Greenish cast to monochrome B&W scans in LR??

I'm scanning old B&W negs as monochrome using Vuescan with a Nikon 5000 scanner outputting tif files. When I import these into LR they show up with a really awful greenish cast, the surrounding LR screen being nice grays and black. I'm new to things digital and don't have a clue as to what might be causing this or how to correct it. TIA for any help here.
njb

Almost certainly a bad monitor profile indeed (I sound like a broken record). Also be careful with single channel files. Lightroom seems to do best with RGB files.

Similar Messages

Prints have green/blu cast w CS5/LR3, Epson R2880, Coloreyes, eyeone display 2

Please help! After months of printing w great results using:
CS 5 (12.0.1) running in either 32 or 64 bit mode and/or LR 3 (3.2) and profiling my iMac Intel Core i7 running OS X 10.6.5 with ColorEyes Display Pro (1.52r032.2), and have the most recent drivers from Epson (8.27) I have suddenly started getting crap prints - they are flat and have a bluish/greenish cast when printing on Ilford or Hahnemuhl paper, using the correct ICC profiles selected in the print dialogue (I also soft-proof gamut and colors in PS before printing). Ink is not low, prints are not banding, B&W prints basically OK, and print diagnostic sheet is fine.
I have checked everywhere on the forums and have not found anyone experiencing similar problems. Can anyone help!!!?

You know.. I had a similar problem a few months ago. Same printer and calibration device. I just could not track it down the color shift problem. Not sure if this was what fixed it, but I uninstalled the Epson driver (current version) and downloaded again from Epson and reinstalled it. Same with the paper profiles. And I built a new monitor profile. ONE of those things (or something?) worked and all was back to normal.

Serious issue w/LR5.3: Softproof is invisible!

Hello all,
I've just noticed that I have a really strange problem with soft proofing in Lightroom 5.3. I can activate it and select all the ICC profiles that are installed on my system, choose between relative/perceptive/show paper color, and the histogram changes accordingly, just like it is supposed to do. Unfortunately, the image preview does not! The displayed colors remain the same!
I have checked this with several files and made screenshots to compare them for differences - there really are none.
Next thing I tried was this: Buy a brand new SSD, install Windows 7 SP1 64bit, install all Updates, install the latest AMD Catalyst pack, install Lightroom 5.3, then try again. The result is basically the same, with one small difference: When I activate the softproof now, I have a small chance to see the "corrected" preview, however it'll be gone as soon as I zoom in, for example. Switching between relative/perceptive/show paper color yields wildly different results each time, ranging from no change over a slight change to a visible change in a totally non-predictable manner. This works best with zoom to fit; at 100% zoom there's mostly no visible change, and it's gone again as soon as I zoom in or out.
I'm running an Intel Core2 Duo E7300 on a Gigabyte GA-EP45UD3 with 4GB of RAM, Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 + current updates, Crucial M500 SSD, SAPPHIRE HD 7750 ULTIMATE with the latest Catalyst installed.
System Information is this:
Version von Lightroom: 5.3 [938183]
Betriebssystem: Windows 7 Business Edition
Version: 6.1 [7601]
Anwendungsarchitektur: x64
Systemarchitektur: x64
Anzahl logischer Prozessoren: 2
Prozessorgeschwindigkeit: 2,6 GHz
Integrierter Speicher: 4094,4 MB
Für Lightroom verfügbarer phys. Speicher: 4094,4 MB
Von Lightroom verwendeter phys. Speicher: 285,9 MB (6,9%)
Von Lightroom verwendeter virtueller Speicher: 249,5 MB
Cache-Speichergröße: 39,6 MB
Maximale Anzahl Threads, die Camera Raw verwendet: 2
DPI-Einstellung des Systems: 96 DPI
Desktop-Komposition aktiviert: Nein
Monitore/Anzeigegeräte: 1) 1280x1024
Anwendungsordner: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3
Bibliothekspfad: C:\Users\root\Pictures\Lightroom\Lightroom 5 Catalog.lrcat
Einstellungen-Ordner: C:\Users\root\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom
Installierte Zusatzmodule:
1) Behance
2) Canon Tether-Zusatzmodul
3) Facebook
4) Flickr
5) Leica Tether-Zusatzmodul
6) Nikon Tether-Zusatzmodul
Config.lua-Flags: None
Adapter Nr. 1: Anbieter : 1002
    Gerät : 683f
    Subsystem : e213174b
    Version : 0
    Grafikspeicher : 1010
AudioDeviceIOBlockSize: 1024
AudioDeviceName: Lautsprecher (Juli@ Audio)
AudioDeviceNumberOfChannels: 2
AudioDeviceSampleRate: 44100
Build: Uninitialized
CardID: 26687
Direct2DEnabled: false
GPUDevice: D3D
MaxTexture2DSize: 8192
OGLEnabled: true
Renderer: AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series
ShaderModel: 11.1
Vendor: AMD
VendorID: 4098
Version: 1002:683f:e213174b:0000
The newly set up system is totally clean, I didn't transfer one single file from my old system yet, so there's no old catalog here now. I simply got myself an ICC profile from Saal Digital and a monochrome JPG from the internet for testing purposes, but to no avail, like I said above.
I have also tested several ICC profiles which work OK in other programs, so I won't blame them. Like I said, the histogram changes accordingly, i.e. it shows a noticeable color cast for monochrome images with a print profile, but only in the histogram and not the image itself.
My monitor is not calibrated and using the Win7 system standard color management. I did try some monitor profiles from the internet that changed the color rendition of the monitor but didn't make any difference in Lightroom.
Any ideas what might be the culprit here? Or what else I should try - maybe a new graphics card?
Regards,
Lasse

First, ignore the histogram of the scan and all that. Too many variables in the process (scanning) to make a conclusion.
You're probably right about too many variables, but the scan resembles what I actually see on the paper quite nicely. The print definitely has a color cast, which is easily recognised when I put it next to a print done with my monochrome laser, which obviously isn't able to produce a color cast.
4. How you view the image is critical, especially if the papers are high in OBAs. The Lightsource can produce what appears as a color cast. At the very least, examine the print under different illuminants. Do they look the same or do you see a color shift?
There's no metamerism here. It's simply a color cast due to the printer using colored inks instead of true black inks. I'm perfectly fine with that, however I'd like to move the color cast more into a sepia-like, "warm" direction, away from that violet-ish it is now. So my way of thinking is, If I see something violet-ish in the soft proof, I can tone the image in a way that is more appealing to me. Again: Is this a valid way of thinking? If it is, why doesn't it work the way I expect it to? If it is not, is there another way to achieve it?
1. Actual device has changed behavior and the profile isn't reflecting that correctly.
2. Actual ICC profile isn't all that good. Note too that these profiles have two tables. One affects the output, the other the soft proof. In a prefect world, they are in sync. But that isn't always the case.
3. The driver wasn't setup on the Epson for the best neutral process (Advanced B&W) and with that process, ICC profiles are out of the loop anyway. That's a proprietary process and is really the best way to produce (if so set) pretty dead nuts neutral output from this printer.
To me this would seem plausible if the soft proof and the final print would be "a little off". Now the soft proof is totally off from the print, since it's basically like the original without any proof.
And then there's the histogram.
Please do the following test:
Fill an image with RGB 128,128,128. Look at it in Lightroom with activated soft proof, Relative, simulate paper & ink disabled, using the pearl profile. Note how the histogram changes. Now hover the mouse over the image and note the values below the histogram: In my case they read RGB 135,132,142, while the image itself still shows 128,128,128. You can check that with a screenshot. Now fill the image with the shown 135,132,142 and note the color cast. I didn't test it yet, but I'd bet that Saal's printer would not be able to print a neutral middle grey but something like what you see on screen with the 135,132,142 instead!
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to act stupid; I simply don't get it and am desperately trying to understand what's wrong here. Why does Lightroom "measure" 135,132,142 but continue to display 128,128,128?

What Color Space to choose for viewing jpegs on a monitor

After reading many webpages and watching many tutorial videos about which color space to use, I get odd results. I understand that sRGB is more for web applications, and that Adobe RGB 1998 has a wider gamut, and that ProPhoto has the widest gamut of colors, particularly helpful with printing.
However, in LR 4, when I export to jpeg as sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto, the differences are very noticeable. sRGB looks the most vibrant, Adobe RGB looks flat, and ProPhoto looks dark with a greenish cast. I expected ProPhoto to look best, or is that only for printing, and I have to process differently?
What am I misunderstanding here? TIA.

It depends on three factors:
1. The monitor - normal, which means with a gamut close to sRGB, or "wide gamut" with a gamut that approaches Adobe RGB (and today there are plenty of medium priced "wide gamut" monitors).
2. The viewing application and whether it is color managed. In a nutshell, color management translates the image color numbers to eqivalent color numbers in the monitor's color space.
3. Whether the monitor is calibrated and profiled. In order for color management to work properly the application must know what the image's color space is (embedded profile) and what the monitor's space is (monitor profile). Any display on the monitor is always in the monitor space, but in order for the display to be accurate the translation must be made.
If all three conditions are fulfilled, alll images, no matter what their spaces are, will be displayed more or less the same because they have all been translated to the same display space. I say "more or less" because if the image is in a wide space that needs to be compressed to fit in the monitor space, there may be slight differences in the way colors that are out-of-gamut for the monitor are rendered, but the differences are slight.
Without those three factors, only images in the space closest to your monitor's native space will be properly displayed. So if you have a "normal" monitor, choose sRGB and if you have a "wide gamut" monitor, go with Adobe RGB, but keep in mind that other people with "normal" monitors and without color managed browsers/viewers will not see it properly.

Why does the color and or tone of my image change?

Why does the color and or tone of my image change after working in LR for a couple of hours? I open LR and everything looks fine - work for a couple of hours on the same shoot - but then the pictures start to look flat or greenish cast as time goes by. All the files get flat and the greenish cast after a couple of hours - the ones already worked on and the newer ones I'm pulling up to work on. RAW files downloaded from a Canon 30D. Also exporting to PSCS2 as PROPhoto results in a flat image. I switched back to export AdobeRGB.

Hola - thanks for the reply - yep - closing and then opening LR helps - but can't do that all the time after processing 3 or 4 files.
One reply was a corrupt monitor color profile - So I deleted that one and loaded a new adobeRGB profile. That helped a little also for a while - I then reloaded my monitor drivers and refreshed them - that help for a day - the greenish cast is back It works fine on my laptop for now. The same pictures that look greenish in LR look great in Canon DPP. So it probably wasn't the color profile or monitor drivers. My issue started with the small scale previews so I bumped that up. Still have the issue. I finished up a project and now going to uninstall and reinstall LR. Let's see what happens with a fresh install. andy.

Faulty color management

I have Windows XP, home, Epson 2200 printer and CS3. Normally,when preparing to print, the image appears red or magenta in the "preview" window but the print itself is accurate and matches the monitor. Now, the preview image is dark and roughly similar to the monitor but prints with a distinct greenish cast.
I have confirmed settings of no color management by the printer and checked ICM. I've read that this suggests no color management at all, rather than double profiling.
The monitor itself is calibrated but I wouldn't think it would affect the
preview image. I have uninstalled and reinstalled the printer software[2x] and deleted Prefereences in PS, with no effect.
Any ideas will be much appreciated.

I'm printing with an Epson 2200 using custom profiles. Like you, I always get a reddish preview image and a near-perfect print. Red means good print, no read means bad print.
It sounds like PSCS3 is not applying the profile. In your print dialog, is Color Handling set to Photoshop Manages Colors, the correct profile is loaded under Printer Profile, and Rendering Intent is set correctly (I usually use Relative Colorimetric)? It sounds as if you've checked your printer driver to make sure ICM is turned off there.
If so, you might have a bad profile. Could have been damaged somehow. Can you load a fresh copy or make a new one if you roll your own? I would uninstall and delete the old one, then reboot and install the new one just to be thorough.

Printing Black & White Prints

I will tell my problem first and then some background.
When I attempt to print mono prints on my Epson R1800 using the "black" output opion on the print dialog I cannot get a true mono image and the full tonal range replicated. Often I have too much at the black end of the scale which gives my photos a "dark" appearance. If I use the "color" option I can achieve the tonal range but a true mono image doesn't result as a greenish cast is often introduced as the black is arrived at using the colour inks.
I have used the following combinations in both LR and PS; Epson provided ICC profiles, bespoke calibrated ICC profiles (which have the best results for my colour images) & printer controls (adjusting brightness/contrast/gamma).
I have tried so many combinations that I have almost lost track with some interesting results, none that are close to what I have on screen though. The most obvious route is to use my bespoke ICC and simply switch to black on the printer driver but this has the worst result of all!
Any help would be greatly appreciated before I have to take shares in Epson ink! LOL

Thanks Paul. I greatly appreciate the pointers and will go looking.
I appreciate that my questions is to an extent a "workflow" issue however my weapons of choice are LR and PS and I believe that it is the (correct) use of these that will solve my problems so see my question as being valid here.
I have chosen my tools because they have a wide user base and hope that someone here may have already got to grips with these issues and found a way to correct the issue. My question still remains for anyone here that can help; how do I control the tonal range if printing using "black" in the printer setting or the colour casts if using "color"?
Thanks again.
Gary.

Camera Calibration - Profiles. How To??

I'm very new to Lightroom. I'm using a trial version of 2.6 until I get my full paid version in the mail, hopefully in one or two days.
In the develop module on the CAMERA CALIBRATION tab I have no choices for profiles. The only one there is EMBEDDED. I'm using an Olympus E-510 and have imported ORF's into Lightroom. I've downloaded something called DNG Converter 5.6 and installed it but that obviously isn't what I need because nothing has changed. It appears to be a stand alone program for converting files. Can someone tell me how to get the different profiles into Lightroom? Like I said I'm very new to Lightroom so step by step instructions will be helpful.
Thank you,
lmb

The key to calibrating your camera is the color-target along with software to create the profile from the RAW image of the target shot in the lighting you are profiling for.
If you don't have an x-rite color-checker calibration target, already, or it is quite old, then I'd recommend the X-Rite Colorchecker Passport that Jao linked, already, as a nicely portable version of the target along with some software to create the profiles.
The calibration software, from either Adobe or X-Rite is actually free, so the big expense is the color-checker calibration target, itself, and while the CCPP is a little more than just a regular CC target, the pocket-size and hard-case make is easier to handle and take care of, as compared to the larger one that comes in a plastic bag and cardboard sleeve last I knew.
If you are only doing studio work where you can keep your CC in a controlled environment, then perhaps the larger CC target would be easier to image or a model to hold, but if you are going to be out and about with one, then the Passport is easier to work with.
The profiles can be for a single light source or a special dual-illuminant profile (like all of Adobe's are) that you create with one RAW of the target in incandescent lighting and one RAW of the target in 6500K lighting -- hazy sun, or D65 bulbs. This dual-illuminant profile generally works for lighting in between incandescent and shade by interpolating the profile for the color-temperature of lighting you are in. However, I have found that if the Tint value (the magenta/green balance) is too far off of zero, like it will be for fluorescent and mercury vapor and other such lighting, then you will want a special profile for that.
Even though Adobe has made profiles for my Canon DSLR, I use two of my own most of the time, for my ad hoc outdoor and indoor shooting. I have a dual-illuminant profile using an incandescent shot and a hazy-sunny shot that is close to 6500K, where both Tint values are near zero, and then I have one more profile that I've shoot in indoor fluorescent lighting where the Tint value is closer to +30 (extra purple to counteract the fluorescent greenish cast) and that takes care of almost everything I shoot.
The DNG Profile Editor (and the X-Rite software) only operates on DNG's that you've converted from your calibration-target RAWs, but the profiles you create are for any RAWs or DNGs from the camera, so you only have to worry about DNGs at the point you're creating a profile, not when you use it.
The DNG Profile Editor has the ability to tweak existing profiles as you'd do when photographing for a catalog where the color of the clothes must be as precise as possible, but other aspects can wander a bit, but for creating a profile out of CC-RAW shots, either the Adobe or the X-Rite software works just as well.
The X-Rite software had the ability to use shots that are not exactly 2650K and 6500K like the DNG Profile Editor requires, so in my mind that is better because I don't have access to standardized light workstations, and must take my shots in more natural lighting, so need the extra leeway of the X-Rite software.

Having trouble getting skin tones to print "accurately"

Hello! This is my first post to a forum, but I am unhappy with the skintones of my portrait shots in the printed results and am driven to seek your collective help. I realize that an image on the monitor will never match exactly to the printed image because the media is entirely different. I am pleased with the image results for everything except the human skintones. Portrait shots can look great on the monitor, but the printed image always has a greenish cast. This happens when shooting outdoors in sunlight and on overcast days. No flash was used.
I am shooting RAW (uncompressed NEF), using Nikkor lenses on a D200. My printer is an EPSON Stylus Photo 2200. Mac Pro 2x2.66 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor. RadeonX1900 graphics card. Apple Cinema 24" Display calibrated with SpyderPRO. Epson Premium Glossy Photo paper. Aperture 1.5.3. Lately I have been using a 105mm, 2.8, VR Nikkor lens or the 17-55mm, 2.8 Nikkor lens. (I think I have all the right equipment, now if I could only fix the user!)
I notice that Aperture has default setting applied to my images in RAW Fine Tuning and the Boost is always set to 1.00. Chroma Blur Radius=2.00 and Auto Noise Redution is checked. Sharpening Intensity=0.5 and Edges-0.73.
My in camera white balance is set to full sun. Aperture white balance temparature comes in at 4860K.
What is the Boost and if I change it to 0.00, the skin tones are not as saturated and reddish in the display, but the printed image has a greenish cast. Should I be changing this value at all?
I see that other folks post fabulous portrait images on the web with lovely creamy skin tones, but I can never achieve that effect. What am I doing wrong?
Thanks in advance for any help you folks can send my way.

The Boost slider under the Raw Fine Tuning change the contrast of the image. I set it up to be 0.80 as default, sometimes I lower it even more. Then I use the controls under the exposure section to adjust the exposure and contrast. I finish it with the levels adjustments.
It's very easy to get reddish faces when the contrast is to high. If that's the case in the color adjustments I lower the saturation of the reds a little bit and move the slider of the hue a little bit to the right, usually a value of 2.0 is enough to make them more orangy.
It's crucial that you set up the white balance properly. A grey card is a great help to have a neutral tone in the image, then I usually go a bit warmer, around 200-300K more than neutral.

Bridge ACR Conversions Far Superior to LightRoom or Dr. Browns 123 Process?

I use the above apps constantly.
Just did a test of bringing out a Canon RAW file to PSD from Bridge CS3 manually with ACR, doing it from Bridge using Dr. Browns 1-2-3 Process automator and doing it using the conversion automator within LR.
Hands down the manual conversion was far superior to the other 2 automated conversions.
Detail was way better, color fidelity more pleasing and accurate.
So is there a way to make the automators do as good a job as ACR does?
Hate to think I have to sacrifice so much quality for the sake of expediancy.
Any thoughts?

I suspect as much.
It would make sense that the output from both "engines" should be the same.
But what accounts for the difference in image detail?
What are the critical settings in each app to make them match?
Where exactly in each app do you set the color control?
Color management continues to be the bane of my professional existence.
In a related matter, whenever I tell LR to create a website or generate jpegs of my RAW files, I wind up with that sad looking desaturated, greenish-caste look in the resultant jpegs.
They lack the warmth and vibrance of the previews Im seeing in LR.
My output images look non color managed even though I could sware Im specifying that they be sRGB to cover the lowest common denominator of the on screen viewing world.
I believe LR's environment is ProRGB, so what's a guy to do to make the origin match the final?

Prints wrong colour from Word 2007. O.P. XP

Printing from word 2007 with Black text, is printed in Cyan? Have Repaired Word ,cleaned the Registrey and updated HP driver, but not corrected the fault? Any ideas?
This question was solved.
View Solution.

You didn't mention what printer model you have, but in the meantime, try this. If this does not solve your problem, please let me know and add your printer model so I can do a more thorough search for a resolution.
Tobindo
An HP Representative
HP PSC 1100, 1200, or Officejet 4100 Series Not Printing Correctly (See this link for full instructions with diagrams, plus other solutions to try. The following instructions were taken from this document.
The colors are incorrect
This normally occurs because one of the ink cartridges are low on one or more colors of ink, do the following to determine if the ink cartridge is out of ink.
Check the estimated ink levels in the Printer Toolbox. If the all-in-one software is not installed, skip to Step 2.
NOTE: The estimated ink levels are calibrated for the HP 56 and HP 57 ink cartridges. The estimated ink level will be incorrect for the HP 28 ink cartridge.
In the HP Director software, click Settings , click Print Settings , and then click Printer Toolbox .
In the Printer Toolbox, select the Estimated Ink Level tab as is shown in Figure 1. Remember that this is an estimated ink level based on counting the drops of ink used and that it may not reflect the actual amount of ink remaining. If one or more of the colors of ink are low or empty, replace the ink cartridge.
Figure 1: The Estimated Ink Level tab of the Printer Toolbox
Print a test page by one of the following methods:
From the Printer Toolbox: Select the Device Services tab of the Toolbox and then click Print a Test Page . The test page marked A in Figure 2 will print.
From the all-in-one front panel: Press and hold the Cancel button, and then press the Color Start Copy button. The test page marked B in Figure 2 will print.
Figure 2: Self test pages - A is from the Printer Toolbox, B is from the front panel
If the colors on the test page look correct and are not faded or light, continue troubleshooting with Step 4 below. If the colors on the test page do not look correct or are faded or missing, clean the ink cartridges as detailed in the "Cleaning the ink cartridges " section below. Replace the ink cartridge if the correct colors do not print after cleaning the ink cartridge.
Assign a color management profile to the all-in-one. To do this, refer to the following:
Click Start , click Settings , and then click Printers (in Windows XP, click Start , and then click Printers and Faxes ) to open the Printers folder.
In the Printers folder, right-click the HP all-in-one printer icon and then click Properties .
Click the Color Management tab.
Click Add to see the list of available color profiles.
In the Add Profile Association dialog box, select Diamond Compatible 9300k G2.2.icm .
Click Add and then click OK . Print the file again. If the application does not print in color, use Microsoft Paint to print a document with colors.
Try printing again and see if the colors are better.
When printing on some photo papers, there can be a greenish cast to blacks when photo paper is the selected paper type. Change the Paper Type setting to HP Bright White paper or Plain paper and print the page again.

30" Cinema Display Discontinued?

Looks like Apple has discontinued the 30" Cinema display. They now offer a 27" display with a glossy screen. Perhaps this is old news, but I'm not finding any discussion on this. I'm a long time imaging pro (retoucher, photographer, illustrator) In a world of giant TV's, how could Apple choose to discontinue the flagship monitor? NO ONE I talk to likes the glossy screen monitors. Every photographic pro I know uses at least one 30" display, and some use 2 (side by side). I have seen QC issues in the monitors, but shrinking down to a 27" offering is not a step forward. Any INFORMED opinions here? (no hand wringing or emotional tirades)
Please Steve, give us a full size alternative (without the glossy screen).

Why does it have to be an Apple 30" display?
NEC, Eizo, HP, and Dell sell 30" displays that should have as good and in some cases (Eizo, NEC, and maybe HP) better image quality and far newer panels than the Apple 30", with more features on the monitor like more ports.
By trimming their product line to one single glossy 27" display, Apple is showing that they're not making serious monitors for serious people anymore. There are many other better choices now by companies investing heavily in pro monitors. There's no need to deprive yourself of a 30" monitor just because it no longer matches your Mac Pro case.
Here's how the Eizo compares to the Apple. Apple loses.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/two-displays.shtml
Quote:
I was not ready for the shock when I asked him to show me the same images on an Apple display side-by-side. The difference was huge. The Eizo looked much more pleasing to the eye, much sharper, much smoother, completely uniform in color and intensity from edge to edge and from corner to corner, and the color gamut and dynamic range were clearly far superior. The more shocking thing to me was that after seeing a neutral gray displayed on the Eizo, I realized that we could not get a totally neutral gray on the Apple. We calibrated and profiled the Apple several times, and next to the Eizo the pure gray always had a reddish/purplish or a greenish cast.

Epson R1800 prints v. dark despite many attempted fixes

i have an epson r1800 printer which i used successfully with early versions of PS and windows XP. now the prints are very dark with a greenish cast using both a macbook pro snow leaopard, and windows 7 both with ps5.
i import the pics first into LR3.
i have been on the fone for hours with epson high-level tech support and the best they/we can figure out is that the printer cannot handle the photpro color setting that LR assigns automatically. it only like prints that began as Adobe RGB 1998 and havent been re-assigned. those occassionally seem to work fine. but some do not. i have shots in jpg tif and digitized slides [tif] going back decades, so lots of issues included. nor is that is an all-round solution, but is there some way i can instruct lr NOT to use the photopro profile, but adobe rgb 98 instead.
if i go that route, my options then are importing into ps using smart object and opening in raw one foto at a time, a pretty cumbersome [and somewhat confusing to me] process. i do this in lr by choosing 'edit in' > 'open as smart object' and then in ps clicking on the thumbnail in the layers palette to open in raw. ot i can use bridge, thereby involving 3 programs. arghhh.
per epson tech instructions--and this was the first thing that gave me some good prints--i have set the workflow option at the bottom of the raw image in ps at:
adobe rgb 1998; 16 bit; highest mp available( 20 or 25mp even tho i am shooting at 18mp); 320 ppi. but it only works sometime.
or am i on the wrong track completely in trying to solve the printer problem. i have been thru many setting adjustments and nothing seemed to work until opened with the current workflow setting. i have tried, as both adobe and epstill darkson recommeded, having ps control the color and setting icm and management off. still dark.
if agsinst all recommendations i use printer controls color, epson vivid, i can get prttey good prints, but only if i print from LR. PS hates this setting.
i am awating a call from a high-level adobe techie.
my little head is reeling--and of course this all is after epson tried to blame OS, PS, LR, my monitor, and me. and adobe did the same casting about. but since the same dark image is happening with the mac laptop and windows desktop, none of these seemed likely. epson also suggested i buy another, newer printer, but then admitted that if the photpro profile was the problem, no joy.
any suggestions, help. i have gone thru much ink paper and hair tearing and dozens of on-line fora.

As remarked by other responders, this is not a problem unique to you, to Lightroom or to your printer; I have struggled many times, most recently with Aperture3 and an Epson1290 (my Epson 220 didn't show the problem at the same time, with the same images). Changes in driver, profile usage to names but 2 factors, all can screw things up.
My suggestions:
1. Make sure you have the latest drivers downloaded from the Apple Software Update window below the Apple icon at the lefthand end of your Finder menu bar.
2. use an appropriate profile for your printer/ink/paper combination; the only real solution is to produce your own, with something like SpyderPrine - I have one for each combination I use.
3. Select these in the Lightroom Print Menu at the right hand side of the window under "Print Job". Don't use "Draft Mode.", which doesn't allow the following choices. Underr "Color Management", put in your chosen profile and Rendering Intent (I use Perceptual, but, in my experience, they don't change things much).
When you click on "Print", an Apple print window opens, which shows the printer is not in control of printing; all the options are greyed out.
As an alternative, in the Apple Print Window, select "PDF". This will save the image as a .pdf, which you can print from Preview. In the Previerw print menu, select Color Matching/ColorSyc/Profile: and put in your chosen profile; when you get down to the Clor Management" option, coilor controls will be "off", showing that your choices will be used.
If things are working correctly, two prints, one from each route, should be identical; if they are not yoy have another proble, the basis of which I cannot imagine.

First time dealing with Greenshift/Gamma problem in Quicktime/Safari

I've been editing video on a Mac and in Final Cut Pro since version 2 (I am transitioning to Adobe Premiere Pro so don't judge )and this is the first time I've had a huge problem with a shift in color from what I see on the canvas to what is exported - and the first time I've noticed that that problem/shift only happens when the footage is viewed in an Apple program (Quicktime or Safari when uploaded to Vimeo). Opening the footage in VLC or viewing the upload on Firefox? Looks gorgeous. But on Safari or Quicktime? Colors are muted and have a greenish cast.
In doing some research, especially on various Adobe forums, I've learned that this is a scarily widespread problem (and learned the term 'QuiRktime') so I'm suprised I haven't had this problem before - it may be due to the lovely taupe/grey outfits, skin tones, etc that I got to shoot.
The footage is for website/computer usage so looking at it on my monitor should be a good indicator. And I've had others look at the Vimeo upload and some have commented on the green cast (so are probably Mac people too...).
So I'm not sure what to do - how best to give it to the client.
Workflow: footage is ProRes HQ, shot in 1080, shrunk to 720 to make 'artificial second cam close-up' (don't ask...). Edited in Final Cut Pro, but I've been going back and forth with it in Adobe Premiere Pro to try and tweak the picture color and contrast, as I've been liking the filters in Premiere better than FCP lately, but had some pre-built items I needed to use in FCP as I haven't gotten around to re-building replacements in After Effects.
I've exported it as ProRes and used Adobe Media Encoder to compress (been using both the Vimeo 720 preset - and tried upping the bitrate, setting quality to max rendering - and the Broadcast 720 preset).
Only time I've gotten it to look good when opening on Quicktime is when I export it as Animation versus ProRes, but the resulting file is 12X (and thus 12GB) so too large to upload or burn on disc (and compressing it for web usage from that file gives identical results to simply compressing the ProRes file in the first place or exporting directly from Premiere Pro to h.264)
So my question is...what is the best way to export this footage to get the right color cast in Quicktime based computers and non-Quicktime using computers.
I've uploaded a screenshot of the footage opened in Safari and Quicktime (left side) and Firefox and VLC (right side) to Flikr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/44843717@N04/8300689101/
Thanks for any help you can give

The footage is for website/computer usage so looking at it on my monitor should be a good indicator.
It actually doesn't matter where the footage will end up. The idea is to see the image accurately while grading, and for that you will need a calibrated, external TV. You just can't use a normal computer monitor or software media players for this.

Off color printing

I have to say I don't think this is an Epson problem. I have both an Epson 2200 and a Xerox Phaser solid ink printer, and I've suddenly turned up unable to get decent color from either of them. All the posts I've seen here seem to concentrate on Epson printers, but there is no doubt in my case that it also afflicts my Phaser.
A couple weeks ago they both printed with beautiful color. The last few days, total crap. The problem arose somewhere between upgrade to Snow Leopard 10.6.0 and the installation of 10.6.2, as when I first installed Snow Leopard, the prints were great. They turned crappy while I was running 10.6.1. I have no idea why, but I am about to do an archive and install on 10.6.0 and see if I can recover.
What I'm seeing on both is that regardless of whether I use the Gutenprint driver or the Epson driver, or the Xerox driver, and regardless of whether I use color management by the printer driver or have Photoshop or Lightroom do it, and regardless of which paper profile I select, everything has a greenish cast to it. I've one photo in particular of a black and gray dog on a red wagon seat, and the dog comes out muddy, the seat turns fluorescent green. To be sure the different set ups and printers wind up with changed colors depending upon how they are set up, but the green more or less pollutes everything, and that darn seat is always VERY green and not at all red.
I don't have time this week to do the archive and install, so if anybody can shed some light on this problem before I do it next week, I'm all ears.

I am having a similar problem with my Canon ip4000 and Aperture. I was printing much better after one update to Aperture but now everything has a yellow cast to it. I've downloaded the recent drivers and tried to adjust the yellow but to no avail.

Greenish cast to monochrome B&W scans in LR??

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for