too saturated. I am working in HDV, so the most obvious colour space to use is the one for that. However the image becomes low in contrast, and due to the nature of many differnt items in one shot, they are all effected differently...
Is there any easy way I can export the video with no colour space, without the colours changing in the render? Or is there a way I can use the presets without effecting what I have already done? With no colour space selected, what are the colour settings? Many thanks.

Is there any easy way I can export the video with no colour space,
without the colours changing in the render? Or is there a way I can
use the presets without effecting what I have already done? With no
colour space selected, what are the colour settings? Many thanks.
That's a complicated question, Will. Many people turn off Color Management (in applications tha traditionally had Color Management, I mean) because they hope that turning it off means avoiding color management. It probably means bad color management
But that's a long subject. There's also room for opinion.
The very, very short answer could be: if the Project Working Space is the one you should use for your target medium (say, HDTV REC.709), and you make sure source files are intepreted correctly (HDV files should automatically show an embedded profile, but you can manually assign an HDTV. REC 709 Input profile if they don't.), then color rendering should behave even better than the generic RGB space used when there's no Project Working Space assigned (CM off).
Two things are true, though. One is that turning on Color Management if you're not familiar with what you're doing could do more harm than good (there's a very good white paper on Color Management available from Adobe).
For example:
Do not use an output profile in the Render Queue unless you know why you are doing it.
Do not use display management/device simulation if your computer monitor is not calibrated.
Do not linerize the project or enable the option to blend using 1.0 gamma unless you know what you're doing.
And the other, that people have been using AE without CM (it debuted in CS3) without getting color or luminance shifts. If you see very noticeable shifts, it probably is because of something else (or bad use of CM).
An imporant question - the color shifts you are seeing, are these evident in the Comp panel as soon as you assign a project working space (like HDTV. REC 709) or do they appear later in the rendered file? Because changes introduced by the project space should be immediately noticeable in the Comp panel. If they appear in the rendered file only, then it's most likely something else (the rendering options, the format/codec you're exporting to, etc).

Which colour space for different displays

Hi Everyone,
This might be a long winded question so please bear with me.
I have a pc with a wide gammut monitor which displays 94% adobe rgb and 100% srgb.
I have just purchased a surface pro 3 which I've just calibrated and it displays 74% adobe rgb and 98% srgb.
I want to use the same lightroom catalogue for both, likewise with photoshop.
I also will be uploading to flickr, Facebook and behance, and also printing.
My question is, what should I do in terms of setting the colour space?
Thanks
Stuart

OK, then you should be all set and ready to go. Just work in Adobe RGB throughout.
And yes, for web you need to convert to sRGB. But again, you must use a web browser with full color management, or it will not display correctly on a wide gamut display. I just have to stress this, because few browsers get it right. On Mac Safari is good, but on Windows the only option is Firefox. Other browsers may display correctly if the image has an embedded profile, but lots of sites strip the profile, and in that case it will not be color managed by the browser and appear oversaturated.
Firefox can be configured to assign sRGB to any untagged material, allowing the color management chain to operate so that it appears correctly on wide gamut displays. It is the only browser that can be configured this way, which is an absolute requirement.
Internet Explorer gets nothing right and is completely useless with wide gamut. Just ignore it.

FCP vs Media 100 Colour Space

I have a client who will not digitise material into FCP because he says that the colour space in his Media 100 system is far superior.
He is editing DV material via firewire to FCP and component analogue to Media 100, (yes I know the perils of going in via analogue from DV to a DV codec... but he insists...)
DV vs analogue arguments aside, is the colour space in Media 100 superior?
Actually, what is colour space? I get the concept, (just,) in Photoshop but is there a difference for editing systems.
I was once told that the DV encoding system was better in Avids than in FCP, but I'm unsure of the quality of my source information... So now I'm wondering if there is a difference on all edit systems.
Finally, if there is / isn't a difference in the DV codec, does it make a difference for uncompressed material.
Many thanks,
LEE

Here are some things to be aware of:
Media 100 picture size is either 640 x 480 or 720 x 486. DV picture size is 720 x 480. Those numbers don't convert easily. There will be jittery motions during pans and when people move. The only way to combat this is to make FCP use the D1 picture size of 720 x 486. My experience is this never looks good.
Everything that will be recompressed will have to go through the P6000 board of the Media 100. This takes FOREVER! It takes me 5 hours to encode a 1 hour DVD on my Media 100, which has 2 1GHz processors. My 700 MHz iMac at home encodes a 1 hour DVD in less time. The P6000 hardware slows encoding to other formats way down.
There is a difference from one codec to the next. But capturing in one Codec 1 and converting to Codec 2 to try to make up for poor quality of Codec 2 will not help. Codec 2's quality problems will still be there. It's the nature of Codec 2. Graeme is right in saying that it will ruin picture quality. On top of Codec 2's problems, you're adding a generation. It's like transferring from DV to Beta, and then recording Beta to VHS because the Beta quality is better than VHS, even when your final output is intended to be VHS. It makes more sense to go DV to VHS in the first place.
Unless you intend to edit on Media 100, there is no point in digitizing to it. Save the hassle, the time, the money, and the quality by keeping everything native DV. Have your client read these posts if he still won't budge. We are experienced in this field.
By the way, before anyone says anything about me comparing DV to VHS, that is not my intention. I threw obvious formats out there to show workflow orders and to give an analogy. DV is a very good codec. I will tell you that I like M100 better, but DV is not that far behind. I use DV at home, and I am very happy with the results. In fact, I was debating between M100 and FCP at home for my side business of wedding videos, and have decided to go the FCP route due to quality and cost efficiency. DV is not VHS quality. It is far beyond VHS. DV is far beyond DVD quality. I feel DV is above even Beta SP.

Working Colour Space and sRGB

Only partially related to CR, I'm still unclear about using different colour spaces in my workflow, as a semi-pro photographer producing images for the internet, projector, and for home printing.
I found this topic in the archive:
Klaas Visser, "ProPhoto vs sRGB" #1, 15 Nov 2006 4:36 pm
and was still left puzzled.
I read Bruce/Jeff's book a year ago, and took in the recommendation to use ProPhotoRGB as the target colour space, but am still not clear WHY, and if it is relevant to a workflow which results in a reduced sRGB jpeg, or an A3/A4-sized print on a SOHO 6-colour injet printer. Does CR work best in ProPhoto?
Recent conversations have led me to believe that there is little point starting with a ProPhoto colour space if the end medium uses a much smaller gamut, like a calibrated monitor, projector, or domestic inkjet printer. Not only that, but the colour space conversion process will actually degrade the image unnecessarily. I'm told that it's better to start with the final colour space and avoid conversions. One friend went to great lengths to explain to me that a larger gamut with the same bit depth had "bigger gaps" between colours and therefore less accurate colour resolution.
Well, the theory in both camps seems sound, so I'm left in confusion. I could spend many hours (and money) on doing test conversions and prints, and examine fine details with a large magnifying glass, but I was hoping: could somebody put me out of my misery with a logical explanation of best practices?

> Recent conversations have led me to believe that there is little point starting with a ProPhoto colour space if the end medium uses a much smaller gamut ...
You don't sound that confused -- you simply need to decide on what your target color space (CS) gamut should be. You're correct in noting that color gamut conversions are somewhat destrustive, but there nothing wrong with minimizing them, and restricting them for going from large to small gamuts only.
A large CS gamut (PpRGB) is capable of all the color from your camera (depending on your camera), but like your friend implies most probably sould be editted in highbit depth (16bits). This CS is useful for archiving your images, or for aggressive tonal adjustments. (... although your images are 'really' archived as raw data, and ACR "undestructively" modified tonal values before exporting to Photoshop).
I find little utility in exporting to small CS gamuts (eg, sRGB), unless the image is intended for a small gamut (monitors in general - eg, web browser presentations, and/or printers that can only relate to sRGB).
In between are intermediate CS gamuts (eg, AdobeRGB), which are quite capable of small tonal adjustments with 8bit depth, for which the target gamuts are usually better printer technologies.
my CA$0.02 :)

RED Workflow questions with Mac Pro (including third party plugins)

Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
Editing all footage off 96TB Raid 6 mini-sas server (getting about 1100mbs read/write rate according to AJA system test) which is faster than any Thunderbolt/TB2 drive array I have.
Media I work with is footage from the RED Epic (normally 5K) as well as DSLR footage from the 5d.
Software:
-PrPro CC 2014 (8.1)
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
My question(s) pertains to RED post-pro workflow in combination with third party plug-ins and the different approaches to make it more efficient.
Right now, majority of the clients need a 1080p HD master, and they are generally anywhere from 2-8 minutes (usually). So my sequence settings are as follows:
Video:
Editing Mode: RED Cinema
Size: 1920 x 1080
Audio: 48Hz
Video Previews
Preview File Format: I-Frame Only MPEG
Codec: MPEG I-Frame
1920x1080
Maximum Bit Depth unchecked
Maximum Render Quality unchecked
Composite in Linear Color checked
Export Settings
H.264
1920x1080
VBR 1 pass
Target Bitrate 12mbs
Max bitrate 12mbs
Maximum render quality/depth/previews unchecked
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
Would using offline editing help at all?
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
Is there anyway to improve export settings when using an array of filters?
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?

Hi This Is Ironclad,
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
The biggest issue is that most people have is that updating OS X causes certain folders to be set to Read Only. See this blog post: Premiere Pro CC, CC 2014, or 2014.1 freezing on startup or crashing while working (Mac OS X 10.9, and later).
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
It's a nice base system. How about an additional speedy disk for media cache files. You also did not mention which version of OS X you are running.
thisisironclad wrote:
Software:
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
The Red Giant website does not indicate that this software is yet updated to work with Premiere Pro CC 2014.1 (8.1). Proceed with caution here.
thisisironclad wrote:
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
I would not use this plug-in until you get the OK from the manufacturer.
thisisironclad wrote:
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
Again, I suspect your plug-in.
Keep in mind that exports are largely CPU based but you can make sure that GPU acceleration is enabled for AME at the bottom of the Queue panel.
thisisironclad wrote:
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
It's OK.
thisisironclad wrote:
Would using offline editing help at all?
No need when you should be able to edit natively. Relinking might also be an issue.
thisisironclad wrote:
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
That's one way you can do it with the benefit of being more organized.
thisisironclad wrote:
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
I do. Of course, that's a preference.
thisisironclad wrote:
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Try the following:
Sign out from Creative Cloud, restart Premiere Pro, then sign in
Update any GPU drivers
Trash preferences
Ensure Adobe preference files are set to read/write(Hopefully you checked this out already)
Delete media cache
Remove plug-ins
If you have AMD GPUs, make sure CUDA is not installed
Repair permissions
Disconnect any third party hardware
If you have a CUDA GPU, ensure that the Mercury Playback Engine is set to CUDA, not OpenCLYou have AMD GPUs.
Disable App Nap
Reboot
thisisironclad wrote:
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?
I really shouldn't answer that question.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

Elements 10, Camera Raw 6.7: no colour space choices

Newbie alert!
I'm no expert on Photoshop or Camera Raw, but I read everywhere that I should be able to change the colour space of the Camera Raw output. At the moment I can only get the default which is sRGB but I want Adobe.
There's a little camera gizmo titled "Camera Calibration" underneath the histogram, but it's not there.
I've read that there should be some control in the middle beneath the preview but there's nothing there either.
Is this hobbled in Elements?
Thanks,
Keith

ElephantSandwich wrote:
Thanks for the reply: I'm aware I can set the colour space in the editor but my concern is that if it's exported from Camera Raw as sRGB then converted to AdobeRGB that there may be some information loss, my thinking being that getting it right early is better than later. Am I right in thinking that converting from sRGB to ARGB will lose information, or more likely won't have the full information set in the first place because the initial export from RAW is to sRGB?
I have to say I find the subject of colour management quite mystifying ... but I gather I'm not alone in that.
Thanks again.
Keeping in mind that a raw file has no color profile (it's not even an 'image', it's a recording of light intensity for each of the photosites laid out in a 'Bayer pattern' with Red, Green and blue filters) and that your raw file information will never be altered by any converter, you can be sure that it is always possible to re-process the raw file to aRGB without any information loss.
You are perfectly right that the resulting image (psd, tiff, jpeg...) when you save from the editor will keep its color profile and that converting sRGB to aRGB won't add any useful information; that's what I said in the other post.
When I was experimenting on that matter with other users in another forum, I was able to select previously edited raw files containing subtle tones in green/cyan and re-process them in aRGB instead of sRGB and I got better results on my 6-inks home printer.
Don't believe all images will be better in aRGB, there are not necessarily 'out of gamut' colours in all of your pictures.
Edit
I just realized that I have missed to put the link to the other thread:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4619442#4619442

Changing Colour Space - How do I save an image in Adobe RGB 1998?

I wish to submit an image but it is required to be "Saved in Adobe RGB 1998 colour space".
Any suggestions?

Export it an open it with Preview and assign Adobe RGB using preview
LN

PDF/X-4 Device Colour Space inconsistency issue or not

Hi all,
If a deviceRGB image is lying completely outside of trim and bleed, and the PDF/X output intent is set to CMYK, should a preflight flag this as an error according to ISO1590-7:2010 or not? I have tools that currently do this. If I read chapter 6.4.3.2 of ISO 15930-7:2010, I'm not really sure that is what these preflight app's should do:
Device colour spaces may be used for print elements only if:
⎯ they match the space specified in the PDF/X output intent; or
⎯ the PDF/X output intent specifies a CMYK print characterization, and the device colour space is DeviceGray.
All input to help me solve this puzzle is more than welcome.

Looks like I was confusing the Ghent Workgroup specs (and their use of TrimBox to define an area for print elements) with the PDF/X-4 standard which clearly (6.1.3) says that anything drawn on the page is a print element.
Sorry for the confusion.

Mismatch between colour spaces?

I create a text box in Indesign, place an image over this text box with a solid colour as the border in the image, then set the colour of the text box to be the same colour as the border of the image, using the eyedropper. The RGB numbers of the text box colour and the colour in the image are the same, and the colour space of the text box and image are the same, as is space and blend space of the Indesign document - all sRGB IEC61066-2.1.
The colours look the same on screen (in Mac OS). However, when I upload the folio to an iPad, the colour of the text box and the colour in the border of the image are different (slightly but noticeably).
Has anyone any idea what is going on or how to fix it? Bug ?
Many thanks

I think I have solved this: by going to edit > Assign profiles > sRGB
For some reason the document didn't seem to be using the sRGB profile despite the colour preferences being set up for it. I thought it may be that the individual text box had a different profile assigned to it from the one being used as the document profile, but on reflection I am not sure this is actually possible (in contrast to images where you can assign whatever profile you like).
Many thanks

Changing the colour space on a jpeg image for better quality when uploading to a website

When uploading my images to my website the quality and colour of the photographs aren't the same. They lose quality etc. I was told to change the colour space to sRGB or something to make it better. No idea how this works and I'm now not sure what settings to have photoshop on, I don't want to edit my images and then for them to be edited wrongly.
Really need some help, much appreciated.

File > Save for Web. Use the 4-up panel to choose the best quality image with the smallest file size to save on bandwidth. You can test with sRGB enabled. Click on screenshot.
Nancy O.

Scanner calibration for colour-managed workflow

I would like to do a decent calibration of my Epson V750 Pro scanner to achieve a colour-managed workflow. I have the latest version X-Rite i1 Photo Pro 2 calibration kit, and although this enables me to calibrate my monitor and printer, it does not support scanner calibration. I do have Silverfast Ai Studio which includes a scanner calibration facility - is that the best available to me or are there any other options, possibly using the i1 spectrophotometer as I know that it used to be possible to carry out calibration with the older versions of that equipment? Other than that, I'm using an Espon 3880 printer, running Vista x64 and using Photoshop CS5.

Mike is probably right, the Epson profiles available in the Epson scanner sw are close enough. I;ve never seen any ******** about scanner output in this forum.

Colour Space / Workflow question.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for