Converting from sRGB to Adobe 1998

Hello!
I am an artist doing digital paintings on Photoshop CS3.
I drew an outline of my drawing in one shade of blue and realised the colour profile was in sRGB.
I have now converted the psd document to colour profile Adobe 1998.
When I start to put colour in, underneath the blue outline layer -will the colours be of Adobe 1998 quality?
(I plan to do gradients/blend colours and eventually print my work out. I have heard the colours can look choppy when done on sRGB mode)
Probably a silly question but I am new to this and would like to get it right
Any help would be much appreciated!
Thank you
Natalie

Yes the new colours will be Adobe RGB quality. (But I dont think you need it, id just stick with 'safer' sRGB). A wider gamut like Adobe RGB may make banding worse unless you're working in 16bit.

Similar Messages

How did my pdf files get converted from 'open with Adobe Reader' to open with Adobe Acobat'? And if I have a ''free'' Acrobat account why does it not open? When I do click on the account it ask me to pay $89.99. I never wanted Acrobat. How can I get -

How did my stored files get converted from 'open with Adobe READER' to 'open with Adobe ACROBAT'? How can I get them re-set to open with 'Adobe Reader'?
Please reply to my e-mail: [email protected]

It sounds as if you downloaded Adobe Acrobat Pro. If you did, uninstall it. Then repair Adobe Reader.
The free Acrobat account has no connection to any of this.

Converting from Word to Adobe

I want to convert a Microsoft Office Word 2007 document to a pdf (Adobe 8 Reader). I don't see the option. ????

[email protected] wrote:
> get the primopdf printer here
or the
> pdfill printer from here
. primopdf printer
> works very nicely. i haven't tried the printer of pdfill but their
> crop feature works nicely so i'm assuming the printer works too.
No need at all for such substitutes as long as it's Office 2007 apps.
All one needs is the PDF/XPS add-in.
BTW: There are tons of freeware/shareware and low-budget instruments for
PDF creation and none can match Acrobat.
Major problem with almost all of them (and necessarily so if the work as
printer drivers):
*Links* in the source document are not converted. In this is a major
drawback if it comes to usability: URLs in a document are not active,
nor are bookmarks available (a most serious drawback for documents with
TOC, f.e.)
Rainald

How to stop Nitro file converter from altering all Adobe files

I recently wanted to convert a word document to PDF and downloaded a free version of the program Nitro but as the only free part of the downloaded program was to look at it as it then wanted me to purchase the full program before I could use it so I deleted from my computer. But before it finished uninstalling itself it altered all the Adobe files and documents I had on my computer also it now alters the file type of any Adobe file or document sent to me as an email attachment. How can I stop it? would taking the manufacturer to court sort them out? If anyone has any ideas of how to prevent or alter what has happened send to email address [email protected]

Hi Sara
To a point what you said to resolve the problem worked but what the Nitro programme did was convert all my Adobe documents and files into a pdf that can only be opened by a Word programme. If I click on the icon which used to be an Adobe file which has now become a form of greyed out Word icon it automatically opens M/S Word but cannot read it as it’s a pdf file.
Do you know of any way I can convert them back to an adobe readable file?
Many thanks
David Hughes

Converting from Excel to Adobe PDF

I have Adobe Acrobat 7.0 Professional and Windows XP. The excel worksheet is on a landscape page and reduced to say 65%. It has wording on the left side that stretches through five cells. Some of the wording gets cut off. Maybe the last letter gets cut off in half, but not all the words in different cells get cut off. Some of the wording that does not get off go beyond the cells that do get cut off. This happens on some worksheets. The next worksheet can have the same page setup and nothing happens. One of the solutions we have found is that we have to add 3 spaces to the last word of the cells that is being cut off. That seems to fix the problem. Another is that we print the page in excel (works perfect) and then e-fax the page to ourselves and inserted in the document. But doing this last things keeps us from printing a final version for the client, since there is a difference. Any solutions that could solve this?

Change your printer to the Adobe PDF printer and then set the cell sizes in Excel. This is just the normal Excel adjustment to the printer.

Cannot convert from excel to adobe (using acrobat 8 standard)

Document will begin conversion and then just get stuck forever in an unending loop. When I cancel the program (excel) get a prompt that says that Acrobat was unable to complet PDF process!!! Help!!!

Open the file in Excel. Then go to the FILE menu and select print. Chose the Adobe PDF printer and see if you get a PDF -- all of the other Acrobat processes depend on this printing process. If not, report what error messages you get. I suspect that you have deactivated AcroTray.exe that is a required part of the conversion part. If you like to test the latter, use the print-to-file option in the printer dialog, then open the file in Distiller to complete the process. The latter should either give you a PDF or a mess of error messages telling you why not.

SRGB vs. Adobe (1998) RGB

This is likely a basic question for all the pros out there, but here it is:
In Scott Kelby's The Photoshop CS Book (2003), it says on p. 116: "Photoshops' default color space (sRGB...) is arguably the worst possible color space for professional photographers." He says this color space is designed for Web designers and mimics a cheap PC monitor from years ago.
He recommends changing the default setting to Adobe RGB (1998), saying "This is probably the most popular RGB setting for photographers because it reproduces such a wide gamut of colors and it's ideal if your photos will wind up in print."
Then comes the instruction book for the Canon 5D Mark II, which recommends sRGB because Adobe RGB "is mainly used for commercial printing and other industrial uses. This setting is not recommended if you do not know about image processing, Adobe RGB, and Design rule for Camera File System 2.0 (Exif 2.21). The image will look very subdued in the sRGB personal computer environment and with printers not compatible with Design rule for Camera File System 2.0. Post-processing of the image with software will therefore be required."
So-- Is there a 'best' setting for a non-pro who wants the 'best' possible prints? Should the camera and CS4 have the same settings, either sRGB or Adobe (1998)? Does this have anything to do with the price of eggs in China?
Thank you for your help. John

T. Schmidt,
The videos in question are titled
The Art of Fine PrintingFrom Camera To Print, so they are
very much about and for photography. They are of little interest to someone not primarily involved with photography.
My take on color management books is very subjective and definitely photography-oriented, of course.
Real World Color Management by Fraser et al. remains the basic color management book. I also very much like Andrew Rodney's
Color Management for Photographers.
I am not in the Margulis camp, even though I did read the
Canyon Conundrum and
Professional Adobe Photoshop, which I still have, without having profited much from the latter and not at all from the former. I don't care much for Scott Kelby either. (I prefer to avoid L*a*b and CMYK altogether.)
> the best up to date book about Color Management in general or for print,
I am not quite sure what to make of that phrasing.
or" for print? As far as I'm concerned, color management is the art of maintaining color accuracy and consistency
from capture to print.
>97% of the time I get an untagged image it's sRGB
Quite a few untagged image files floating around turn out to be in Color Match RGB or Monitor RGB, so I can't assume sRGB. What I can tell you is that I encounter fewer and fewer untagged files myself, as my known stance on beating morons who give me untagged files with a baseball bat seems automatically to shield me from said morons for the most part.

Aperture identifying Pro 1 RAW Adobe 1998 when it's sRGB

I'm having trouble with my Canon Pro 1. I'm shooting in RAW in the "standard" sRGB workspace (there's an option for Adobe 1998). However, Aperture labels the photos as Adobe 1998. The Preview application also reads the file to be Adobe 1998 (get info while in Preview). One curious thing I noticed, is that when the menus are setup for Finder to show a preview of a photo, it appears that OS X is using the correct color space (or a different one at least). I am importing directly into Aperture from a card reader.
Because I was curious, I checked to see if there was a problem when shooting in JPEG mode. Aperture identifies the color space correctly. Has anyone else had this problem or know how to fix it? I'm using Aperture 1.0

Okay, I understand that Aperture is using its own
special color space that is wider than Adobe 1998 or
sRGB. But, I guess my question is, will Aperture's
color space display two identical pictres (albeit
different color spaces) as the same even if one is
Adobe 1998 and the other sRGB? Because if not, I
think there'd be a problem since the color would not
remain constant when I finally export it as sRGB.
No, although since the AdobeRGB space holds a greater range of colors it may look a little richer.
Also, if you are talking about RAW files it will not matter since any colorspace you include in a RAW file is just a "hint" to an application that is reading that RAW files what color space is preferred after conversion.
Also I noticed this: When Finder shows a preivew of
the file, it seems that it's using a different color
space than that of Aperture or Preview.app because
the tonality is slightly cooler. The image that the
OS shows is, I think, the same as that when Preview
converts the "adobe 1998" file to its true sRGB. So
I'm guessing that the OS's interpretation is right.
Why is there an inconsistencey between the
applications and the Finder/OS?
The image Finder shows is generally from the thumbnail created by the camera itself. So it's slightly different just because the OS X conversion is a little different than the in-camera conversion. It has nothing to do with the colorspace.

How do you stop DNG Converter from embedding Adobe's ACR default settings instead of custom settings?

I notice that the new version of Adobe DNG Converter (8.6, and maybe earlier) appears to place Adobe's ACR defaults in the converted file. Thus, the converted files open up in Bridge with an indication that they already have settings made, and, hence, ACR does not apply the custom camera settings. One has to Clear Settings first in Bridge, then open in ACR.
This behavior is new, perhaps to 8.6. But it's presence defeats the purpose of having custom Camera Defaults.
Is there any way to prevent DNG Converter from installing settings?

ssprengel wrote:
What do you mean by “custom camera settings”? Do you mean you’ve changed the Camera Raw defaults for a particular camera and those aren’t being seen until you do a Reset? Or do you mean some sort of Nikon-settings that Adobe never looks at?
Also at what point in the workflow are you converting these files, just after copying them to your hard-disk and before touching them with any other Adobe software, or after they’ve been adjusted in Nikon software, or after they’ve been adjusted in Bridge/ACR, initially as NEFs?
I mean my custom camera defaults that are set by the Save New Camera Defaults for a given camera.
My workflow is to take my original raw files first into Adobe DNG Converter. I then open the folder in Bridge. At this point I notice that my original raw files remain unaltered (there is no "settings" icon in the top right corner – circle with two lines and up-arrows – in the image's thumbnail), but the converted dng's (otherwise untouched and unopened in ACR) have a "settings" icon. When I open the original raw file in ACR, it opens using my custom camera defaults. When I open the otherwise virgin dng in ACR, it opens using the Adobe defaults (the same defaults that would be employed if no custom camera default had been set).
This behavior is new. DNGs formed by earlier versions of the DNG Converter did not apply any settings to the converted file, and when they opened in Bridge, they were given the custom camera settings.
In order to retain the old (and proper) behavior, I now have to take the just-converted documents into Bridge, select them, and immediately apply Develop Settings/Clear Settings. That gets rid of the settings that have been installed by the DNG Converter (as well as the "settings" icon on the thumbnail).
I notice there is a new feature in Adobe DNG Converter 8.6, namely, a panel-specific toggle between the settings and the default settings. This indicates to me the likelihood that Adobe has been making some alterations with the settings that is having unintended consequences. It clearly is not proper for DNG Converter to be adding (installing) settings, because that prevents the custom camera default settings from being applied, and hence defeats the purpose of the custom camera default settings.

Converting RGB images (sRGB or Adobe RGB) to 709 color space.

I'm trying to determine the correct way to convert RGB images (sRGB or Adobe RGB) to 709 color space. I can't just use the "covert to profile" function to do this because it does not produce results that fall within the 16 to 235 range that 709 dictates. I've read that you can simply use the "Levels" adjustment and change the output levels to 16 to 235. While this would clearly compress the luminance to the correct range, I'm not entirely clear if the end result would be a proper conversion (i.e. if color and gamma, for example, would be technically correct.)
I noticed that converting the profile to "HDTV (Rec. 709)" does alter the image, so I'm wondering what the result would be if I did both this AND used the levels control to compress the output range to 16 to 235.
Thanks for any feedback on this.

(1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._709
(2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._601
The transfer functions for Rec.709 (1) refer to the range [0..1] or for 8 bits per pixel [0...255].
It seems that the clipping, black=16 and white=235 has to happen after the application of the
transfer function. If this should be true, then we don't have a level compression but a level
clipping at both ends, as already for Rec.601 (2), like here:
The ICC-Profile HDTV(Rec.709) in Photoshop contains the primaries and the white point
(both like that in sRGB) and the transfer functions for [0..1], coded by a LUT with high resolution,
as found by Profile Inspector. There is no clipping.
By the way, that`s the internal profile name, I don't know the file name of the profile.
Softproofing, source in sRGB, target HDTV(Rec.709), without clipping:
With numbers not preserved: no change of the appearance, as expected.
With numbers preserved: shows the effect of different effective gammas.
Your questions are very clear and I'm not sure whether my comments help. The information
in the internet is not convincing.
Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

After 9.3 update getting error printing to Adobe PDF while converting from Powerpoint to PDF

That happened after upgrading Acrobat Pro 9.1.2 to 9.2->9.3 on Windows XP sp2 platform. Converting from other Microsoft Office 2003 products is totally normal(Excel, Word) Did anyone came accross and know how to fix that?? We have many users with exactly same issue.

thanks...figured out my problem!
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:24:29 -0700
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: After 9.3 update getting error printing to Adobe PDF while converting from Powerpoint to PDF
What happens if you try to print to the Adobe PDF printer?
>

Hypertext links are not always preserved from Word to PDF, using Aperçu or Adobe, depending on OS 10 or Lion. Why? This generally works perfectly in Windows. Why are Apple and Adobe unable to correctly handle links when converting from Word to PDF?

Hypertext links are not always preserved from Word to PDF, using Aperçu or Adobe, depending on OS 10 or Lion. Why? This generally works perfectly in Windows. Why are Apple and Adobe unable to correctly handle links when converting from Word to PDF?
Depending on the system version, and Office Word version:
- a pure URL link starting with http or even www sometimes works in PDF, either produced by Aperçu or Adobe, sometimes does not work;
- other kind of links where the text under display is not a URL, never work!
I like everything with Apple computers and software, except PDF generation. Output files are usually bigger in size, and no better quality, than under Windows. Furthermore, it is weird that something as common as hyperlinks does not work correctly!
I related this question with Mac OS X Snow Leopard, but the problem is still there with Mac OS Lion.
This problem seems to have been around for years, without any proper solution from Apple and/or Adobe! To me, this is very embarrassing!

Greetings NoNameGiven,
If I understand the problem correctly (I’m not sure I do) you would prefer ‘iii’ to be read as “eye eye eye” rather than “three”? The alt text property is the only way that I know of to make this happen. Hope this helps.
a ‘C’ student

Why is Adobe changing my fonts when I convert from publisher to pdf?

I've just started using the pdf conversion plug-in to convert from publisher 2007 to pdf. The way it was explained to me was that no matter what style of font you use it should be embedded in the file so that when someone opens the file they will read it in exactly the same style as I used to create it. I am a volunteer for a non-proft org. (my church) and each year we publish a small booklet and sell space to local businesses who contribute to the well-being of my church. This is the first year I'm using the pdf conversion but when I checked how the ad would look in adobe reader some of the fonts were changed and I can't seem to correct the problem. It doesn't happen with all the fonts which makes it even stranger. Anyone got any advice, suggestions, etc. Thanks.
Manny

I'm having the same problem and unfortunately, it doesnt matter which software i'm using... Word,
Publisher, and even photoshop. I have Adobe Acrobat Pro and no matter how I try to convert, i'm still getting the same problem.

Poor quality convertion from adobe reader to word

Good day,
I received a poor quality convertion from adobe reader to word.
Can I send the original to anybody for help or a better convertion.
Enjoy your day
Regards
Johan de Beer

Without context, my guess is that your question should go in the ExportPDF forum,
http://forums.adobe.com/community/exportpdf

I paid for PDF to Word subscription through iTunes but when I try to convert from my computer directly from Adobe, it says I need a subscription. Help?

I paid for PDF to Word subscription through iTunes but when I try to convert from my computer directly from Adobe, it says I need a subscription. Help?

Hi divabuyer,
It sounds like you're trying to convert to Word from within Reader, is that so? Are you signed in to Reader? If so, you'll see your name in the upper-right corner of the Reader application window.
If that doesn't work, please try llogging in to https://cloud.acrobat.com/exportpdf with your Adobe ID and password.
Let us know how it goes.
Best,
Sara

Converting from sRGB to Adobe 1998

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for