Is color management in Motion causing me grief?

I'm stumped after looking through support docs and here in the forums, but I'm having problems getting correct color to come through on objects/layers. Here's my problem at a base level (it has other manifestations):
1. Add a color solid (solid1) set colors to R: 205 G: 5 B: 253
2. Add a new color solid (solid2), shifted up in the frame so solid1 is visible. Click on color swatch for solid2.
3. Sample the color on solid1 to apply to solid2
Shouldn't these two color solids match? They don't. I get R: 205 G: 6 B: 233
I figure this must be some color match issue......solid1 is fully opaque with no strange blending modes and such. For instance this also happens if you set the background color and try to match the background color.
Motion also seems to be changing the color of bitmapped graphics I bring in as well.

Similar Messages

Photoshop CS5 Color Management

My question has a complicated back story, but here is where I'm at. I'm still a newby when it comes to color management. I'm running Photoshop CS5, Lightroom 3.3, Windows 7 64-bit, Dell Studio XPS desktop, and a new Dell U2311H monitor. I really struggled several months ago trying to learn color management and Photoshop printing work flow, and may have made an error during that process that created my situation. When I attach a new monitor (or different monitor), all of my images in Bridge, Photoshop, and Lightroom display with a strong pink/magenta cast. Images displayed by applications that are not color managed look normal. Once I calibrate the new/different monitor (with Spyder2Express), and reboot, the color managed images display normally. If I go to the Control Panel, and assign another profile (such as sRGB IEC61966-2.1) as the default profile for the monitor, all images continue to display normally. If I go to the Control Panel, and disassociate ALL profiles from the monitor, the images displayed by Bridge, Photoshop and Lightroom again display with a strong pink/magenta cast.
If no profile has been assigned to the monitor on which Photoshop is going to display an image, what does Photoshop do that might result in a pink/magenta image? Might I have a corrupted profile somewhere, or might I have miscoded something in Color Management that is causing the condition? If I need to provide some additiional info, please let me know what info is needed.
Thanks for any assistance..

Andrew, thanks so much for taking the time to respond. I believe I found
and corrected my problem last night. When I attempted to do my own printing
from Photoshop last summer, I experimented a lot as I tried to figure out
the work flow. I discovered last night that I had apparently introduced an
error into the Monitor Color settings under Color Settings. The RBG Work
Space under Monitor Color was set to "Monitor RBG - xxxxx", where xxxxx was
the profile for the Epson paper I was experimenting with last summer! I
suspect that Protoshop was using that profile when I didn't provide any
other profile for the display. I changed that setting to "Monitor RBG -
sRBG", and my problem (the strong magenta casts when displaying images
without profiling the monitor) is gone.
I have been using the Spyder2Express for the past couple of years, and
usually work with a monitor I have previously calibrated with the Spyder.
This magenta problem only showed up when I switched to a new monitor, and
displayed images before running the first calibration. I wanted to resolve
the magenta problem, however, to determine whether it might be connected to
two other problems I have involving color management. The first was my
attempt last summer to print on a "hand me down" Epson 2200 printer. I
finally got the work flow figured out, but was never able to eliminate a
slight magenta cast from some of my prints. I tried printing from three
computers, using two operating systems, downloaded the 2200 driver and paper
profiles numerous times, printed on two different Epson papers, printed test
prints of the same image on two other printers (without the slight magenta
cast). I've given up on the 2200 for now!
My latest concern, which really prompted my renewed interest in color
management, is my latest monitor calibration. I just purchased a Dell
U2311H, and calibrated it with the Spyder2Express. At the end of the
calibration/profiling process, the Spyder provides a before/after view.
With other monitors, I've always felt that the calibration/profiling process
improved the test image. With the Dell U2311H, however, it appears to my
eyes that the "before" image looks super, while the "after" image appears to
have a yellowish, or yellowish-green, cast, and the after image is also
"lighter", giving the image a bit of a "washed out" look.
Any suggestions on what I might try next?
Thanks again for your help, Andrew. By the way, I read the two articles you
sent links for. I especially enjoyed the article on matching display and
prints. I'll keep rereading that one until it all soaks in!
Mike
www.mikelandwehr.smugmug.com

New graphics adapter causing color management problem

My graphics adapter failed and I just replaced it with a new Radeon 9800 Pro graphics adapter. Now all photos I open, .RAW, . JPG, .TIF, are trashed. They appear to be over saturated. This incorrect color is the same in CS3 Photoshop, Bridge & Lightroom beta 3; however if I bring the same photo up in ACDSee, Windows Viewer, or Photoshop and Bridge from my laptop the color is correct. If I bring up a photo with the colors oversaturated and do a "save for the web" the preview of the photo has the correct colors. Crazy! Color management is set for North American Prepress 2. So far I have totally removed CS3 and reinstalled and downloaded the latest display drivers for the graphics adapter. Anyone have any ideas?

You mean to say I spent $250.00 for my Eye1 calibrator for nothing?
Oy! (Slapping my forehead in mock horror!).
Actually, I'm glad I have it.
I noticed that Win7, as installed, seemed to know what to do when I chose the photo profile as I configured the OS. I looked at the gray screen I chose for background color (better to keep track of drifting) looked pretty neutral. But I ran the eye one anyway and could hardly notice the difference. But lately, I do see differences as when for instance, the OS does not run the profile (which happens enough I have a workaround to make Win7 go get it).

Suspected Flaw in Firefox 35 Color Management Behavior

I hope I can keep this concise, but bear with me if my confusion causes me to include some extraneous info. The info below is what I think is required for someone else to fully understand the issue.
BACKGROUND:
- NECPA271W wide gamut monitor in dual monitor setup with a standard gamut Samsung 245BW
- Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit
- Nvidia Quadro K4000
- Latest versions of FireFox (v35 32-bit), IE11 (11.0.9600.17498 updated to 11.0.15 32-bit) & Avant (Ultimate 2015 build 7, in use for testing because it incorporates the rendering engines of 3 major browsers, IE v 11.0.9600.17496, FireFox v 34.05.5464, & Chrome v39.0.2172.95)
- i1Display Pro (not the NEC SVSensor version), SpectraView II, NEC Multiprofiler & i1 Profiler
- Both monitors are calibrated and profiled. The NEC is calibrated using SVII, but since that software only supports NEC monitors, the 245BW has to be done using i1Profiler software that comes with the i1Display Pro. SVII is only capable of generating v2 ICC profiles, i1 Profiler is capable of v2 & v4, and recommends v4. Nevertheless, I think this entire bullet point is irrelevant to the effect I'm observing.
- I've lately started selling some of my photography on a fine art website. As a result I started digging deeper into how those images are viewed by others & subsequently printed. Images optimized in sRGB for the best possible display results across a widely varied viewer base are not going to give the same results as images that are soft-proofed and optimized for specific media/printer/ink combinations. This is especially true of my images which tend to lean in the direction of being more heavily saturated & wider gamut
- I've been exhaustively over the info here COLOR MANAGEMENT PHOTOSHOP CC CS6 Basic ColorManagement Theory ICC Profiles Color Spaces Calibrated Monitor Professional… & here http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/ among many others.
I had reached a point where I thought I understood things pretty well, but now I'm not so sure again Here's the problem:
I followed the guidance and info on how to set FireFox for FULL color management (value 1 with associated monitor profile) that allows the handling of non-tagged images and web page elements, http://cameratico.com/guides/firefox-color-management/. Upon restarting Firefox with the updated configuration, I return to the test at http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/ The last two tests there are designed to show a) how much wider your display gamut is than sRGB, and b) how the browser handles untagged images and elements.
The behavior I observe is different from the behavior I expect! Specifically, setting FIrefox to color management value 1 and telling it my monitor profile causes Firefox to display the sRGB tagged images as if they were not tagged. With the default value 2/no monitor profile, I can see a difference between the display of sRGB tagged images and either the ProPhoto RGB tagged image or the untagged sRBG & untagged CSS elements. I would expect that the change to value 1 with monitor profile should have no impact on the display of tagged images and elements, and yet that switch ONLY causes a change in the display behavior of the tagged images it shouldn't have affected, and I can no longer see a difference between the various images because everything is fully saturated
A marked up screen capture showing the comparative behaviors between the various applications and browsers would probably be worth more than the proverbial 1000 words, I'm new here & haven't figured that part out yet, but will post this as is while I work on that.
Can anybody replicate the behavior I observe? Is anybody spotting an error in my thinking?
TIA
Randy
*EDIT - I have annotated a screen shot comparing the results across 4 browsers. The screenshot has an embedded Adobe RGB profile which best represents the effects & changes that I was/am seeing but may not be preserved if posted here. It may be best to download and view in CS6 so as to not introduce any additional confusion arising from which browser YOU may be using :-) If needed the full res 2560x1440 version is available, but scaling to meet the forum limits of 900x900 makes the text unreadable. Can anyone suggest a means of supplying the full res file with the embedded profile retained?

twenty_one wrote:
Firefox will use the profile for the main display. It does not support a dual monitor setup. If you move FF to the secondary display, it will still use the primary display's profile.
There is a Firefox Add-On called Profile Switcher that allows using multiple monitor profiles. You will need to setup a Firefox user profile for each monitor:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Multiple_Firefox_Profiles
After installing Profile Switcher Add-On you will find a new entry in the FF File menu 'Open Profile Manager,' which can be used to create and manage the new user profiles (see screenshots below).
You can then setup a Firefox Sync account to keep the user profiles synchronized or do this manually using Copy & Paste. I was concerned that Firefox Sync would over-write the configuration data for the monitor profile, but it doesn't. I leave 'gfx.color_management.display_profile' blank on the user profile for the primary NEC 272W monitor, and add the path for the monitor profile on the user profile for my standard gamut secondary display. Here's what I see when launching FF:
After installing the Profile Switcher Add-On you'll see two new entries in the FF File menu that allow you to manage and launch other FF user profiles as separate browser instances.
It works fine on my Windows 7 system and should also work on Mac OS X systems and Windows 8.x.

Illustrator cc crashes on start up win 8 - pantone color manager issues?

I was at a clients office yesterday, installed Pantone Color manager on my laptop (I have Adobe Illustrator CC) and on their desktop (They have latest copy of Illustrator, but not cc, it's disc). And imported some pantone swatches into illustrator on both machines.
Since I shut down my laptop on leaving their office and restarted, Illustrator freezes on start up. Their machine is ok.
I have uninstalled and reinstalled illustrator. I checked that it wasn't win updates that is causing this and ran an update. I'm stuck now, still no solution, I'm travelling abroad and I need illustrator! Could anyone walk me through any possible solutions?

I selected the swatch card that I needed using the Pantone Colour Services manager application - I selected a Pantone Textiles colour card - same colour ref guide as my paper swatch book - because it doesn't come as standard with the software, you then choose which Adobe application you want to export it to following the instructions here http://pantone.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1803
In ordder to do this, I installed Pantone Color Services manager from the pantone website - I note that this software seemed to be bundled with X-Rite Services Device manager which installed at the same time. Despite removing this and reinstalling and also trying to use Windows system restore (which didn't work and threw up an error message saying it could not restore) the application still does not launch. Do I need to go into the registry and alter anything?

Preview panel loses Color Management after Minimize Bridge CS5

Whenever I minimize the Bridge CS5 application window to the Windows taskbar, upon restoring or maximizing the Bridge application window the image(s) currently showing in the Preview panel no longer appear color managed (they look exactly as they would appear from a non-color-managed app.) In order to see them as color managed again, I have to either de/re-select their thumbnails or double click the Preview panel twice (once to minimize it, and once again to restore it.) Otherwise resizing the Preview panel has no impact on the color. The thumbnails in the Content panel are fine. This did NOT occur in CS4 or earlier versions of Bridge - otherwise the same environment.
I have a wide-gamut monitor, which causes many non-color-managed images to look super saturated, especially reds & greens, so it is probably much easier to notice this behavior in this environment than from a typical-gamut monitor.
Windows 7, x64, ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics card, Bridge v4.0.3.9
Anyone else notice this annoyance?

Thanks Curt,
I doubt this is a video issue as no other versions of Bridge behave this way on this system. I have the same preference settings in Bridge CS5 as for Bridge CS4 - which works fine. Nor does Photoshop exhibit this behavior post-minimizing, & Photoshop behaves perfectly for all the OpenGL Drawing settings (which I have set to Advanced in PS.) Bridge just seems to poorly manage the Preview panel color post-minimizing the application window, but otherwise everything displays fine during operation. I'd be surprised if it was just me but if it is, it's an easy enough annoyance to work around. I'd imagine that this isn't too observable on a normal-gamut monitor.
I tried your suggestion of "use software rendering", just in case, but it made no difference. Appreciate the idea though...
One more observation:
While thumbnails are being generated for the first time on large images, they also have the non-color-managed appearance until they complete their generating, at which time they take the managed appearance - but I just consider that a processing-timing final step & it hasn't changed behavior from previous versions of Bridge.

Color management problems printing to Epson R2880 from CS3

I recently purchased an Epson R2880 printer. I am having a lot of trouble getting good color when printing from Photoshop CS3. I am running OS 10.4 on a G4 Mac. I have a high-quality monitor and an EyeOne calibrator. I have spent a total of a few hours on the phone with tech support from the store where I bought the monitor and calibrator, and with Epson. To try and keep it simple, I am using all Epson products (ink, paper, their ICC profiles downloaded from their site). I have calibrated my monitor to brightness: 80, white point: 5000 K, Gamma 2.2.
All that tech support has brought me to the point where prints I get on Epson Velvet Fine Art paper and almost where they match what I see on the monitor, though they still could use a touch more red. I've tried making a slight curves adjustment to the red channel but I still don't quite have it. But it's basically acceptable.
So then I tried Epson Premium Presentation Matte paper. After a lengthy session with the Epson tech, we determined that I can get a print that's almost right by printing out of Preview and letting the printer manage colors. If I make a levels adjustment and brighten it a good bit, I get a very good print. But if I try printing on that paper from CS3 I get something that looks like a washed out black-and-white print with a hint of color in it. The Epson tech (a level 2 tech) told me to use the SPR 2880 Matte Paper-HW profile. Didn't help. At that point he said that he'd done all he could do and that for further assistance I needed to contact Adobe about "advanced settings in Photoshop." Of course, I'd prefer to print out of Photoshop because it gives more options in terms of placement and size of the print on the paper.
So here are my questions:
- Is this kind of thing par for the course, and will I eventually figure out a system that gives me good results all the time with any Epson paper I choose with a minimum of tinkering with levels and curves?
- Or should I expect more from a printer that costs almost $1,000 and should I return it for, say, a Canon?
- Is there information online about those "advanced settings" the Epson tech was referring to?
- Or would I be advised to purchase a one-on-one phone consultation from Adobe Photoshop tech support to resolve these problems?
Thanks,
Helen

Mike,
Gee Ramón, I am guessing Mike did a search for Epson R2880/CS3 and noticed that a Mac user was having the same problem he was. If together, maybe Windows users and Mac users can come together and solve the problems of the Epson R2880, maybe we can set a good example for the Republicans and Democrats in Congress :-).
Anyway, since I posted this problem, I have been working on it getting input from a variety of people. The person who finally helped me was Jim, a tech at ColorHQ.com. If you are in the US or Canada and have to buy a monitor and/or calibrator, definitely consider buying it from them, because they offer free tech support to their customers!
So regarding yellowness, one thing that you definitely should look at is how you're calibrating your monitor. Despite some of the replies above that recommend calibrating to 6500K, ColorHQ, which specializes in solutions for the printing industry, told me that calibrating to 5000K is the print industry standard. (While 6500K is the standard for working on images for the web or for editing video.) 5000K will make the monitor look yellower, so see whether that's a better match to what you're printing. I have an Eizo monitor and am running their Color Navigator software. The nice thing about that is something called Color Navigator Agent that allows me to switch between calibration profiles on the fly if I'm doing some web work and then want to work on images for printing.
Calibrating to 5000K was helpful, but not the solution in my case. The ultimate solution to my problem was more of a Mac issue, so I don't know if this will help you, but I'll post it in case anyone refers to this discussion in the future: there evidently IS an issue with ColorSync Utility in the Mac interfering with Photoshop managing colors in OS 10.4. In my case, ColorSync was causing the printer to preserve RGB values rather than use the ICC profile. The afore-mentioned Jim suggested that I go to Edit: Convert to Paper Profile, then pick the profile from the list. When printing, in the first Photoshop dialog box choose Color Handling: No color management. All the other settings in the next dialog box are the same as when you don't want the Epson to manage colors. So what you're doing is making it so the profile is built into the file, and neither Photoshop nor Epson are managing colors.
The result to this was MUCH better. The soft proof is a little redder than the print, but I can adjust that by creating a curves adjustment layer and pulling down the red curve in the middle a little bit if I want to see what the print will look like. I can live with that.
Also Jim pointed out that those papers that you mentioned are in fact a little warm in tone -- put Velvet Fine Art next to a piece of ordinary copy paper from say, Staples, and you'll see the difference. He suggested that if it's the matte look I want (it is) that Hahnemuhle makes a couple of papers that are brighter: Photo Rag Baryta and Bright White He also likes Ilford Gold Fiber silk, but that's a luster satin finish. You can download the Hahnemuhle profiles from Hahnemuhle's web site and compare them in "Soft Proof" mode in Photoshop with the Epson papers you mentioned and get an idea of the difference with your images. I haven't actually printed on them yet, but I see what he means.
Good luck, and I'd be interested to know how it goes for you.
--Helen

Color management, printing with InDesign CS3

RGB output devices (this includes essentially all inkjet printers from every manufacturer, when driven by the manufacturer print driver). Inkjet printers driven by a PostScript RIP are considered CMYK output devices, and thus this post does not apply to them.
When printing to RGB output devices from InDesign using the same ICC profiles and settings as in Photoshop, you still get crummy results, in terms of color, that differ from both IDCS2 and other Adobe applications including Photoshop CS3.
InDesign CS2 previously did all rasterizing and color space conversion in InDesign prior to submitting the print job to the OS. In CS3 this was changed to submit PostScript + colorspace information, which is then supposed to be normalized by the OS. Except that it doesn't work. Mac OS X drops the color space information.
The work around is to check "Print as Bitmap" in the advanced section of the IDCS3 print dialog. This causes IDCS3 to do the conversion and generate a bitmap prior to submitting to the OS, rather than depending on the OS to do color conversion or rasterizing, which is the default behavior with IDCS2. Thus you can use the same ICC profiles and print driver settings as with all other Adobe applications, if you choose this option.
Chris Murphy
co-author Real World Color Management 2e

Chris,
First, I am surprised that there has been no response to your post since there were more than a few complaints about the problem in this forum when IDCS3 first came out. So thank you for the solution to this vexing problem.
But I find some of the language in your post a bit problematic:
>InDesign CS2 previously did all rasterizing and color space conversion in InDesign prior to submitting the print job to the OS.
and
>... rather than depending on the OS to do color conversion or rasterizing, which is the default behavior with IDCS2.
The second quote seems incorrect on two counts:
1. It contradicts the first quoted statement.
2. In my mac IDCS2 (version 4.0.5 build 688) in the options area of the color management pane of the print dialog, the only available choice for the Color Handling pop up is "Let InDesign Determine Colors".
So the default behavior with IDCS2 seems to be "Let InDesign Determine Colors".
I am not at all taking issue with the main point of your post, which I welcome wholeheartedly. I just find the second quoted phrase from you post confusing. Can you please clarify.
Returning to your main point, are there any downsides of using the Print as Bitmap method?
Thanks,
Al

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 in hp 8500 officejet premier pro so I can use Lightroom or Photoshop?

When I print what I see on the Monitor is not what I get on printout. I don't seen to be able to use the icc profile in either application. If I let the printer manage the color, they are blue-green overtone.

Hi ssprengel,
Thanks for the reply. I didn't know how these things work but now realise that my profiles seem to have been sitting in windows/system32/spool/drivers/color since I bought the computer in 2010.
The guide you referred to suggested that at least one of the profiles on my computer, GL3, should be suitable (there was no mention of GL2) In fact I ended up trying most of my profiles but they all had a very distinct red tint which was completely unacceptable. I even tried specifying and downloading a new profile from Ilford (I can't see where to get these from Canon) but this had the same red tint. When using the profiles I did switch off Color Management in the Print Preferencies, or rather i set it to manual and left all the sliders at zero.
When i used "managed by printer" there was no red tint and the print looked reasonably good although not quite matching the screen, particularly in brightness.
It may be worth mentioning that, for the profiles, the red tint was obvious in the print preview. I did not have to wait until the actual print, although I obviously did print to check.
I did try printing my RAW files to JPEG then printing via Explorer and this ended up around the same quality as "managed by printer" directly from Lightroom
Any ideas about what causes the red tint when using the profiles?

HELP with sRGB in Photoshop Color Management Winows Vista

Greetings beautiful Windows people!
I am stumped with a Windows Vista problem — it is not displaying sRGB properly.
I posted bigger files here if this is easier to follow
http://www.gballard.net/windows_srgb/
But here goes:
First, my main question is HOW Windows Vista deals with sRGB because I am seeing inconsistant sRGB color on a client's workflow.
The first clue is:
How Photoshop is displaying Tagged sRGB on the two machines:
The original sRGB tagged file opens as above on my Mac.
Note: In the lower screen shots, Firefox has color-management enabled — and Photoshop's Working RGB is set to sRGB (it is using the sRGB embedded profile).
In the above Windows screenshot — Photoshop and Firefox look yellow — Explorer displays TAGGED sRGB correct — FireFox incorrectly matches Photoshop.
In the above Windows screenshot — Photoshop looks yellow — Explorer 8 and Firefox display UNTAGGED sRGB correct.
BECAUSE THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE THEORY, I suspected a bad profile so we loaded sRGB as the Monitor profile in the Windows Color Management setting.
Setting Windows Vista> Control Panel> Color Management: to sRGB fixed the problem (above, Photoshop is displaying the file correctly now, and sRGB is behaving as expected in both managed and unmanaged Web browsers).
However, I am clueless about two things:
Is Vista's "Color Management" Control Panel setting its Monitor RGB, or
Is Vista's "Color Management" Control Panel setting a DEFAULT RGB for the system?
I suspect the client has a bad hardware puck and/or buggy profiling package that needs an update because it appears to be even causing Photoshop to display sRGB improperly using the custom profile (and this is happening on eight of the client's Windows boxes).
He is using a glossy screen on the laptop I saw if his package can't handle it).
Can someone please clue me here as to what's going on (and how Vista should be set up to display sRGB consistantly in Photoshop and WEB BROWSERS)?

Thank you Chris,
When I did windows update I must have checked to download new display drivers I'm using (Dell with Dell Screens). It was loaded into the color settings as a profile, I hit delete and now all is well.
-Patrick

Which monitor for accurate color management?

I shoot digital product and food photography using a mac powerbook. I've been using a LaCie CRT (yes, I said CRT) monitor for fine tuning my photos. It has finally started acting up so I'm ready for a new monitor. Can anyone recommend a dependable monitor that has color, brightness and contrast controls for use with establishing color managed profiles using eye1 macbeth (now that company is called something else which I can not remember at the moment). Obviously it needs to be accurate when it comes to color, brightness and contrast as well.
I ended up using my laptop screen this past shoot cause I had no other choice - but it made me really nervous.....
thanks -

First of all, my sincere condolences for your loss. Losing your last high-end CRT is a traumatic loss. I'm still hanging on to two (2) of them! (Knock on wood!)
Highly recommended monitors:
The NEC 2690 and 2490.
You want to use the SpectraView II software to conduct all the work internally and use GammaComp and ColorComp.
If Andrew Rodney chimes in with updated recommendations, listen to his advice.
Wo Tai Lao Le
我太老了

Color Management - Am I Doing Something Wrong

I am encountering a problem that I see a great deal of discussion about but to which I am not finding a solution (if there is one). After converting a jpeg to sRGB, I am seeing oversaturation, particularly in reds, in some applications and on a digital photo frame.
So far this has cropped up in two scanned negatives that I did not have tagged from the scanner, moved into Lightroom (as a 16 bit TIFF), moved into CS5, converted to ProPhoto RGB, and edited. I then flattened, converted to sRGB (trying it 3 alternative ways, e.g from the LR export module, from PS edit>convert menu, & from the Save for Web and Devices Module). On my color managed applications the colors look fine. I first noticed this in the file thumbnails for the images and then when viewed on a digital frame. Also in some applications (but not others) I see this oversaturation. The only workaround I have found is to assign my monitor profile to the image.
I do not have a wide gamut monitor (HPLP2475W), although I think that would create the opposite problem, and I reprofiled my monitor with an Eye One after this problem first appeared.
After trying many different things, searching around on the web and rereading my color management stuff, I still haven't figured out where I have gone wrong. Any ideas? The only hint I have as to what may be wrong is that in soft proofing, my Monitor RGB seems to be much more saturated than the image as it appears outside of soft proofing. As I indicated, I reprofiled my monitor but that phenomenon remains.

Based on what you have said above and after hitting the books, this may be where I have gone "wrong." Let me know what you think. I am scanning color negatives and as such cannot create a custom profile for the scanner output. (At least that is the conventional wisdom from everthing I have read, mainly because of the number of variables that could make a profile next to useless). I brought the image into Lightroom with the full gamut of the scanner but without any tag or embedded profile. I then exported them to CS5, but I probably should not have converted to ProPhoto RGB at that point because, as you note, I was "approving" its appearance at that point even though the image had no starting profile to begin with and except for a global Lightroom adjustment, I had done nothing to correct it. Thus, I am assuming that what I did was to start down the color management path with an incorrect assumption about the accuracy of the color values in the image from the beginning. And that would cause my output at the end after conversion to sRGB to look wrong on an unmanaged sRGB device. Do I have that right?
Instead, I probably should have done any of the following:
(1) Using Nikon Scan (also an option in SilverFast), let the scanner software profile an image in my chosen color space (as opposed to the full color gamut of the scanner) as best it can, and move forward from there. Nikon Scan uses a one size fits all canned scanner profile and then (presumably) converts it to the color space of choice. Silverfast must do essentially the same thing for color negatives but, as a starting point, gives you profiles for various kinds of negatives, with the caveat that it also cannot hit the accuracy mark dead on because of the variability of negatives. Either of these options present the easiest, least challenging, but perhaps suboptimal, solution.
(2) Bringing the untagged image into the CS5 Working Color Space from Lightroom and then previewing the image under different profiles until one is found that comes closet to matching the expected colors and gamma of the image, and assign that profile. Then edit the image from there, converting as necessary.
(3) Leaving the image unmanaged, but in the working color space handed off from Lightroom (ProPhoto RGB), manually color correcting without the aid of a starting profile, and only converting to a desired color space (e.g. sRGB) for a specific output device (e.g., a photo frame or the web).
(4) Assigning the working space handed off from Lightroom (ProPhoto RGB), manually color correcting without the aid of a starting profile, and converting to other color spaces as necessary for a specific output.
I'm not sure there is a huge amount of difference between #3 and #4.
Do these sound like the correct options to you?
Thanks,
Brian

Possibility to assign a color profile in the color management tab for more video formats

Presently, in After Effects CS5, in the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box the possibility to assign a color profile to footage is grayed out for many video formats.
Formats that allow to assign a color profile include Quicktime/JPEG2000, Quicktime/Motion JPEG A, Quicktime/Motion JPEG B, Quicktime/MPEG-4, Quicktime/Animation as well as various image sequences, like tiff-sequences. (Motion JPEG A,B and Quicktime/MPEG-4 are not very helpful in this context because they have a small color shift when reimported to After Effects.)
Formats that do not allow to assign a color profile include Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V. (Here, H264 main concept has anyway the disadvantage that it has a color shift when reimported into After Effects.)
In After Effects CS4 it was possible to assign a color profile to Quicktime/H264, Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, but in CS5 this is no longer possible.
Those video formats that do not allow to assign a color profile automatically are interpreted as having the color profile HDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr in case that the videos have 1920x1080 format; similar applies to PAL formats which get SDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr color profile.
(I did not find anything of this automatic assignment to HDTV or SDTV color profile in the "interpretation rules.txt" file, therefore it must be written into the programme itself.)
With growing popularity of wide gamut monitors it becomes necessary to produce footage and other videos that have a color profile different from HDTV or sRGB. When such footage is reimported to After Effects it has the wrong color and the only workarounds are either to use (in After Effects) the effect "Color profile converter" which necessitates extra render time or to use somewhat unpopular formats, like JPEG2000 that has very large filesize.
Presently many footage is produced in Quicktime/PhotoJPEG and therefore it would be very desirable to allow to assign a color profile to such footage in the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box.
Does anyone know why in AE CS5 the video formats Quicktime/PhotoJPEG and Quicktime/H264 do not allow to have an arbitrary color profile assigned (although it was possible in CS4), is it a bug, or does it have a deeper reason.
In this context I have a related question, often I read that Quicktime videos have a gamma tag. Does this mean that part of the color profile (the gamma value) is actually embedded/remembered, like you have it for images where the gamma is part the embedded color profile.
I use AE CS5 on Mac Pro 2009 with OS 10.6.7.
Thanks,
Volker

Thank you Rick for this interesting explanations and the links to articles.
In the past few days I performed a few tests in After Effects and it is interesting that you mention that cameras, like the Sony EX3, allow videos to have embedded color profiles. I am not working myself with cameras but either get footage from the internet or sometimes videos from our video department which produces videos with professional SONY cameras, usually I get them in a matrox mxf format.
As far as my test with After Effects show it is not possible to embed color profiles in the videos rendered with After Effects. Independent of the color profile in the working space and independent from the color profile in the output module I always get the same reaction if I reimport videos rendered by After Effects back to After Effects:
In AE CS5 videos made in the formats Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V are always interpreted as color profile SDTV/HDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr (even if I made them in other color profiles, such as Adobe RGB, Photo RGB, sRGB); and there is no possibility to change this interpretation rule.
In contrast videos made in the formats Quicktime/JPEG2000, Quicktime/Motion JPEG A, Quicktime/Motion JPEG B, Quicktime/MPEG-4, Quicktime/Animation are always interpreted as sRGB (even if if I made them in other color profiles, such as Adobe RGB, Photo RGB, HDTV); only this time I can change the interpretation rule. Therefore if I know for example that if I had selected Photo RGB in the Output module I can change after the reimport the interpretation rule from sRGB to Photo RGB and only then I get again the original colors.
The only exceptions are picture sequences, such as tiff-sequences, where the original color profile is automatically selected in the interpretation of the footage.
Therefore, unfortunately for videos produced by After Effects your advice "If it says something like sRGB and you can change it, in most cases you shouldn't change it because the guess is probably right. If there is no color profile assigned then you should assume that is correct." is not so easy to be applied. You have to know how you did it originally in the Output module and hope that you can change it to the proper color profile, in case that the original color profile in the Output module was different from sRGB and HDTV/SDTV. But it is interesting to hear from you that with cameras there seem to be more possibilities.
For this reason it would be nice if in future versions of After Effects one could change the color profile in the the color management tab of the "Interpret Footage" dialog box also for formats such as Quicktime/PhotoJPEG, Quicktime/H264, H264 main concept, DVCPRO HD 1080p30, F4V.
Of course one can always circumvent shortcomings by using tiff-sequences, QT/jpeg2000, or QT/Animation as formats for storing, which is anyway better for lossless or nearly lossless storing, but the files are then too large and also cannot be played easily with a player.
Volker

No Color Management will activate ColorSync?

Dear all,
I'm trying to print out the profiling target via Photoshop CS4. As usual, I made sure my target is Untagged; under print preview I choose "No Color Management"; Under Epson Printer Driver, I choose "No Color Adjustment" with the correct settings for that specific paper. After I print out the target and waited for 48 hrs, then I start to scan my sheets and creat a profile with it. But when I compare the custom made profile to the generic profile, it is almost half of the size smaller. I've tried with different types of paper, profiling software (ProfileMaker, i1Match, MonacoProfiler, Pulse) and printers including 2880, 4880 and 9880. They all came out the same way. I've been told that the ColorSync is activated by Photoshop even I've already selected "No Color Management" under Print Preview and ColorSync will automatically assign the default paper profile for that printer. Please can someone tells me is there any solution for this issue?
My settings:
Intel based MacPro
OSX 10.5.8 with the latest Update
ColorSync (The latest version)
Photoshop CS4 with the latest Update
Epson Printer (2880, 4880, 9880) with the latest driver
Thanks
Aaron

My testing would seem to suggest that the problem arises just after CS4 sends the target to the driver. What I have found, and it was also stated on other forums, was that if I assign a profile of "generic RGB" and set the colorsync default space to "generic RGB" I get a target sent to the Epson driver that goes thru a NULL profile conversion and thus unchanged. Turning color management off in the driver then prints the target with output looking like I expected. All of this seems to me to suggest that colorsync (Apple) is the issue. This would also seem to be the thoughts of others on this forum.
So... My question to Adobe, who should have far more pull with Apple than I, is what is being done to resolve this issue and that when something is sent to the driver with "NO COLOR MANAGEMENT" it truly means ZERO color management in the workflow? I understand that this issue will never be experienced by casual users of the product but it is affecting most of the professional / higher end users.
John
If you had really bothered to read all the forum threads here and elsewhere, you would be aware that old drivers or bad installs of drivers is the problem here that causes the double profiling with Apple new printing path.
My question to you is what do you expect Adobe or Apple to do about this when most all current SL drivers for current printers work correctly? Whose fault is it if the printer manufactures choose not to support new OSs for there old legacy printers?
You have a lots of choices or workarounds to print correct color.
Use old or other OSs, drivers, that support your old printer.
Use workarounds that some of us have come up with.
Print with applications that use the old print path.
Purchase new printers with drivers that support the new OS.
Complain to Epson if that is your printer of choice.

Is color management in Motion causing me grief?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for