How do I soft-proof in LR?

Is there a way to view files in LR with different profiles? I looking to perform the same function I can in PS (view>proof set up>custom>picking my stored profiles to use for viewing). I primarily use LR and prefer not to keep switching back and forth. I have LR 3.6.
Thanks,
Tom

Soft-proof was first introduced in LR4. You can download the free trial to see if it's what you hoping for. I don't use it so I don't know much but from what I've heard you can only proof RGB profile but not CMKY. Hope this help.

Similar Messages

How to export soft-proofed image?

Hi !
Maybe I'm completely off but I didn't find any info on the subject.
I have soft-proofed image with a profile that a specific printer provided me.
I want to export the image that I soft-proofed to be displaying them as an album in Photoshop.
I didn't find any way to export the soft-proofed files.... Is it something that makes sense ?
Let me know.

Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață wrote:
Just export it and select the soft proof profile in the Export dialog.
To add to this for the OP, you might need to select Other... option from the color space popup to access the profile. It will remain within the list now.
And if it isn’t RGB, it isn’t going to show up (LR only supports RGB profiles).

Soft proofing: how to A/B?

Hi all,
I'm kinda new to soft proofing, so maybe this is a silly question, but here goes:
My workflow for printing is that i first tweak my photos so they look like how i want them on my computer monitor, for uploading to Flickr.
After that i choose the one(s) i want to print (Epson 3880) and go into "soft proofing" mode.
After i've tweaked the photo to compensate for the print, i want to A/B with my original. What i've noticed is that i need to generally add a bit more brightness and vibrance to approach (on physical paper) what i see on my computer screen, so i want to be able to A/B between my original photo and the proof copy.
But the thing is, when i do this the "soft proofing" module remains engaged for both my proof copy (that's ok) and for my original photo (not ok!) which was tweaked to look good on the computer and never meant to be printed, and on which i never did any soft proofing!!!
This makes it really hard to A/B between the two copies.
So why doesn't the soft proofing module automatically turn off when you switch to another photo on which you haven't done any soft proofing?
Hmmm, clear as mud methinks!
But does anyone see what i mean and could offer any tips?
Thanks! ......... D

Daz V wrote:
So why doesn't the soft proofing module automatically turn off when you switch to another photo on which you haven't done any soft proofing?
Soft Proofing "simulates" on your computer display (transmissive) what the print copy (reflective) will look like in your hands. The two are radically different in contrast ratio, black level, and white level achievable, so it makes little sense to try and compare the two. They will always look quite different. The goal is to adjust web based images so they look good onscreen, and print based images with 'Soft Proof' so they look good in the actual reflective light viewed print copy. What are you trying to achieve?
You can view them side-by-side by windowing LR and your browser and viewing the image in both at the same time. In fact that would be much close to reality, since browsers aren't always properly color managed. Two separate displays would be even better for this purpose.

How differs soft proofing in View - Proof Colors and Save for Web - Preview?

Hi, I'm currently confused with one inconsistency. My working space is Adobe RGB and I use calibrated monitor. After I finish my work on image I go to View -> Proof Colors -> Internet Standard RGB. Image looks terribly with the overall violet/purple hue. Then I open Save for Web dialogue, I check Convert to RGB and from Preview options I select again Internet Standard RGB. Now the previewed image looks as expected. The same results I get if I manually convert image to sRGB before soft proofing and saving for web. So... what's the difference between preview in Proof Colours and in Save for Web? Thank you for your opinions.

Hi 21, thank you for your input. All what you say makes perfect sense, it is exactly how it should work and how I expected it works. My problem was, that while testing this theory in practice, I have come to different results. I expected, that if I stick to the theory (meaning keeping in mind all rules you perfectly described) I should get the same result in both soft proof and save for web preview. But... it was not the case. Save for web preview offered expected results while soft proof was completely out of any assumptions and colours were totally over-saturated with violet/purple hue. Also, Edit -> Assign Profile -> sRGB gave another result then Soft Proof -> Custom -> assign sRGB (preserve numbers), but the same as save for web preview. What troubled me was why this is so.
Today I've made tests on hardware calibrated monitor and... everything works exactly as you describe and as I expected.
Then I went back to another monitor which is software calibrated (both monitors are calibrated with X-Rite i1 Display Pro). And again... I received strange results described above. So I did the last thing I thought and disabled colour calibration on that monitor. And suddenly... both soft proof and save for web preview gave the same result.
Probable conclusion: soft proof and save for web preview (together with Edit -> Assign Profile) are programmed to use different algorithm which is evident on standard gamut monitors with software calibration. Question can be closed.
Gene and 21, thank you for your effort.

How to use ICC profiles and soft proofing profiles?

Hi,
I got an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and Epson Hot Press paper which, upon investigation, received great profeesional reviews and, having never printed digitally before, I don't know how to use profiles for soft proofing or printing.
I don't know where to go in Aperture or what to do. My driver is up to date and I downloaded the paper profile - not sure where it ended up. What's next?
So far as I know, soft proofing is about calibrating the monitor to the paper - am I correct?
Thanks guys,
Raphael

Raphael,
A good reply is going to require a full-size keyboard, which I don't have access to just now. Here are some starter pages:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.htm
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml (a bit grumpy and out-dated)
Fwiw, I print to Epson Hot Press using a 3880. Imho, it's a _great_ printer, and that combination of printer and paper produced state-of-the-art results. (Not suitable in all cases, but if that is a look you like, the only thing that I've seen that surpasses it is the Epson 9900, and without looking at prints side by side you can not tell them apart.)
Your profile ended up wherever you have told your browser to save downloaded files. The Epson site should provide instructions on where to move the file. Once it is in the right Finder folder, when you next Aperture it should show in your list of profiles.
Keep in mind, though, that soft-proofing is useless without a well (read: hardware-calibrated) calibrated display.
HTH,
--Kirby.
(Sent from my magic glass.)

Adobe - please explain how to soft proof in LR2

I have read all the messages I could find. It seems clear that LR2 has no soft proofing of my prints. And yes, I am working with a color managed screen.
So Adobe, please tell us how you intend us to soft proof our images????

>Really? "most professionals do not calibrate their monitors." I find that unbeleavable.
Me too, but I know a few working pros that simply trust their expensive monitor is good enough. Weirdly some of them will spend a long time obsessing over color (typically skin tones) but don't bother to calibrate. This just boggles my mind. Seems to work for them fine though.
>I will agree that I am getting amazing prints out of LR2
Color is great for me too. However, I identified a major, reproducible on multiple machines, resolution bug with LR 2's print module at least in the OS X version and am curious if others see it too, especially on windows.
Jao, "Loss of Sharpness Printing Actual Size from Lightroom" #15, 24 Aug 2008 11:22 pm
In short. I. Printing at native resolution by unchecking "print resolution" does not work. LR2 will still scale but to the value now shown in light grey. II. In rotated images (like a portrait format RAW on a portrait paper) LR2 calculates the resolution to send to the printer based on the wrong dimension, resulting in a far lower resolution sent to the printer than specified. LR 1.4 does not have these bugs. This also impacts the print to jpeg feature and makes the Print module in LR 2 basically useless for me as I can only trust it to do the right thing in a limited set of circumstances.

LR 4.2 - how to compare master and soft proof copy?

Hello Everyone,
I'd like to use the soft proofing function in LR 4.2 to preview the print output and I'd like to use it to apply some corrections to the pictures before printing them, in order they look like I originally meant them to look like, but I'm experiencing some troubles, possibly caused by the used workflow (I'm not a pro, but my environment is calibrated properly).
My workflow is:
1. I import all fotos and apply some changes so that the fotos look like I want them to be (this is the master)
2. As I want to print them I use the soft proofing function and load the target icc profile with which I create a soft proof copy. Sometimes I notice that the differences between master and soft proof copy are quite drammatic, especially with regards to contrast, vibrance of colors and sometimes also regarding the brightness.
3. My target is now to adapt the soft proof copy so that it looks like the master (as I wanted the foto to look like), but I can't find any proper way to do so, because:
- I can't find a (semi-)automated way to adapt the soft proof copy so that it "looks" like the master copy
- in the Develop module I can't find a way to display both the master foto and the soft proof copy besides each other to compare them, in order to apply changes to the soft proof copy only so that it "looks" like the master.
The only way I found so far is to switch back and forth bewteen master and soft proof copy to compare them (to be able to apply the needed changes to the soft proof copy), but this is pretty painful, as the fotos don't load immediately, but it always takes some seconds and I have to 'remember' how the master looks like.
I'm not sure whether I'm doing something terribly wrong, but unfotunately I didn't find any answers to this specific issue so far, that's why I'm writing here.
Hope you can point me to a solution,
Regards,
Plasma2k

Activate softproofing with your choice of output profile (this can include proofing a web output colourspace such as sRGB).
Press Y to show a split before/after view (if your Toolbar is not open, press T to open that - this gives different kinds of split view options).
You will now see a comparison of the un-proofed and proofed appearances of this current image.
If you then make any develop adjustment from this mode, e.g. to make these two appearances more similar, you are then prompted to create a new proofing (virtual) copy as necessary - which can store these corrective adjustments independently of the main adjustments.
The before/after view then switches to show a comparison between your starting image (shown without softproofing) against your print-adjusted proof version (shown with softproofing).

Is Lightroom 2.2 color managed? How to soft proof?

I was just told that LR 2.2 is not color managed and softproofing is not possible... is this true?
I also have PS CS4... What is the best way to use LR 2.2 for you image editing in a color managed workflow if you also want to Soft proof before printing when you also have PS CS4?

It is correct that LR does not have soft proofing. But you don't have to print from PS to use soft proofing.
For color images, when I've finished with Develop in LR, I then edit in PS and do the soft proofing there. I have recorded some actions (two per paper type - one for each rendering intent - relative and perceptual) which I then apply as appropriate. The actions apply two adjustment layers - a curve and a hue/sat (to do a saturation bump - not necessary for all papers). I then tweak if necessary, flatten the layers and save the result.
I then print the PS edited file in LR. In my case I also rename the file to indicate the paper and rendering intent, plus I keyword it accordingly.
It's a pain but works very well. By printing in LR you can take advantage of the built-in output sharpening, and it's generally more convenient to set up - at least for me.
I have an Epson 2880 - when printing Black and White I use Eric Chan's profiles for the 3800 ABW mode - they seem to work fine for the 2880 - at least for me - I get results that match what I see on screen. For B&W I do not need to use PS at all - I just print directly from LR - no need to soft proof.
Selby

Iphoto book -- how to soft proof

Does anyone know of a way to get a soft proof profile for an Iphoto book?

If you're using CS3 from within iPhoto for your editing then just set it up to manage the color as seen in this screenshot and follow the workflow described below.
Using Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) as Your Editor of Choice in iPhoto.
1 - select Photoshop as your editor of choice in iPhoto's General Preference Section's under the "Edit photo:" menu.
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
NOTE: With Photoshop Elements 6 the Saving File preferences should be configured: "On First Save: Save Over Current File". Also I suggest the Maximize PSD File Compatabilty be set to Always.
If you want to use both iPhoto's editing mode and PS without having to go back and forth to the Preference pane, once you've selected PS as your editor of choice, reset the Preferences back to "Open in main window". That will let you either edit in iPhoto (double click on the thumbnail) or in PS (Control-click on the thumbnail and seledt "Edit in external editor" in the Contextual menu). This way you get the best of both worlds
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
If you're using a digital camera and not shooting raw then the camera's RGB profile will be very close to the sRGB IPC61966-2.1 profile that you can embed with PS and you shouldn't have to edit a photo just for the profile. However, if you do edit with iPhoto's editing tools the profile that gets embedded will be the one that the monitor is set to. iPhoto only embeds profiles on files it creates, i.e. modified files.
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

Display profiles and soft proofing Windows RGB / Monitor RGB

This might have asked before, but I did not find any definite answer for this. Sorry this gets a bit long.
Short question:
What's the difference between softproofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets? I see differences in my image between these targets.
Long question(s):
Here's some reasoning.. let me know when I go wrong.
I have hardware calibrated my display Spyder 3 elite to sRGB standard. I have understood that the generated display profile contains a LUT table that affects gamma values for each RGB component, so that affects both gamma and color temperature. That table is loaded into video card when Windows starts. In addition to the LUT table, the display profile contains what? Probably information on what color space the display has been calibrated to. Does that matches directly with the LUT table information, but may deviate from sRGB in the case my monitor cannot reproduce sRGB 100%?
Now if I have image that that is in sRGB, but the embedded sRGB profile has been stripped away, should any non color management aware image viewer show the colors properly, if it is assumed that 1) my monitor can handle full sRGB space and 2) my monitor was succesfully calibrated to sRGB and the LUT table has been loaded into video card?
Or does it still require a color management aware program to show the image, which implies that the LUT table information alone is not enough and the display profile contains some extra information that is needed to show the image correctly? I would think this is true, as I needed to turn on color management in Canon Zoom Browser to see images in it the same way as in Photoshop.
Now to the original question, what's the difference in Photoshop when soft proofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets
I read from www.gballard.net that
Photoshop can effectively "SoftProof" our web browser color:
Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Windows RGB
Photoshop's Soft Proof screen preview here simulates how unmanaged applications, web browsers, will display the file on 2.2 gamma monitors, based on the sRGB profile. If the file is based on sRGB and our monitor gamma is 2.2 and D/65 6500 degrees Kelvin, we should see very little shift here, which is the goal.
Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Monitor RGB
THIS IS WHERE the color-brightness-saturation problem will repeat consistantly.
Soft Proofing Monitor RGB here strips-ignores the embedded ICC profile and Assigns-Assumes-Applies the Monitor profile or color space.
The color and density changes seen here show the difference between the monitor profile and the source profile sRGB.
I'm not sure how to read that. Assume here that my monitor has been calibrated to sRGB and the PS working space sRGB. Do in both cases photoshop strip away color profile from the image at first? What happens after that? Does in Windows RGB case Photoshop pass the color values as they are to display? What does it do in "Monitor RGB" case then? Does it assign my monitor profile to the image? If it does, does there also happen conversion from one color space to another? In either one conversion there must happen as the soft proofing results are different. Does either one cause "double profiling" to the image as the monitor is already calibrated?
Thanks

Windows defaults to sRGB if you don't calibrate your monitor so untagged sRGB files should display (more or less) correctly in applications that don't know about color management on systems with uncalibrated monitors.
When proofing against Windows RGB you're proofing against sRGB, it will show you how applications that don't know about color management on an uncalibrated monitor will show the image. This is what you proof against if you want to see how the image will display in web browsers.
When you proof against Monitor RGB, Photoshop will assign your monitor's icc profile to the image which tends to be utterly useless most of the time.

Can I soft proof in LR4 like I can in PS CS5?

I haven't used LR 4 yet, but did view the soft-proofing tutorial.
I applaud Adobe for adding this functionality in LR4. It was one of the most obvious lacking features in the previous version, and I've still been mostly doing all my printing through PS CS5.
While soft-proofing is not a perfect replacement for test printing, I've been mostly satisfied with proofing in CS5.
Proofing in LR4 seems a little different, but by using a virtual copy it looks like if I use my printer/paper profile I should theoretically be able to not only be able to deal with color gamut issues, but also adjust contrast & brightness to more closely match my original developed image, and could compare the original with virtual copy in compare mode. Is it that simple? And if so, why is there a contrast & brightness adjustment in the Print module? That latter adjustment would be similar to what one goes through in PS CS5 when soft-proofing prior to printing. However, why have it if it can be done in the Develop module......and regardless, from the video tutorial it looks like you can't preview the image after making those adjustments in the print module nor compare it with the original......thus forcing one to make multiple prints until the result is satisfactory.
Just seems to me there is a bit more tweaking to do in LR4 to make the soft-proofing more functional. Or, perhaps I'm too stuck with the paradigm set forth for soft-proofing in PS and need someone to clarify how I can achieve the same result in LR just as confidently.

Beaulin Liddell wrote:
BTW, I've benefited immensly from your and Martin's Evenings books.......you've never steered me wrong.
Thanks for the kind words...but LR4's soft proofing is worth the effort to use. It really is better than Photoshop's soft proofing. I'm still on the fence regarding VCs vs Snapshots for soft proofing It's a tossup but the VC part has been built in while making a snapshot wasn't.
The advantage of LR4's soft proofing is you get the ability to do a Before/After while still using the full range of LR4's controls to adjust the printed version. Makes it really easy to nail great print (assuming you have good print profiles).
As for the Print module Brightness and Contradt...that's really a special case that doesn't involved color managed output. It's a crutch for those who don't have a locked down system. It's east to tweak but you have to make example prints since the controls don't actually display but only impact the output. I tend to avoid that.

Printing, Soft Proofing & Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions

Printing, Soft Proofing, and Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions
There are 2 common ways to set color management in Adobe CS2:
1. use managed by printer setting or,
2. use managed by Adobe CS2 program.
I want to ask how Color Management for Adobe LR 1.2 differs from that in CS2?
As is well known, Color Management by printer requires accurate printer profiles including specific model printer, types of ink and specific paper. It is clear that this seems to work well for LR 1.2 when using the Printer module.
Now lets consider what happens one tries to use Color Management by Adobe LR 1.2. Again, as is well known, Color Management by printer must be turned off so that only one Color Management system is used. It has been my experience that LR 1.2 cant Color Manage my images correctly. Perhaps someone with more experience can state whether this is true or what I might be doing to invalidate LR 1.2 Color Management.
Specifically, I cant use Soft Proofing to see how my images are changed on my monitor when I try to use the edit functions in LR 1.2. Martin Evening states in his text, The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book that it is not possible to display the results of the rendered choices (Perceptual or Relative) on the display monitor. While it is not clear in Evenings text if this applies to LR 1.2, my experience would suggest that it still applies to the 1.2 update even though the publication date of his book preceded this update.
Can someone with specific knowledge of Adobe LR 1.2 confirm that Color Management and Soft Proofing with LR 1.2 hasnt been implemented at the present.
The writer is a retired physicist with experience in laser physics and quantum optics.
Thanks,
Hersch Pilloff

Hersch,
since just like me, you're a physicist (I am just a little further from retirement ;) ) I'll explain a little further. computer screens (whether they are CRT or LCD) are based on emission (or transmission) of three colors of light in specific (but different for every screen) shades of red, green, and blue. This light stimulates the receptors in your eye which are sensitive to certain but different bands of red, green and blue as the display emits, making your brain think it sees a certain color instead of a mix of red green and blue. Printers however, produce color by modifying the reflection of the paper by absorbing light. Their color mixing operates completely differently than displays. When you throw all colors of ink on the paper, you get black (the mixing is said to be subtractive) instead of white as you get in displays (the mixing there is additive). The consequence of this is that in the absence of an infinite number of inks you cannot produce all the colors you can display on a monitor using a printer and vice versa. This can be easily seen if you compare a display's profile to a printer profile in a program such as Colorsync utility (on every mac) or
Gamut vision. Typically printers cannot reproduce a very large region in the blue but most displays on the other hand cannot make saturated yellows and cyans.
Here is a flattened XY diagram of a few color spaces and a typical printer profile to illustrate this. Most displays are close to sRGB, but some expensive ones are close to adobeRGB, making the possible difference between print and screen even worse.
So, when the conversion to the printer's profile is made from your source file (which in Lightroom is in a variant of prophotoRGB), for a lot of colors, the color management routine in the computer software has to make an approximation (the choice of perceptual and relative colorimetric determine what sort of approximation is made). Soft proofing allows you to see the result of this approximation and to correct specific problems with it.

Rendering intent when displaying, exporting or soft proofing?

I am trying to make use of soft proofing to adjust my images for a given output device for which I have ICC profiles. The two profiles I am playing with are for a Lambda and a Fuji Frontier. The Lambda working space almost fits within Adobe RGB, it exceeds it in only a few places but is noticeably smaller for a number of other colors. The Frontier working space is for most colors a bit smaller than the Lambda and about equal for only a small number of colors. The Frontier working space would also almost fit into sRGB (to give you an impression of its size).
When soft proofing with Aperture, dark greens desaturate more with the larger Lambda working space than with Frontier one. If the rendering intent were relative colorimetric, colors should be clipped more and limited by the smaller working space of the Frontier. If perceptual is used then colors would in general be somewhat more compressed (ie, desaturated) with the smaller Frontier working space. But I see rather the opposite. In short, neither explanation makes sense.
So I tried exporting from Aperture into Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB hoping that both would be big enough to contain most of the internal gamut of Aperture in order not to require much compression or clipping when converting from the internal color space of Aperture (I saw no difference between Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB in the exported files, so I guess both are large enough for my purposes). And I then converted/soft proofed these files from Photoshop into my two output profiles. More options (different rendering intents, black point compensation) but none seemed to really match what Aperture was soft proofing. I still have a lot of ideas what to try out but if anybody could shed some light on rendering intents and soft proofing with Aperture, it would be very much appreciated.
(A related question, what rendering intent is used when converting colors, let's say defined in the Lab space in Photoshop, to the screen? I guess this is defined in the monitor profile, which in turn is created by the monitor calibration software, and therefore might depend on the latter. I would guess some kind of perceptual, but how the colors are really fitted and converted from the larger Lab color space into the smaller monitor one might very noticeably been different calibration software and will be different again for the monitor profile supplied by Apple.)

I went on about this a little more scientific by creating an image with three rectangles: red, blue and green.
All of them are 100%, e.g. (255, 0, 0). Colorspace: ProPhoto RGB.
Results when exporting the images to AdobeRGB and sRGB, concentrating on the reds:
- sRGB looks very washed out
- AdobeRGB looks a bit washed out
- Original ProPhoto has so much red that it almost drives me nuts
Now, I would really expect similar results when activiating soft proofing.
But when selecting either AdobeRGB or sRGB, the reds always drive me nuts.
There is just no difference at all to the original ProPhoto image!
Conclusion 1: Dorin, you were right, previews are in AdobeRGB. What I saw in the reds was the difference between ProPhoto and AdobeRGB. Somehow my screen seems to have extreme reds (calibrated recently with an X-Rite ColorMunki Display).
Conclusion 2: Soft proofing with AdobeRGB and sRGB really DOES NOT WORK!

Convert to Profile & Soft Proofing.

Hello,
Apologies if this has been asked and answered. Some answers on soft proofing searched on the forums helped, but didn't hit the nail on the head.
I'm grateful for ideas, instruction, pointers.
I. Per the instructions of the printer who's printing my work, I've converted my image profiles to Dot Gain 20%. I would like to make sure that what I'm seeing on my screen will a) be a close match to what she (the woman printing the work) will see on her screen; and b) give me a sense of how the printer (Espson Stylist Pro 4800) will interpret and print the work. It makes sense to me that I should change my Proof Setup to Dot Gain 20%, no? Do I have this wrong?
II. I also need to make a set of jpegs that will be seen on a variety of screens, each of a different make and calibration. These jpegs need to be as convincing a match to the print as possible, with allowances, of course being made for paper, ink, etc. The match has to be close. Is there a standard for softproofing that will allow me to see what's likely to appear on a given screen. A tall order, I know. Wondering if I should just inform the viewers to view the jpegs with their monitors set to a certain color profile--or if I should send them a monitor profile along with the jpegs.
Again, I'm grateful for ideas.
Best-
Gear: iMac 27"; Native Gamma 2.2; CS6.

I've converted my image profiles to Dot Gain 20%. I would like to make sure that what I'm seeing on my screen will a) be a close match to what she (the woman printing the work) will see on her screen
if YOUR monitor profile is proper, Photoshop is 'accurately' displaying your image
to see your image the same, SHE (or anyone) will need to apply your source profile and also have a proper monitor profile
give me a sense of how the printer (Espson Stylist Pro 4800) will interpret and print the work. It makes sense to me that I should change my Proof Setup to Dot Gain 20%, no? Do I have this wrong?
Gernot offers a good approach (what I would recommend):
"Leave images in sRGB (Working Space sRGB)
Modify by PhS until the appearance is nice
In Soft Proof choose your PP"
in other words, "Soft Proofing" (View> Proof Setup> Custom: Device to Simulate: the specific Epson profile) -- it doesn't make much sense to Soft Proof source DotGain20% to device DotGain20%
my question to her would be: is Dot Gain 20% the actual Epson Print Space (or does she use a specific printer-paper-ink profile that you can Soft Proof on your 'calibrated' monitor)
if she doesn't do any conversions to your DotGain20 file (it is the Print Space), then Photoshop is showing you the contract proof on your monitor when you open it (is my opinion)
I also need to make a set of jpegs that will be seen on a variety of screens, each of a different make and calibration. These jpegs need to be as convincing a match to the print as possible
here, i would Convert to sRGB and embed the sRGB profile -- short answer here -- that is the best you can do

Dueling Features: Soft Proofing vs Print Adjustment

I'm really trying to appreciate the value of the new soft proofing feature that's got many around here excited. While there are other uses I'll get to in a minute, is it fair to say this feature is designed to make printed output predictable and save paper? I watched Julieanne Kost's tutorial and saw how we can identify out-of-gamut colors on our display device and any number of output devices/processes/papers. Her mooring pole example only seemed to illustrate the inherent compromises we have to make. If we're lucky our monitor IS showing us a hi-fidelity rendering of the image gamut and we're making an informed creative decision about which way we accommodate outlier colors in the output space. If, as in her example, both ends of the line are out of gamut, I'm not sure we're doing much more than fiddling. Not that I have anything against the illusion of control... if I did I couldn't stay married.
So assuming we've got a good monitor and decent eyes, soft proofing gives us some predictive power over what we're going to get before we feed a 24 x 30 sheet of Exhibition Fiber into the 9890 and blow $6 plus ink.
More useful in my own case is the potential to tailor image adjustments to client's prepress requirements. If I can get a prepress profile from a magazine client I can try to give them images that print better on their presses while staying true to my vision. Am I on the right track here?
Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities. One saves paper, the other says "throw another sheet in the machine and let's see what comes out"
I'm purposely trying to be humorous. I picture two LR teams arguing across the meeting room table. The calibrationists vs the gunslingers. MadManChan tell me it ain't so.

VeloDramatic wrote:
Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities.
Yup, very confusing. Especially if the issue is, my prints are too dark compared to my display which this is presumably supposed to fix. If the prints really are too dark, the RGB values need to be fixed and we have to wonder why the user didn’t see on their calibrated display, the RGB values are too dark. If instead, the print is darker appearing than the display, the fix seems to be to properly calibrate the display or fix the print viewing conditions to produce a match. And if the print is only too dark appearing compared to the display, what do the sliders do once you have a lighter (matching) print next to your too bright display and move the print away? Seems it would appear too light, not a good solution.

How do I soft-proof in LR?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for