Help please. Vista / CS3 Color Managment issue. Going nuts...

Hi all.
I'm in desperate need for some assistance since time is running out on a project that needs Powerpoint.
If I use color management in Bridge and look at my NEF and Jpegs they look somewhat desaturated and lacking vibrance as in comparison to another program, like AcdSee.
When i open up in Camera Raw, and then Photoshop, it looks the same. But hwen I copy to Powerpoint - it looks very vibrant and with a lot of saturation, luminance and hue. But it looks much better "eyecatching".
If I shut of color correction in Bridge, then the picture looks just as vibrant and nice as the end result in powerpoint and it looks just as good as in AcdSee! But the steps in between, that is Camera Raw and Adobe looks awful, and I'm supposed to make some color adjustments etc, making it absolutely impossible to know what the end resutl will be, since the color management is ON in Camera Raw and Photoshop.
I've callibrated my monitor, spyder3, I've set Adobe Bridge to use CS3 for monitor. I've tried alternating between Adobe RGB and sRGB. I've tried everything there is, but the colors in Camera Raw and Phtoshop are very wrong in relation to the end result. Can I shut down color management in Photoshop? Change it to Vista's? I know Adobe is right at the end of the day, it just doesn't work with the end result!
To add on to this, I've tried AcdSee and colors are correct in the RAW format. Thus, they don't have the same color correction and this looks exactly like the end result in the powerpoint.

>> the colors in Camera Raw and Phtoshop are very wrong in relation to the end result
Then you need to Photoshop> Convert to profile> Save As to the profile based on the end result because the end result sounds like an unmanaged application.
This is likely sRGB -- have you tried this?
What monitor, what did you profile it to (2.2 gamma/6500)?
http://www.gballard.net/psd/assignconvert.html

Similar Messages

CS3 Color Management Issue

No matter what I try when I open my pictures in photoshop, they look different than they did in ACR. I have gone throuhg all the color settings and even made sure to synchronize my settings between the two. Still, when I open an image that I've edited in camera raw into photoshop it looks different. Sometimes this is very minor, but sometimes it is enough to ruin an image.
Any ideas?

John,
This should not happen.
I can only speculate that you might somehow have some Photoshop default color settings out of whack. Just speculating, but assume that your default RGB profile is Adobe RGB. Then assume that your settings say, Convert to Working RGB under Color Management Policies. All this with no warnings set.
Now if you open the image with ACR in Pro Photo RGB it will be converted to Adobe RGB when it gets to Photoshop. Some colors may be altered if they are out of gamut in the target space. Depending on your conversion options, these changes may be visible. With other profiles such as sRGB vs aRGB the differences will be much more subtle.
If you have off selected under Color Management Policies, you can expect all sorts of bizarre behavior.
Nothing else makes sense to me.
Cheers, Rags :-)

Photoshop Vista Nvidia - color management issues - working colors not accurate

Today I updated Vista and the NVidia 3300 driver got upgraded as well. Earlier today, everything was working great with colors within Photoshop. After the update, my colors in Photoshop (and Illustrator) are shifted brown. My grey scale has varying degrees of brown. Reinstalled NVidia drivers without success. All other colors on desktop and other programs (Flash included) are fine. Also, a bizarre thing is when I prep a file for the web, the colors look good.
Please help!
Thanks! Chris

The NVidia desktop system is an invasive piece of bloatware, so I usually
remove it, being careful to leave the latest video driver in place.
Two possibilities -
1) the NVidia driver update included a profile. To verify this, go into
Start>Settings>Display>Advanced>Color Mgmt. and verify that the profile
selected there is the one you had before. If you are not sure what was
there before, add sRGB and select it as the monitor's default profile.
2) the NVidia driver is loading the LUT at startup time.
If you have calibrated your system, any combination of these two will throw
things off. If you have not calibrated, then the problem is more likely to
be #1 above.

Color shift (color management) issues in Mavericks

Noticed color management lacking for Safari and Dock icons just after Maverick update, but was unable to check it with recalibration. Today X-Rite issued an update for i1 Display PRO and i was able to recalibrate my display, but the problem unsurprisingly wasn't in the display profile.
Bellow are two screenshots of Safari vs. Chrome and FF vs. Chrome respectively.
Color difference is seen with the naked eye, but gray and blue fields' values are also annotated (Safari is on the left, Chrome is on the right).
These are FF (on the left) and Chrome (on the right) with no color difference, both browsers are color-managed.

Issues here too: 2013 Mac Pro, latest Mavericks/browser versions (OS X 10.9.4), and Dell UP2414Q display (known for good color—not to mention the only retina display money can buy).
Safari seems fine: web sites with no color profiles in the images look very much as I am used to from OS X Lion and Windows on other machines (some variation from screen to screen is just life). CSS colors match image colors when they should.
Firefox is ultra-saturated: web sites the look fine in Firefox--and identical to Safari--under OS X Lion (on a different Mac/display anyway) but on the new Mavericks system, colors are eye-burningly saturated! That's CSS and images alike (without color profiles). CSS and image colors still match—but both are WAY oversaturated.
Note: images dragged from Safari and Firefox to my desktop both look fine when opened in Quick Look or Preview. Both (again, images without profiles) look super-saturated like Firefox when opened in Photoshop CC—despite Photoshop having the same settings I'm used to using (color management Off for RGB, working space set to Monitor) on my old Mac with PS CS6 under Lion. Yet the color values in PS CC do register as correct despite looking so bad (same goes when opening my own RGB source PSDs that generated the web sites to begin with).
Shouldn't Safari and Firefox out of the box look alike, since they do in earlier OS versions? (Even if some workaround is found, "out of the box" a new Mac with default Firefox installation now looks terrible.)
Separate but complicating issues, in case it helps to diagnose this:
a) The Dell display's default calibration looks quite good to me; but if I run Apple's visual calibration steps which I would normally do on a new Mac, everything gets very dark. (So I went back to the default calibration, which is supplied by Apple and called "Dell UP2414Q"; Apple clearly supports this display specifically, since I never installed any Dell software.)
b) When I take an OS X screenshot of Safari, despite it looking "right" everywhere (Preview and Photoshop CC alike), values are way off. (Regardless of whether I strip the color profile or not when importing the screenshot into Photoshop CC.) When I take a screenshot off Firefox, the screenshot looks "right" (no longer oversaturated!) in Preview and Quicklook. When imported into Photoshop CC, Firefox screenshots behave just like drag-saved images from Firefox: they appear super-saturated just like in the browser, BUT the color values at least register correctly.
c) No setting I can find for Photoshop CC will make exported images look right (and match CSS colors) in ANY browser unless I accept them being super-saturated while I work on them (which of course is untenable). I'll deal with that separately: I've abandoned the new Mac Pro for Photoshop work and gone back to my old Mac (and PS CS6)--but this I assume to be Adobe's fault. I mention it only in case it's some kind of clue.
For what it's worth, here's my interpretation: Firefox and Photoshop are using the full gamut of the display, while Safari is not—and Safari looks GOOD not using the full gamut. (And at least with this Dell display, it looks "correct" that way.) Pure primary red #FF0000 (images and CSS alike) which appears normal to me in Safari and Preview and Quicklook turns to eye-burning neon red in Firefox and Photoshop (with management Off and working space set to Monitor). It's kind of amazing that the display can show a red even more brilliant than I have ever seen on a computer before, BUT it doesn't help me design web sites for the rest of the world who has a more ordinary gamut.
Maybe this is just a long-standing Firefox bug, revealed to me now that I have a large-gamut display? (But that wouldn't explain why other people have seen colors MORE saturated in Safari then Firefox.)

Color Management issues with Illustrator

Can someone help me figure out the color management issues I'm getting when printing on an Epson 3880 from Illustrator?
The image comes out severely red as evident on the face. I'm not getting the same problem when printing from Photoshop, even though I set same paper profile in printing dialog box.
I attached two printed picture (one from Photoshop CC, and one from Illustrator CC) that I took with my iphone so that you can see the printed result. Even when I try to simulate same thing using illustrator soft proofing process, the soft proof does not show me anything close to how it gets printed out. And I tried all device simulations to see if any would match it. Im using CMYK SWOP v2 for Color space in both programs.

Dougfly,
Only an hour wasted? Lucky you. Color is an incredibly complex subject. First, forget matching anything to the small LCD on the back of your camera. That's there as a basic guide and is affected by the internal jpg algorithm of your camera.
2nd, you're not really takeing a color photo with your digital camera, but three separate B&W images in a mosaic pattern, exposed thru separate red, green and blue filters. Actual color doesn't happen until that matrix is demosaiced in either your raw converter, or the in-camera processor (which relies heavily on camera settings, saturation, contrast, mode, etc.)
Having said the above, you can still get very good, predictable results in your workflow. I have a few color management articles on my website that you might find very helpful. Check out the Introduction to Color Management and Monitor and Printer Profiling. In my opinion, a monitor calibration device is the minimum entry fee if you want decent color.
http://www.dinagraphics.com/color_management.php
Lou

Color management issues with Flash CS3, please help?

Hello everyone.
I am having issues with color from a Jpeg image produced in Photoshop CS4
after importing onto the stage in Flash CS3. The color in Flash changes the image to a lighter less saturated state. Yuk.
Here is a link to a screen capture to show you what's happening (for a bigger view):
http://www.rudytorres.com/color/weirdcolor.png
As you can see the front image is the Photoshop image showing the sRGB color profile embedded but Flash (behind) changes that color.
This client is quite picky and she will notice this difference.
If any one can help, please.
- Rudy
P.S. It's a button somewhere, Right?

Dougfly,
Only an hour wasted? Lucky you. Color is an incredibly complex subject. First, forget matching anything to the small LCD on the back of your camera. That's there as a basic guide and is affected by the internal jpg algorithm of your camera.
2nd, you're not really takeing a color photo with your digital camera, but three separate B&W images in a mosaic pattern, exposed thru separate red, green and blue filters. Actual color doesn't happen until that matrix is demosaiced in either your raw converter, or the in-camera processor (which relies heavily on camera settings, saturation, contrast, mode, etc.)
Having said the above, you can still get very good, predictable results in your workflow. I have a few color management articles on my website that you might find very helpful. Check out the Introduction to Color Management and Monitor and Printer Profiling. In my opinion, a monitor calibration device is the minimum entry fee if you want decent color.
http://www.dinagraphics.com/color_management.php
Lou

Help - color management issue, sunburns! (with a calibrated monitor)!

I love Lightroom and its workflow, its unlike anything of its kind. However, lately (since I first started using it) I've seen a problem related to color management on my computer (I believe) and hope someone out there can shed some light.
After importing JPG pictures into Lightroom and making modifications to them, I am getting *completely* different results once I export them (as sRGB, as I'll be sharing them via web). All of the pictures are coming much more saturated (for a lack of a better description).
Here is what I am getting (see brief descriptions below each pic): http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/couple.html
I'd be very curious as to how they are showing up on your (calibrated/uncalibrated) screen(s), but the 1st and 3rd pics are showing up as 'realistic' on my PC, while the middle (exported from Lightroom) is showing up as too much saturation and even reddish push, as though the couple got hit with sunburns.
Another example of this result here: http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/dog_chair.html. Though in this case, the picture in the middle actually looks better, it doesn't change the fact that I am getting very different output than what I see in Lightroom (or in photoshop without the embedded profile).
I am thinking this is a problem with color management settings on my PC. First guess would have been "monitor calibration"... but as mentioned in the title, I calibrated my monitors (I have two Dell 1905FPs... not great for accurate color representation, but they do the job) repeatedly, using Spyder2 Pro.
What pushes me to think this is the following (represented here http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/couple_original.html ):
Before making any modifications to the imported sRGB picture - in other words, importing the picture straight from the camera memory card into Lightroom and then exporting it back (again, without making any modifications to it) - the pictures, both the original and the exported which still look the same and are kept sRGB, look completely different in Lightroom then if I was viewing them in a non-color managed software on my PC, such as the default windows picture viewer.
If my LCD panels are properly calibrated, should I not be more or less seeing the same image colors, whether I'm viewing them through windows, or through Lightroom (or Photoshop along with the embedded sRGB profile)? What gives??
Jesse
PS. I *more* than appreciate anyone taking time to respond to this post. I've been up for nights now trying to understand/fix this.
If it's any help, I have the different version (but original and exported) files here:
original file:
http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/couple_original.JPG
Original file, imported into Lightroom and then exported back out w/o any modifications (sRGB): http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/couple_lightroom-nomidification_exported_srgb.jpg
Original file, imported into Lightroom, MODIFIED and then exported back out (sRGB):
http://www.bachmannphoto.com/test/couple_lightroom-modified_exported_srgb.jpg

Exiftool reports the original contains the following EXIF tags:
Interoperability Index : R98 - DCF basic file (sRGB)
Interoperability Version : 0100
The nomidification_exported version does not have those lines, but contains the actual sRGB profile:
Profile CMM Type : Lino
Profile Version : 2.1.0
Profile Class : Display Device Profile
Color Space Data : RGB
Profile Connection Space : XYZ
Profile Date Time : 1998:02:09 06:49:00
Profile File Signature : acsp
Primary Platform : Microsoft Corporation
CMM Flags : Not Embedded, Independent
Device Manufacturer : IEC
Device Model : sRGB
Device Attributes : Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
Rendering Intent : Perceptual
Connection Space Illuminant : 0.9642 1 0.82491
Profile Creator : HP
Profile ID : 0
Profile Copyright : Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company
Profile Description : sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Media White Point : 0.95045 1 1.08905
Media Black Point : 0 0 0
Red Matrix Column : 0.43607 0.22249 0.01392
Green Matrix Column : 0.38515 0.71687 0.09708
Blue Matrix Column : 0.14307 0.06061 0.7141
Device Mfg Desc : IEC http://www.iec.ch
Device Model Desc : IEC 61966-2.1 Default RGB colour space - sRGB
Viewing Cond Desc : Reference Viewing Condition in IEC61966-2.1
Viewing Cond Illuminant : 19.6445 20.3718 16.8089
Viewing Cond Surround : 3.92889 4.07439 3.36179
Viewing Cond Illuminant Type : D50
Luminance : 76.03647 80 87.12462
Measurement Observer : CIE 1931
Measurement Backing : 0 0 0
Measurement Geometry : Unknown (0)
Measurement Flare : 0.999 %
Measurement Illuminant : D65
Technology : Cathode Ray Tube Display
Red Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Green Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Blue Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)
The modified_exported version likewise does not have the interoperability index tag but contains the actual sRGB profile:
Profile CMM Type : Lino
Profile Version : 2.1.0
Profile Class : Display Device Profile
Color Space Data : RGB
Profile Connection Space : XYZ
Profile Date Time : 1998:02:09 06:49:00
Profile File Signature : acsp
Primary Platform : Microsoft Corporation
CMM Flags : Not Embedded, Independent
Device Manufacturer : IEC
Device Model : sRGB
Device Attributes : Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
Rendering Intent : Perceptual
Connection Space Illuminant : 0.9642 1 0.82491
Profile Creator : HP
Profile ID : 0
Profile Copyright : Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company
Profile Description : sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Media White Point : 0.95045 1 1.08905
Media Black Point : 0 0 0
Red Matrix Column : 0.43607 0.22249 0.01392
Green Matrix Column : 0.38515 0.71687 0.09708
Blue Matrix Column : 0.14307 0.06061 0.7141
Device Mfg Desc : IEC http://www.iec.ch
Device Model Desc : IEC 61966-2.1 Default RGB colour space - sRGB
Viewing Cond Desc : Reference Viewing Condition in IEC61966-2.1
Viewing Cond Illuminant : 19.6445 20.3718 16.8089
Viewing Cond Surround : 3.92889 4.07439 3.36179
Viewing Cond Illuminant Type : D50
Luminance : 76.03647 80 87.12462
Measurement Observer : CIE 1931
Measurement Backing : 0 0 0
Measurement Geometry : Unknown (0)
Measurement Flare : 0.999 %
Measurement Illuminant : D65
Technology : Cathode Ray Tube Display
Red Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Green Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Blue Tone Reproduction Curve : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to extract)

Photoshop CS3 color management "Save for Web" problem

This problem is getting the best of me.......
After spending 3 full days researching this problem, I am no closer to finding an answer than when I started. I still cannot produce a usable image through the "Save for Web" feature of Photoshop CS3. I have read web page after web page of "Tips, Tricks and Recommendations" from dozens of experts, some from this forum, and still I have no solution... I am exhausted and frustrated to say the least. Here's the simple facts that I know at this point.
I have a web design project that was started in PS CS1. All artwork was created in photoshop and exported to JPG format by using "Save for Web". Every image displays correctly in these browsers (Safari, Camino, FireFox and even Internet Explorer on a PC).
I have recently upgraded to PS CS3 and now cannot get any newly JPG'd image to display correctly. My original settings in CS1 were of no concern to me at the time, because it always just worked, and so I do not know what they were. I have opened a few of my previous images in CS3 and found that sRGB-2.1 displays them more or less accurately. I am using sRGB 2.1 working space. Upon openning these previous image files, I get the "Missing Profile" message and of course I select "Leave as is. Do Not color manage". CS3 assumes sRGB-2.1 working space, opens the file, and all is well.
The problem is when I go to "Save for Web", the saturation goes up, and the colors change. The opposite of what most people are reporting. Here's another important point... new artwork created in CS3 does exactly the same thing, so it's not because of the older CS1 files.
I have tried every combination of "uncompensated color", "Convert to sRGB", "ICC Profile", etc. while saving. I have Converted to sRGB before saving, and my monitor is calibrated correctly.
I have tried setting the "Save for Web" page on 2-up and the "original" on the left is already color shifted before I even hit the "Save" button. Of course, the "Optimized" image on the right looks perfect because I am cheating by selecting the "Use Document Color Profile" item. Why do they even have this feature if doesn't work, or misleads you?
Does anyone have any ideas what could be happening here? Why is this all so screwed up?
CS1 worked fine out of the box.
Final note: I do have an image file I could send along that demonstrates how it is possible to display an image exactly the same in all 4 of the browsers I mentioned with no color differences. It is untagged RGB and somehow it just works.
I am very frustrated with all of this and any suggestions will be appreciated
Thanks,
Pete

>> First of all... I'm using an Adobe RGB image master... I open it and get the Profile Mismatch Screen... I choose Use Enbedded profile... all looks well. Next I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... again all looks well, no change that I can tell.
This has further confused the issue on several points, not the least of which version PS you are doing this with?
>> AdobeRGB> Convert to Profile > Working Space sRGB-2.1... all still looks well... but now, when I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... I see the insane oversaturated look that is driving me nuts.
That is your strongest clue...it sounds like you have a bad system or bad monitor profile. To rule out the monitor profile: Set sRGB as your monitor profile in System Prefs> Displays> Color.
>> Adobe RGB image master... I open it and get the Profile Mismatch Screen... I choose Use Enbedded profile... all looks well. Next I go to Proof Setup > Monitor RGB... again all looks well
That doesn't make sense, stripping an embedded AdobeRGB profile should desaturate the color in Softproof MonitorRGB, especially the reds -- you have something wacky going on there.
At this point I think you need to review the links and get a grip about how color management and profiles work...
BTW, forget about setting ColorSync in PS COlor Settings, use Adobe ACE.
MO,
I think SFW is fixed under CS3 :) By default it Converts to sRGB and strips the profile.

Color management issue

I'm scanning some old 35mm slides on an old iBook G3. I must use this because my scanner is no longer supported by the newer versions of OS10. The setup works just fine; just the other day I rescanned something I originally did almost 8 years ago and you can't tell the difference visually between the two versions. However, I'm making a book using these scanned illustrations in a newer iMac using OS10.6. I'm laying the book out using InDesign and Photoshop CS3. The problem is that when I view the scanned images in Photoshop--which look great on the old iBook--on the new iMac, all sport a noticeable yellowish cast with also a tad of red. I've been tearing my hair out trying to troubleshoot where the problem is. Not only do the images look much warmer on the iMac, but the prints from this computer do also. Under "color spaces" I have set both computer working spaces to Adobe RGB(1998) and under "color management policies," both computers are set at "preserve embedded profiles." I have come to a dead halt and would appreciate some advice as to steps I might take to resolve this frustrating issue. By the way, both monitors have been calibrated numerous times; as I say, the prints come out just as different as do the images on the monitors. Thanks for any help.

10.6 was the first version to properly display untagged sRGB. The print thing, I don't know, that's a WTF.

CS3 color management won't match prints

Okay, I know there are a lot of boneheds who can't figure out how to set up color in Bridge and CS3 but I am at my wits end on this so bear me out.
Windows XP and CS3
Bridge is set to; Enable color management in Bridge
RAW conversion is SRGB
CS3 color settings/working space set to SRGB
Print color management is set to SRGB and Photoshop manages colors
Printer is set to "application manages colors" (HP B9180)(btw, I have also tried it set to SRGB)
Image looks the same on Bridge, RAW conversion, CS3 and print screen (dark)Image looks LIGHTER when viewed with any other program (including windows picture and fax viewer, HP print program, Paint Shop Pro and online) and prints to match the lighter image both on my HP and from my lab!
The closest I have been able to get to a total sync is to set Photoshop's color settings to "Monitor color," and uncheck the box in Bridge that says "apply color management settings in Bridge." In that case, Bridge and CS3 produce a lighter image but RAW conversion is still darker. Plus, who the hell wants to use monitor color in Photoshop!?

That's pretty much it David... I could get Photoshop to match my prints but then any other program would show the prints as being waaaay off-color.
Today I bought a spider2express and color balanced my monitor. Now everything seems to look in sync and my prints match very close (a little warm for my tastes..). Tech support at Photoshop told me it was a calibration issue but I thought that was bull... i mean, how can calibration make an image that looks different in two different programs look the same? Well, it does. As far as I understand it now (layman's terms)when you look at an image in windows viewer ot explorer or any other non-color management program you are looking at the image based on your monitor profile. When you look at the same image in photoshop the program uses it's own color management which then gets filtered through your monitor program to your eyes (but not to the printer). If your monitor profile is bad, the image looks bad.
Or something like that :)

Need help understanding profiles and color management

I made the big leap from inexpensive inkjets to:
1 Epson 3800 Standard
2 Spyder3Studio
I have a Mac Pro Quad, Aperture, PS3, etc.
I have a steep learning curve ahead, here's what I've done:
1 Read a lot of books, watched tutorials, etc.
2 Calibrated the monitor
3 Calibrated the printer several times and created .icc profiles
What I've found:
1 The sample print produced by Spyder3Print, using the profile I created with color management turned off in the print dialog, looks very good.
2 When I get into Aperture, and apply the .icc profile I created in the proofing profile with onscreen proofing, the onscreen image does not change appreciably compared with the no proof setting. It gets slightly darker
3 When I select File>Print image, select the profile I created, turn off color management and look a the resulting preview image it looks much lighter and washed out than the onscreen image with onscreen proofing turned on.
4 When I print the image, it looks the same as was shown in the print preview...light and washed out, which is much different than what is shown in edit mode.
5 When I open PS3 with onscreen soft-proofing, the onscreen image is light and washed out...just like displayed in PS3 preview. If I re-edit the image to look OK onscreen, and print with the profile and color management turned off, the printed image looks OK.
So, why am I confused?
1 In the back of my simplistic and naive mind, I anticipated that in creating a custom printer profile I would only need to edit a photo once, so it looks good on the calibrated screen, and then a custom printer profile will handle the work to print a good looking photo. Different profiles do different translations for different printers/papers. However, judging by the PS work, it appears I need to re-edit a photo for each printer/paper I encounter...just doesn't seem right.
2 In Aperture, I'm confused by the onscreen proofing does not present the same image as what I see in the print preview. I'm selecting the same .icc profile in both locations.
I tried visiting with Spyder support, but am not able to explain myself well enough to help them understand what I'm doing wrong.
Any help is greatly appreciated.

Calibrated the printer several times and created .icc profiles
You have understand that maintaining the colour is done by morphing the colourants, and you have understood that matching the digital graphic display (which is emissive) to the print from the digital graphic printer (which is reflective) presupposes a studio lighting situation that simulates the conditions presupposed in the mathematical illuminant model for media independent matching. Basically, for a display-to-print match you need to calibrate and characterise the display to something like 5000-55000 kelvin. There are all sorts of arguments surrounding this, and you will find your way through them in time, but you now have the gist of the thing.
So far so good, but what of the problem posed by the digital graphic printer? If you are a professional photographer, you are dependent on your printer for contract proofing. Your prints you can pass to clients and to printers, but your display you cannot. So this is critical.
The ICC Specification was published at DRUPA Druck und Papier in Düsseldorf in May 1995 and ColorSync 2 Golden Master is on the WWDC CD for May 1995. Between 1995 and 2000 die reine Lehre said to render your colour patch chart in the raw condition of the colour device.
The problem with this is that in a separation the reflectance of the paper (which is how you get to see the colours of the colourants laid down on top of the paper) and the amount of colourant (solid and combinations of tints) gives you the gamut.
By this argument, you would want to render the colour patch chart with the most colourant, but what if the most colourant produces artifacts? A safer solution is to have primary ink limiting as part of the calibration process prior to rendering of the colour patch chart.
You can see the progression e.g. in the BEST RIP which since 2002 has been owned by EFI Electronics for Imaging. BEST started by allowing access to the raw colour device, with pooling problems and whatnot, but then introduced a primary ink limiting and linearisation.
The next thing you need to know is what colour test chart to send to the colour device, depending on whether the colour device is considered an RGB device or a CMYK device. By convention, if the device is not driven by a PostScript RIP it is considered an RGB device.
The colour patch chart is not tagged, meaning that it is deviceColor and neither CIEBased colour or ICCBased colour. You need to keep your colour patch chart deviceColor or you will have a colour characterisation of a colour managed conversion. Which is not what you want.
If the operating system is colour managed through and through, how do you render a colour test chart without automatically assigning a source ICC profile for the colourant model (Generic RGB Profile for three component, Generic CMYK Profile for four component)?
The convention is that no colour conversion occurs if the source ICC device profile and the destination ICC device profile are identical. So if you are targetting your inkjet in RGB mode, you open an RGB colourant patch chart, set the source ICC profile for the working space to the same as the destination ICC profile for the device, and render as deviceColor.
You then leave the rendered colourant test chart to dry for one hour. If you measure a colourant test chart every ten minutes through the first hour, you may find that the soluble inkjet inks in drying change colour. If you wait, you avoid this cause of error in your characterisation.
As you will mainly want to work with loose photographs, and not with photographs placed in pages, when you produce a contract proof using Absolute Colorimetric rendering from the ICC profile for the printing condition to the ICC profile for your studio printer, here's a tip.
Your eyes, the eyes of your client, and the eyes of the prepress production manager will see the white white of the surrounding unprinted margins of the paper, and will judge the printed area of the paper relative to that.
If, therefore, your untrimmed contract proof and the contract proof from Adobe InDesign or QuarkPress, or a EFI or other proofing RIP, are placed side by side in the viewing box your untrimmed contract proof will work as the visual reference for the media white.
The measured reference for the media white is in the ICC profile for the printing condition, to be precise in the WTPT White Point tag that you can see by doubleclicking the ICC profile in the Apple ColorSync Utility. This is the lightness and tint laid down on proof prints.
You, your client and your chosen printer will get on well if you remember to set up your studio lighting, and trim the blank borders of your proof prints. (Another tip: set your Finder to neutral gray and avoid a clutter of white windows, icons and so forth in the Finder when viewing.)
So far, so good. This leaves the nittygritty of specific ICC profiling packages and specific ICC-enabled applications. As for Aperture, do not apply a gamma correction to your colourant patch chart, or to colour managed printing.
As for Adobe applications, which you say you will be comparing with, you should probably be aware that Adobe InDesign CS3 has problems. When targetting an RGB printing device, the prints are not correctly colour managed, but basically bypass colour management.
There's been a discussion on the Apple ColorSync Users List and on Adobe's fora, see the two threads below.
Hope this helps,
Henrik Holmegaard
technical writer
References:
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?14@@.59b52c9b/0
http://lists.apple.com/archives/colorsync-users/2007/Nov/msg00143.html

Color Management Issues Solved in LR 1.1?

Long tempted to switch from Elements 5.0 to LR (or to integrate the two), I have held off because I've read on this forum dozens, probably hundreds, of complaints about LR 1.0 and color management. Some of these questions were clearly from ignorance, I know (such as not understanding the difference between the color space used by monitors and that used by printers). But many other were from sophisticated users all of whom began their comments or questions with "Works perfectly in Photoshop, but in LR ..." See, for example, http://adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc41850/39 , which describes difficulty in getting LR to produce acceptable prints. To my mind, LR 1.0 had color management problems even if the highest end users managed to work around them. I don't want to buy into problems, not being a sophisticated user yet myself. So here is my queston: Does LR 1.1 solve these problems? That is, does LR 1.1 work as easily, or almost as easily, as Photoshop (say with the HP b9180, which has a PS plugin)? Thanks in advance.

The problem is that lightroom is somehow throwing the default profile that is set in colorsync into the mix. Which is something that Photoshop is not doing. So any printer profiles built by printing a target with PS is not going to be accurate when printed through Lightroom unless the default profile for you printer is Generic RGB Profile or something close.
Here is what I have posted elsewhere about my discovery of this issue.
I discovered something today that just might be the answer to the color printing problems from Lightroom.
First of all, all prints from PS and Lightroom was done with the same color management workflow with the profiles set in the application and color management turned off in the printer driver. This was to a Canon iPF9000.
Started when I tried to print from a new MacPro with Lightroom. Colors were not right.
Went to the G5 and printed from lightroom same file same settings same profile, color was correct.
Printed same file same setting same profile from PS on the MacPro. Color was correct.
So started printing and saving as PDF from the print dialog. Open the PDF files in Acrobat and checking embedded profile with Pitstop.
Here are the results.
Lightroom on Macpro: iPF9000 Paper profile. This was much darker with way to much yellow.
Photoshop of Macpro: Generic RGB
Lightroom on G5: sRGB v1.20 (Canon)
I had uninstall the sRGB v1.20 (Canon) profile from the colorsync folder on the MacPro. Added sRGB v1.20 (Canon) back in and guess what. sRGB v1.20 (Canon) in the PDF now generated from Lightroom. Print to the printer from Lightroom on the MacPro and it now printed correct.
Now got to thinking were does Lightroom get this (sRGB v1.20 (Canon) profile from. So checked in the Colorsync utility to see what the default profile for the iPF9000 is and sure enough it was sRGB v1.20 (Canon). Ok so what happens if I change the default profile in the Colorsync utility to Adobe RGB. Now guess what the Lightroom generated PDF now shows Adobe RGB as the embedded profile.
PS printed to PDF showed Generic RGB profile no matter what I set as the default profile in the Colorsync Utility.
Clearly Lightroom behaves differently when printing when a different default profile is selected for a printer. On Windows this could be the same as one can set in the printer properties (at least for the iPF9000) the default profile to automatic or set a different default profile manually.
This raises an interesting question as to what is really going on with print files set to a printer. Especially printers with much larger gamuts than sRGB.
Could this be the source of the strange Lightroom printing problems?
I do know when I have tried to make a profile from a printed target in LR I could not get accurate color. But the profile generated for a target printed in PS works fine in LR.

Color management issue from Photoshop Acrobat

I'm having an issue that I believe has been isolated to Acrobat X related to Color Management, but was referred to this Photoshop forum because more experts in color management tend to read here. My thread in the Acrobat forum with several updates on tests is here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4646650#4646650
The short version is that any RGB image I create in any app (including Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, a non-Adobe app with Word, and Acrobat's own PDF from Screen Capture feature) displays in both Acrobat X and Adobe Reader with dull colors, very similar (if not identical) to how an RGB file with full intensity colors (i.e. R255 or G255) looks when converted to CMYK.
I've tried numerous settings in the Color Management system, and have Synchronized my Color Settings via Bridge across all Adobe CS6 apps. I've tried synchronizing to both the default North American General Purpose 2, and the (sometimes suggested) Monitor Color, using a calibrated profile for my Dell display from OS X's built-in tool. Have also tried various settings of Preserving Embedded Profiles, ignoring them, Assigning a new Color Profile to a document, turning off color management completely, etc. No change in result.
I have a multi-monitor setup (3 external Dell displays connected to a Macbook Pro, 2 of them via USB video devices), but I've also tried making each display (including the laptop's built-in display) my Primary monitor and can see the color shift on each one, so it doesn't appear to be a calibration issue.
This issue is on my Mac at the office. I have a similar setup at home (albeit a MacPro 1,1 vs. a laptop) but with the same Dell monitors and CS6 software installation, and I can take the same document (whether it's InDesign, Illustrator, or Photoshop), make a PDF of it, and it displays with 100% accurate colors when viewed in Acrobat X.
In addition to the tests mentioned in my original thread, I've also tried uninstalling and reinstalling both Acrobat X and Adobe Reader.
I believe the issue is related to Acrobat, as I can repeat the issue with no other apps than Acrobat in the workflow: if I display a full-intensity RGB image on screen, then use Acrobat X to create a PDF from Screen Capture, the resulting PDF immediately shifts to the dull colors.
Have also thoroughly checked through Acrobat's preferences, as it seems almost as if there's a setting somewhere along the lines of "View all PDFs in CMYK color gamut", but no such setting exists. I did a complete uninstall of Acrobat X as well, which I imagine would also dump its Preferences, so it would be a clean reinstall.
Another interesting note: Apple's Preview app seems to display the PDF with accurate RGB colors, so I know the PDF actually has the correct color definitions intact. But the same PDF opened in Acrobat X or Reader side-by-side displays the dull colors.
Any thoughts?
-R

i wasn't able to follow your lengthy post, and the color management chain is too complicated (for me) to address here other to say Acrobat reads tagged elements and converts their colors to Monitor RGB (so you must have stripped the profiles in the PDF, and the Acrobat CMS is applying or passing through the wrong profile)
further, if you don't want to rely on profiles, your safest bet (for screen viewing) is to CONVERT everything to sRGB (but i would still include the profile in case someone wants to display or print the document 'accurately'
Here is a look at a several critical color setting in Export to Acrobat that control: Downsampling, Compression, Color Conversions, Destination, and Tagging (click on image for blowup):
PS:
these panels were grabbed from an InDesign Export PDF process, but Photoshop should have similar options somewhere

LR3 color management issues

Alright, so I'm having some trouble with color spaces and am at the point I'm seeing red and just want to smash my computer. I feel like I understand the basics of color management but for some reason I can't seem to get things to behave. I know certain programs are color managed and can handle different color spaces, and some are not. I will also note that my monitor has been calibrated using a Spyder3Pro.
I like working with sRGB simply because I get the same result on most places on the internet (I know I'm losing gamut but I really don't print too much so it's not a big deal). So I know that LR operates in ProPhoto RGB, the biggest of the main RGB color spaces (sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB) and as such shows photos with far more color than can be represented by sRGB. However, whenever I export a photo from LR (be it to JPEG in any of the color spaces, or to edit in PS CS5), the colors are always far more muted than what I see in LR. I have checked the settings in CS5 and even opened the RAW file (with the .xmp editing info) directly in CS5 in ProPhotoRGB and the colors aren't even close to what I see in LR. Additionally I used LR to export the file to JPEG in sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB, and when those three files are opened in Photoshop, they look virtually identical. There are minute changes in the histogram between the three files, but they all look the same. However, they appear different when viewed in my browser (Firefox), even though I have set it to color manage. I did notice that there was no color space listed when I looked at the file properties in the Details tab, but the color profile is clearly being embedded as PS asks me if I want to view the image in the working space or the embedded color space of the image. What is going on here?
Screenshot of the same file in LR and PS, being opened in PS using the external editing feature of LR (screenshot pasted and saved in sRGB in PS):
The file in PS converted to sRGB and saved in PS:
The file saved in sRGB from LR:
The file saved in Adobe RGB from LR:
The file saved in ProPhoto RGB from LR:
Additional information that may be useful:
Lightroom 3.6
Camera RAW 6.6
Photoshop CS5.1
Firefox 16.0.1
Monitor calibrated with Spyder3Pro
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Thanks,
Reed
EDIT: After further investigation, it appears that Firefox is treating these images as images without a color space, yet somehow Photoshop and Windows Photo Viewer recognize the color space. So I think I have two concerns: 1) why are my photos drastically different between LR and PS, and 2) how are the images being saved from LR lacking the color space information needed by Firefox yet still retaining it for PS?

ReedJ12 wrote:
It must be embedding the profiles somewhere because when I open the JPEGs in CS5, it recognizes that they're not sRGB. I made these simply by going in LR and clicking on the standard Export button. No external plugins have been installed.
Reed
In that case, were the images in the original post, the result of a "save" operation inside CS5? If so, could they have lost their colourspace tagging at that point, due to something in your Photoshop JPG saving settings (or your "save for web and devices" settings)?
That could be quickly confirmed by uploading a (say) ProPhoto exported image, for comparison, as directly exported from LR - that is, which has never been into Photoshop.
You could also compare this youself against the version you uploaded, side by side in PS - if the one that has just come fresh from LR still has its colourspace tagging, and the other has lost its colourspace tagging, then even though the RGB numbers inside the image may be identical, PS will be interpreting the meaning of the numbers differently in each case - and will therefore display them as different, just as colourspace-aware browsers such as IE8 are doing, for other people viewing your examples online.

Color management issues with colorsync utility

hi all,
I'm trying to properly color manage my workflow from camera to monitor to printer and I read through the entire manual on the "colorsync utility" which is supposed to do this. That's an hour of my life I'll never get back. Anyway the color is different on my camera's screen from my computer monitor and the final output is radically different.
I've used the ICC profile for my camera (Canon Rebel XT) and I've visually callibrated my monitor. I'm using a Canon IP 4600 with a continuous ink system (non OEM ink).
What I need to know is how do I change the color space visually? What I mean is without spending hundreds on colorometers etc. I know how to manually callibrate my computer monitor, but how do I ensure that my camera matches my screen and how do I compensate for the non OEM ink?
thanks for any help

Dougfly,
Only an hour wasted? Lucky you. Color is an incredibly complex subject. First, forget matching anything to the small LCD on the back of your camera. That's there as a basic guide and is affected by the internal jpg algorithm of your camera.
2nd, you're not really takeing a color photo with your digital camera, but three separate B&W images in a mosaic pattern, exposed thru separate red, green and blue filters. Actual color doesn't happen until that matrix is demosaiced in either your raw converter, or the in-camera processor (which relies heavily on camera settings, saturation, contrast, mode, etc.)
Having said the above, you can still get very good, predictable results in your workflow. I have a few color management articles on my website that you might find very helpful. Check out the Introduction to Color Management and Monitor and Printer Profiling. In my opinion, a monitor calibration device is the minimum entry fee if you want decent color.
http://www.dinagraphics.com/color_management.php
Lou

Help please. Vista / CS3 Color Managment issue. Going nuts...

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for