HP LP2475w produces small calibrated gamut

Summary of the issue
When calibrated, the resulting ICC profile for this monitor spans a gamut that is smaller than anticipated.
Monitor and settings
LP2475w with panel LPL LM240WU4
F/W: GIG068 S-L0226
Backlight hours: 4760
Brightness: 21
Contrast: 80
Custom Color: R245 / G255 / B247
Source
Lenovo 3000 n200 laptop (GeForce Go7300 card)
Connected via external VGA (no digital video out on that laptop)
OS: Windows 7
Calibration details
Colorimeter: Spyder3Pro
Calibration software: BasicColor Display 4.1.20
Target white point: 6500K
Target gamma: 2.20
Target luminance: 110cd/m2
Black level: 0.33cd/m2
Detailed description
I have recently bought a used LP2475w for photo color correction and retouching. I would like to make it work in a workflow from capturing Adobe RGB DNG files via my DSLR, via LR4 & softproofing, to output on my profiled Epson R2880. The inkset on my printer has a rather large gamut, so it made sense to me to get a monitor that allows me to softproof saturated colors where applicable.
The calibration process resulted in pleasing contrast and good grayscale neutrality, but there is a flaw that runs counter to what I am trying to achieve with it: The LP2475w, when calibrated using the system above, shows a peculiar gamut that lacks saturated yellow-greens and saturated magenta-blues. It is noticeably smaller than the one posted on TFTcentral for this monitor http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/icc_profiles/hp_lp2475w.icc and does not encompass either sRGB, AdobeRGB or my printer/ink/paper's gamuts. This is obviously quite frustrating.
The preceding image shows a comparison between AdobeRGB (wire) and monitor profile (solid).
The preceding image shows a comparison between TFTCentral's gamut plot of the monitor (wire) and my own monitor profile (solid).
My attempts at troubleshooting so far
reset the monitor to factory defaults and start from scratch
vary the different monitor settings (brightness, contrast, custom RGB settings)
vary the profiling settings (different gammas, different white points including native, different contrast ratios)
compare the ICC profiles via ICCView http://www.iccview.de/content/view/2/4/lang,en/
use both the original Spyder3Pro software and BasicColor Display 4 - results are similar
I am now at the end of what I can do and would appreciate it very much if a monitor- and color-savvy person would chime in on this board. Feel free to check the ICC profile I have generated here. It uses the settings outlined above:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8819420/HP_6500k_110cd.icm
Questions
What can I do to achieve the same large gamut as other users have?
Does connecting to the monitor via DVI-D make any difference to the resulting gamut? I will soon build a new computer system, but for the moment I am stuck with VGA.
http://sven.zenfolio.com
http://www.fo-en.de/sven-koerber

Tried something else, with partial success:
Installed ArgyllCMS & DispCal GUI
Loaded the corrections for Spyder 3 & LP2475w
Calibrated & profiled the display for 5800K / Gamma 2.2 / 110cd/m2
And presto - bigger gamut visually (the outlined version is the old one):
http://www.iccview.de/user/10016/104.wrl
Coverage according to DispCal GUI:
100% sRGB
87% Adobe RGB coverage
Will have to tweak some more using a different set of Spyder 3/monitor compensation settings, but this is much better already.
The root cause for the issue appears to be the match between the colorimeter and the wide gamut display. Apparently you'd need an accurate spectrophotometer to get around these limitations.
http://sven.zenfolio.com
http://www.fo-en.de/sven-koerber

Similar Messages

Folio Producer small glitch

HI Everyone,
just a very small question - I seem to be unable to click within the product ID field on the Folio Producer. I have done it before without probs, so what have I missed?
Any suggestions pls?

Have you tried the Update button (under Folio Details on the right)?

Flash, Flex, AIR Which is best for producing small interactive apps?

Hi
I posted to the flash forum but really looking for feedback from flash, flex, AIR users as well
I'm looking for the forums thoughts and advice on which of Adobe's current technology set (CS5) is best suited for creating small interactive applications/packages by users who would not have any background in coding and very little interest in learning coding.
The idea is that users would know basic drag & drop development and maybe extend it to include some basic scripting to wire up elements of it. The ability to develope applications for a range of access points (website, mobile, desktop) would also an added benefit
The over arching idea would be to let the users create some apps/programmes/packages quickly on any topic they like but not bog them down with coding
Which CS5 technologies would be best for that

I don't see how it would be any different for mobile than for desktop, considering the biggest difference is frame-size.
Flash Builder is very good at building fluid layouts. VERY good. By extension, Catalyst, built on the same framework, should be too (haven't seen the final version, but the betas were looking good in this regard).
The entire platform has been getting optimized for mobile creation lately, and CS5 should have a lot of tooling towards that end.
I would suggest downloading the trial version of the softwares when they are released (supposed to be mid-may) and playing around with it before you decide.
If you want to, you can hit up labs.adobe.com to download the beta of Catalyst right now, which might give you the answers you need. (Flash Builder was already released, and is available on adobe's site for trial download currently)

Photomerge Panorama produces small image

I'm trying to use Photomerge Panorama with 3 10MP images. It's a vertical panorama but if I arrange the images manually, Photomerge stitches them nicely. The result is a high quality HDR panorama - but it's only about 1K pixels wide, and therefore useless. I don't see any step where I can affect this resizing, which seems to happen on its own, arbitrarily. Is this a bug? Is there any way to get Photomerge to preserve the resolution of my photos when stitching them?

This is happening with Elements 8.
I'm reviving this thread because I'd really like to use this feature - but it's apparently broken, and if Google is telling me the truth, it's never really worked reliably in any previous version of Elements.
By selecting manual positioning, and flipping between 'perspective' and 'reposition', I can sometimes trick Elements into trying to stitch a full size panorama; I see the images suddenly pop back to full size; but E8 then grinds for a while, then the Photomerge UI closes, and no image is produced. Nothing. Or sometimes E8 just locks and has to be killed with Task Manager.
My source images were TIFF - I tried converting them to JPG - it made no difference. There's nothing unusual about these images, they're just 10MP photos. I've tried other options in Photomerge Panorama, and the result is always the same. Apparently it will only produce a panorama at about half the resolution of the original images - basically useless.
Does anyone use Photomerge Panorama to successfully get a full size image? Does anyone know if this feature works properly in Elements 9?

Macbook Pro w/ Retina Display produces small white spots, how do I clean the screen?

How do I remove the white spots from the Macbook Pro display? The cleaning cloth takes out few of the spots, but I don't want to apply so much pressure on the display, as it may damage it. I'm a little nervous about using liquids, should I? Any solutions? Cloths? Liquids? Etc.

I've noticed that people offer various personal advice on this, but nobody references the engineers who actually designed and built the screen. I'm assuming Apple did consult the engineers on this issue and they actually took the time to write about it in the "MacBook Pro Important Product Information Guide." They probably thought it was important or something. ;-)
I'll quote page 2 from the 2012 rMBP version:
"Cleaning the McBook Pro Screen To clean your MacBook Pro screen, first shut down your MacBook Pro and unplug the power adapter. Then dampen the included cleaning cloth with just water and wipe the screen. Do not spray liquid directly on the screen." (Emphasis added.)
Coming from a machining background, I would recommend using a swirling motion to avoid wearing the screen in a uniform manner. Take note that this is not explicitly stated in the guide, and is probably not necessary considering the included cloth is so soft that it probably wouldn't affect the screen this way.

Any recommendations for A3 colour printer for small studio?

Need a printer to do A3 or A3+ printouts for client mockups in small studio.
Can anyone recommend one? Needs to be networked with 3 people using it.

Formally, your question belongs on the Apple ColorSync Users list and not here, but Pages is the place where photography and typography come together, so here goes.
1. Stay away from toner-based printing devices. They tend to have a tiny gamut, too small for the RGB colour space in which you capture and correct your photographs, and too small for proofing.
2. Stay away from printing devices intended for the office imaging market. These devices tend to have a small hardwired RGB colour space, that is, sRGB.
You may not be able to work around the cap on the colour gamut in an ICC characterisation of the colour device, so you can't get at its full colour gamut.
3. For presentation printing and proof printing, a graphic arts CcMmYK inkjet with bright and neutral white substrate produces a colour gamut you can use in two ways.
a. For presentation printing you can address the whole gamut of the inks+substrate, reproducing as much as possible of the colour space within which you capture and correct photographs. Use the smart 3D gamut comparison in the ColorSync Utility to see what you could be loosing.
b. For proof printing you can clip the large gamut to the size and shape of the gamut of the intended printing condition, adding paper white simulation for D50 visual matching and matching by colour measuring instrument for contract proofing using a control strip.
There are contract quality presentation-printing and proof-printing RIPs for Mac OS X Server. BEST/EFI Colorproof by a group of people in Germany is one such. They have a forum where you can work out questions on configuring rendering intents, or you can ask on the Apple ColorSync list.
/hh

A Calibration.Gamma Question

I've been calibrating a fairly new 21 Inch Samsung LCD, with the Eye One Display 2. Generally speaking, I am very happy with the results. The colors seems true and the monitor is not too bright. The problem is the Gamma. The target chosen is 2.2; yet, each time I calibrate the result is 1.9. The color target of 6500 and brightness of 120 are achieved.
So, what effect does this slight variance have, and any ideas why it can't be achieved?
I adjust the brightness/contrast and RGB values using the software and the LCD OSD controls. Each step I get the values almost dead on in the center, so I can't figure out what's going on.

Now i'm confused, so let me get this straight,
I said:
>As long as what you're seeing between LR, PS and web syncs up, that's as accurate as you're going to get.
you:
>There's no reason why LR/PS and web colors should sync up, unless you're using a color-managed browser such as Safari.
and then,
>Which is why I always see a difference, sometimes ever so slight, between CM and nonCM apps.
So,
> As accurate as you're going to get.
> Ever so slight.
To me these mean the same thing.
There are subtle differences between applications, but getting within 3% of expected is essentially, accurate color.
Why sweat those last few %? It's going to look different on everyone else's monitor, so why kill yourself?
I apologize if my language caused a minor fire, but i just found your statement to be slightly offensive. Telling a user that they're not supposed to have consistent color seems like an attempt to scare them. I don't know about you, but i make my living producing color. I work on multiple systems spread throughout several agencies and photographers. In each of them, i've walked in, set up an unfamiliar system and had consistent and reasonably accurate color up and running within the first hour (mac only). And the process is always the same. Unless the monitor you're working on is beyond repair, once you've calibrated, getting consistent color between apps is simply a workflow issue. Of course, the moment you bring an output device (other than the monitor) into the mix, everything goes to hell. Fortunately, the majority of my work these days is destined for the web. But if i had to tell my clients, "oh sorry, these files that you just spend a couple hundred thousand producing are going to look like inconsistent dog meat because some browsers aren't color managed," they would fire me. Seriously. This issue was resolved last century. I can bring up my work in any image editor, and ALL browsers and not see any obvious differences. This is how it should be and is.
In case you haven't tried this, calibrate to 2.2/65K. Now, open LR and PS. Take an image from LR and export as sRGB. Open in PS. Notice any major differences between? You shouldn't. Next, Save for Web from PS. This will take your sRGB image and strip its profile (if unchecked). Save it. Drop the jpg into all your browsers. What do you see? That's right, consistent color! And yes, it is possible to produce out of gamut color which shifts after being squeezed into sRGB. Fortunately, this is rarely the case.

Appearance of color in Photoshop after calibration, and outside of Photoshop

I bought an expensive monitor some time ago which claims to produce the color gamut of Adobe RGB, the NEC PA271W. I also bought an X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter, with software, to calibrate my monitor.
After calibration, the images appear right when displayed in Photoshop, and such images print okay on my professional printer with professional profiles, but such images don't appear okay outside of Photoshop, when displayed on my calibrated monitor. They appear far too saturated and contrasty.
When I check what profile is listed under the Color Management tab of my monitor, the default profile is the same as that listed among all the other profiles under Windows/system32/spool/drivers/color.
What's going on, I wonder. Is my video card not compatible with the X-rite calibration process? The video card is the AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series.
Any help would be appreciated.

Vincent RJ wrote:
I think we're either talking at cross purposes, or you are misinterpreting my words. I've always understood that the purpose of calibration is to standardise the appearance of the image on all monitors that are correctly calibrated.
You are indeed MASSIVELY WRONG there. Trust me, you're not even close to beginning to understand color management. What you are describing is a simplistic, deficient personal idea of Color Management, not "calibration".
STEP ONE in Color Management:
Calibrating and profiling are only a start of the whole Color Management process. Calibrating and profiling your monitor does nothing, absolutely nothing for the appearance of any image on other monitors. Trust me: ZILCH !
When you leave out the term "profiling" and refer to calibration alone you are talking sheer nonsense. Get yourself into the habit of thinking of both terms together, though they are part of the one starting point in process.
STEP TWO:
Set your saved monitor profile after calibration as your Monitor Profile File only. Never as your Working Space, never as something you ever embed in a file, never as a print or target profile.
Once you have set this profile as your Monitor Profile. You NEVER think of it again, and never mention it again—unless eventually, and for whatever reason, your monitor profile file gets corrupted, damaged or disappears by magic.
Note that your monitor profile is a strictly device-dependent profile, it applies to nothing else in the entire world, only to your video card and your particular monitor unit. Not even to an identical model and manufacturing batch. Each individual monitor has its own performance characteristics (industrial tolerances of components or manufacture and all that, as well as aging of same).
STEP THREE:
This entails choosing your WORKING COLOR SPACE. This will always be a device-independent (repeat: device-independent) standard workspace such as ProPhoto RGB, Adobe RGB, sRGB, etc., in descending degree of gamut width.
STEP FOUR:
You make absolutely sure to embed the device-independent Color Profile of your Working Color Space in your document (image file), this is called tagging your file. This is of such enormous importance that I always say: "If a moron hands you an untagged file, you're going to have to guess in which color space it was created. Once you make your best educated guess, remember to go beat that moron who gave you an untagged file mercilessly with a baseball bat or simlar, heavy object!"
This is just my way of stressing how wrong it is not to embed the color space profile in your finished file. The only worse offense would be to tag it with the wrong profile. Tagging a file with your monitor profile should be punished by quartering or by burning at the stake.
Again, just strong imagery to reinforce the concept.
STEP FIVE:
This will be using a device-dependent Printing Profile, also called a Target Profile, in the printing dialog of the Photoshop application or the RIP used by a commercial printing outfit. This will be a device dependent profile prepared exclusively and specifically for your particular combination of ink, paper and printer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vincent RJ wrote:
…I'm not referring to any conversion of numbers or RGB values…
But of course you are Vincent RJ, you are!!! Most definitely you are! Why can't you grasp that basic concept? ?? !!
With a calibrated and profiled monitor and a properly tagged image file (with the color profile of your working color space properly embedded) Photoshop will use your Monitor Profile that you set in the application as such to CONVERT and CHANGE THE NUMBERS (VALUES) of the RGB colors in your finished image BEFORE sending them to your monitor. Every single time. Think of that process as making up for the deficiencies of your monitor and video card combination.
When other people look at your image, if they're using a color managed application, said application will use whatever they have set as their Monitor Profile in their setup to CHANGE THE NUMBERS of the colors in your finished image BEFORE sending them to THEIR monitors.
If their monitors are uncalibrated and unprofiled, you don't have a prayer of a chance to control even remotely how your image will look on their screens. That's 96% of web users, by the way. If their monitors are calibrated and profiled, the image on the screen will be reasonably close to what you see, but the gamut of their monitors (vs. your wide-gamut NEC) will necessarily change the RGB numbers and colors from what your setup does, and the variance will be greater.
Get rid forever of your silly concept of "standardisation" or standardization, whichever way we want to spell it. That is simply a pipe dream of yours. If you have a big stick handy, beat up the moron who got you to believe that. Use twice the numbers of strikes if that person is a teacher.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly, I'm getting an uneasy feeling because you haven't mentioned printing at all.
You should be aware that Color Management is defined in terms of the art and science of controlling colors from the digital image to print. There are different variants of the definition, but they all end with the word PRINT.
What I'm trying to say is that a person who works with images only to be observed and shown on screens does not need to bother with Color Management at all, because the minute percentage of monitor viewers I mentioned above. Such a person can just set everything to sRGB (monitor, color space, tags, printer, etc), the lowest common denominator of profiles, and forget about anything else.
I would hope I got through to you, but I'm not holding my breath.
I wish you luck in your endeavo(u)rs.

How to have posted images display as sRGB on wide-gamut monitors.

I understand an sRGB profile is necessary for posting images but I need help on how to do that with Photoshop CS2 and my new wide-gamut monitor (HP LP2475w with Spider3Express calibration). Before doing a "save for web" and posting, I "convert to profile" to either "sRGB IEEE61966-2.1" or "sRGB with hardware configuration derived from calibration" (it makes no difference which), but I see then a significant color shift in the posted images when I view them through Firefox 3.6 (with operating color management software -verified on other posted images) and the same color shift with IE6 (which has NO color management software). So, Firefox is NOT RECOGNIZING my posted images with the sRGB profiles that I thought I was embedding in them in Photoshop. So my question boils down to: WHAT EXACTLY DO I HAVE TO DO IN PHOTOSHOP SO FIREFOX WILL RECOGNIZE THE POSTED IMAGES AS sRGB and display them 'correctly' on wide-gamut monitors??
Thank you very much.
-Jeff

ISSUE RESOLVED. Photoshop CS2 was not embedding an sRGB profile in the images I was posting. I needed to check the "ICC Profile" checkbox in "save for web" to make that actually happen (after I did "convert to profile" sRGB).
I also have switched to "Full Color Management" Value 1 (hidden) in Firefox 3.6 so that Firefox now assumes any untagged image is sRGB standard and then converts those, and all other images which ARE tagged, to my calibrated monitor profile. This definitely looks to me like the way to operate with a wide-gamut monitor although I understand it is still recommended to always tag images for posting as sRGB and not embed any other profile for color consistency over color accuracy. At least if there are some out there with wider-gamut tags, I should get some benefit.
Have I got it right ?
Thanks,
Jeff

When replying to an email in Outlook '10, the font of the text to which I am responding changes to Calibri 11.

In my Inbox, all of the body text for my emails is Arial 10 (which is our default font) but on my PC once I hit reply to an email, the font of the most recent email switches to the smaller Calibri 11. I have all of the File/Options/Mail/Stationery
and Fonts set to Arial 10, but Outlook is changing the text i am replying to to Calibri for some reason. Any thoughts on how to fix this? IS it a registry value I can't find?
thanks!

Did you set Arial as the +Body default or change the font to use Arial? It sounds like the font is not set in the mail, so outlook uses the default +Body font. Set Arial as the default in format text > change styles. complete instructions are here:
http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/email/understanding-fonts-and-the-body-style/
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center
Outlook Tips
Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook weekly newsletter

Working Colour Space and sRGB

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

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

Over saturated images when monitor resumes from sleep

Lately I started to get this weird beheviour from LR 2.7. each time my monitor resumes from sleep all image colors become extremely over saturated. All other apps and computer desktop are just the same so it's only LR.
I use a wide gamut LCD (HP LP2475w) which is calibrated using iOne Display 2.
If I restart LR the problem goes away. This only started a few days ago just after I started uploading new photos taken by a new lens (Sigma 30mm).
Any ideas?
Micha

Hi
I can sympathise with how annoying this must be - and although I haven't looked into it myself, I do recall several other posts over the last 18months or so, with the same issue.
I can't dig out the exact posts now, but maybe the following might lead somewhere?
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827
http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
sorry I can't locate the threads I remember- I found one or two, but they were un-answered.

Secondary monitor displays with colorshift

secondary monitor displays with colorshift in LR4.1rc2. this is on windows 7/64.
Both my monitors i have are calibrated with spyder3, one is hardwarecalibrated eizo CG243, the other a HP2475 calibrated with spyder4 elite software.
Colorshift shows same characteristics when i switch LR app window with secondary window.
IT looks as if sRGB profile is applied to the secondary preview, because of the strong/overly saturated colors.
It seems to me a softwarebug, which makes secondary display inusable.
How is color management supposed to work in LR4?

It works fine with me (LR4.1 RC2, but previously used RC1, LR4.0, LR3.6... all worked the same).
I have a wide-gamut HP LP2475w (approx Adobe RGB gamut) and a Samsung193P (approx sRGB). Both calibrated/profiled with Color Munki Display, but I've previously used Eye One and Spyder units. After calibration/profiling, LR main and secondary display look the same in both Loupe and Develop view, and no matter which is LR's primary display. (Obviously, colours outside sRGB gamut don't look the same!)
I've just checked, and it still seems to be the case on my set up (W7 64-bit).
I can't think what the problem might be. I guess you've checked in Control Panel / Color Management that the correct profiles are assigned to each monitor. And I guess that you've got a video card with dual LUTs that allows separate calibration (mind you, I've never come across any cards that don't have separate LUTs, but apparently there are some).
PS - Web view might be different, as I think LR uses IE for rendering in web view only, and IE doesn't colour-manage properly.

Display disaster!

Hi all, I have a major problem with LR though I'm guessing it's not LR's fault. I have two Samsung monitors and if I drag LR from one to the other, after about a second, the image changes significanty in terms of color rendition. On the right monitor there is sufddenly a LOT more red added. I then drag it back to the left monitor and after a second, poof, the red coloring goes away. Aghhh! I hate color rendition and management. I would pay $100,000 to someone who could a) sort it out and b) explain the whole mystical art to me! If I had $100,000.
Can anyone offer any explanation? I am using Windows 7 Personal, 64bit and have 2 Samsung monitors and they were calibrated with a Spyder a month or so ago but those profiles are now out of date.
Thanks for any help you can offer before I go totally bald with frustration!
Phil

Phil J Rose wrote:
Hi all, I have a major problem with LR though I'm guessing it's not LR's fault. I have two Samsung monitors and if I drag LR from one to the other, after about a second, the image changes significanty in terms of color rendition. On the right monitor there is sufddenly a LOT more red added. I then drag it back to the left monitor and after a second, poof, the red coloring goes away. Aghhh! I hate color rendition and management. I would pay $100,000 to someone who could a) sort it out and b) explain the whole mystical art to me! If I had $100,000.
Can anyone offer any explanation? I am using Windows 7 Personal, 64bit and have 2 Samsung monitors and they were calibrated with a Spyder a month or so ago but those profiles are now out of date.
Thanks for any help you can offer before I go totally bald with frustration!
Phil
Let me say first of all that I'm up for the $100,000
I have two monitors, both profiled/calibrated. But they are very different monitors: one is an old Samsung, approximately sRGB colour gamut. The other is an HP LP2475w, which is wide gamut (approximately Adobe RGB). I normally run the LR window on the HP, with the second window on the Samsung. The images look near identical on both (unless there are saturated colours beyond sRGB that the Samsung can't manage).
But if I drag the LR main window from one window to the other, I see what you describe. That is, if the LR window is on the HP (wide gamut) monitor, and I drag it to the narrow gamut Samsung monitor, at first the colours go rather pale, but after a second or so LR realises that it needs to re-render to a different profile, and corrects the display. Similarly if I drag it back. But, after it adapts, LR shows the same colours on each monitor. If that's not the same with you, I would first check that each monitor has a correct profile associated.
What happens if you use both monitors in Lightroom? That is, display Loupe view on the main monitor (whichever that is) by typing E, then display Loupe view also on the 2nd monitor by typing Shift-E. If the monitors are profiled and calibrated, it should show the same colours on each. If you drag the main window to the other monitor (and you might have to type Shift-E again to get the loupe view on the other) you should have swapped the displays, but again still have the same colours on each.
PS if frustration leads to baldness I must be frustrated.
Can I have the $100,000 now please?

Color value shift from Illustrator to Photoshop

Hi there:
Hopefully someone has an answer for me (my apologies if this has been addressed before)?
When I open up a EPS file in Illustrator, the blacks read !00% for RGB. When exported as a JPG, Photoshop reads it as 0-0-0. So far so good. But when copy and paste the same EPS into a Photoshop files, as a smart object, the values change to 4-7-7. I've tried that with other colors, and it seems the color values shift when using as a smart object. Any ideas on why and how to remedy this?
I will also post in the Illustrator forum as well...
Thanks,
Lisa

Color spaces are a little complicated.
Best practice is to pick one and use it for every application.
Adobe (1998) has been regarded as a great standard for years.
If you are using s-RGB you and going into CMYK, you will probably always get color shift.
Bruce Fraser used to refer to s-RGB as "Satan RGB."
It has a very small color gamut and almost everyone has it by default because it is the Windows standard and unless the system was calibrated and planned, s-RGB will be everywhere (as intended).
Unfortunate that printing uses CMYK and the web uses the RGB.
Newer printing technology can use RGB but the s-RGB will limit your color spectrum.
Also you can set the conversion settings to preserve either the numerical values or perceptual intent...or turn them off in your preference panel.
If your final work product is in RGB (anything viewed on a monitor), I suggest that you work in RGB and not CMYK and use the Adobe 1998 standard on every machine and every program. (You can set your info palette to see both sets of numbers)
Everyone has their own opinion, the key is to be consistent.
And dont let all the tech-speak freak you... there is lots of information out there but you are in charge how you use it.
MrPxl

HP LP2475w produces small calibrated gamut

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for