Logic of Lightroom Color Management

There are, I know, endless posts about Lightroom color management issues. This question, I hope, will be somewhat different, as I don't have a specific problem, yet, but am trying to understand the logic of the software in the hope of avoiding problems down the road (as when I add file types, e.g.) I am also reading a book on color management, but it is on general theory with specific references to Photoshop CS3 (or 2), not to Lightroom. So here are my two questions and I'm hoping that the answers, should I be fortunate enough to receive any, will help not only me but other neophytes.
First, the Adobe online manual says this: "For rendered files such as TIFF, JPEG, and PSD files, Lightroom uses the images embedded color profile to display the image, histogram, and color values. If the image doesnt have a profile, Lightroom assumes the sRGB profile, and the image may not look as expected on your monitor." Clear enough, but what does CS3 do when it is launched from Lightroom to do pixel editing on an image primarily managed in Lightroom? That is, if CS3 is used essentially as a Lightroom plugin does CS3 adopt the Lightroom color management or does CS3 independently have to be set appropriately for the image to appear the same in CS3?
Second, the online manual says this: "Raw photo files generally dont have embedded color profiles. For raw files, the Develop module assumes a wide color space based on the color values of the ProPhoto RGB color space. ProPhoto RGB encompasses most colors that cameras can record." This is confusing, at least to me. Consider the paragraph above in this post, where the manual explains (or at least intimates) that if you create a file with values of a broad gamut such as Adobe RGB but don't embed that profile Lightroom will think it has a narrower gamut, sRGB file and the display will be off (unsaturated and washed out, I presume). That makes perfect sense. But why, then, does Lightroom assume for RAW files the wide Prophoto RGB color space when a camera might not record across this gamut? Wouldn't a camera that records in a narrower gamut cause the same problems for the display as does an Adobe RGB file read as if it were an sRGB file?
Thanks in advance.

>For rendered files such as TIFF, JPEG, and PSD files, Lightroom uses the images embedded color profile to display the image, histogram, and color values. If the image doesnt have a profile, Lightroom assumes the sRGB profile, and the image may not look as expected on your monitor.
Funny but if this came from the manual it is actually incorrect. For tiff, jpeg and psd files, the image is rendered into the linear lightroom color space using the embedded profile or assuming sRGB if there is no color tag on the image. The histogram Lightroom shows is always based on the Lightroom color space with a gamma 2.2 toning curve applied no matter what the source of the file. To answer your question, if you do an "edit in CS3" from Lightroom a copy of the file is rendered in the color space that you requested in the dialog and CS3 uses that space if your Photoshop is correctly set up to respect embedded profiles.
>Raw photo files generally dont have embedded color profiles. For raw files, the Develop module assumes a wide color space based on the color values of the ProPhoto RGB color space. ProPhoto RGB encompasses most colors that cameras can record.
The manual is again not correct here! Embarrassing. I have never seen a RAW file with an embedded profile so generally is incorrect. Also, for RAW files, the module DOES NOT assume prophotoRGB color space. The actual primaries are actually stored in a internal database that is based on calibrations that Thomas Knoll and other ACR engineers did of the specific type of camera. They ARE not the prophotoRGB primaries. The RAW files are rendered into MelissaRGB using those primaries. MelissaRGB has ppRGB primaries but a linear gamma instead of 1.8.
>hat makes perfect sense. But why, then, does Lightroom assume for RAW files the wide Prophoto RGB color space when a camera might not record across this gamut? Wouldn't a camera that records in a narrower gamut cause the same problems for the display as does an Adobe RGB file read as if it were an sRGB file?
See above, the manual is wrong. Lightroom knows the actual gamut of your camera and uses that, not prophoto.

Similar Messages

Can't get Lightroom Color Management to select custom profiles

I can't get Lightroom Color Management to select custom profiles.
- I select "other" in Profile,
- a pop-up box shows me numerous profiles to choose from
- I select a profile and the selection is highlighted
- I press "OK" and the pop-up box disappears
- but if I go back to the "Profile" selection line, only "Managed by Printer" is available.
What's wrong here?
Is the inability to select a profile the reason that prints from Lightroom look way to dark when I print them?
Vick

Oh, I'm on Windows, XP with SP2.
The profiles are in C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color
I used the .exe that was provided by Epson for installing the drivers.
Nothing fancy, nothing different.
For Lightroom, I installed it off CD, and got the 1.3.1 update off their Adobe site.
Any clues there, to solve the puzzle?
Vick

- Lightroom Color Management Hints & Tips -

Summary
If you have a profiled monitor and you experience that Lightroom 2.1 renders the image
very different from the way Photoshop renders it, or that the Library and Slideshow modules render the image
very different from the way it is rendered by the Develop module, chances are that this can be solved by re-profiling your monitor and saving the new profile as a matrix-based profile rather than a LUT-based profile.
The full article
Read the full article at: http://photo.bragit.com/LightroomColorManagement.shtml, which describes the background, the problem, the solution and the results. There are also some hints on the use of test patterns, choice of gamma, color temperature and luminance.
I am sure many people may have opinions on these issues, so please run any discussions about the article in this forum.

To Richard Waters:
For normal mid-tone images (excluding shadows) viewed at 1:1, there should be no (significant) differences between Development and Library modules (and Photoshop). If you do see significant differences, there is something wrong with the calibration.
As for Photoshop vs Lightroom: Photoshop is better for printing because it has a proofing systems. What one can do is to open it in Photoshop (with Lightroom adjustments), then do the proofing, and perhaps some extra adjustments to compensate for the paper, and then print the result either from Photoshop or from Lightroom. Printing from Lightroom has the advantage that it does the resampling and sharpening automatically.
Choice of gamma when profiling is not very critical. 2.2 is reasonably okay (and the most common), although the sRGB gamma (if you have the choice) may be more optimal, especially for deep shadows. Color management works so that, in principle, if the bit depth from the graphics card to the monitor was infinite, it would compensate for whatever gamma you choose. Thus, in principle, you could choose any arbitrary gamma, and the image would look and print exactly the same. The only reasons to choice a "suitable" gamma are: (1) the bit depth is limited to 8 bits which makes it necessary to use a "reasonable" gamma so as to avoid banding and posterizations; (2) when viewing images from the internet that are not tagged with a profile, or using a lousy browser that does not understand CM, then the choice of gamma is critical since it directly affects the contrast of that image.

LightRoom Color Management

Apart from the unique color space and behavior on certain export operations, Lightroom seems rather closed mouthed about color management. (This is a bit unsettling for someone used to all of the control offered by Photoshop) For instance, 1) is there any way to reveal the embedded profile of legacy PS files which have been imported? (all I can presently find for profile is "embedded") 2) what profile (and what gamma) is sent to a printer when printer color management is selected? 3) Is ColorSync enabled? and 4)Finally, is there any source which might make all of this clear?
Bob Hesse

Raw files have no color space, they are essentially Grayscale data.
Existing rendered images have their own embedded profiles and thus color space but IF you apply ANY corrections using LR, you're converting into its internal color space to apply the edits. At that time, you're basically now in ProPhoto RGB (with a linear tone curve) so you might as well export back to 16-bit ProPhoto RGB.
IF you don't apply an edit, the embedded profile will be honored if you open it in Photoshop.
You might want to read this:
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200701_rodneycm.pdf

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?

Lightroom (ACR 4) color management problems

Lightroom (or ACR 4) has some color management problems. When I develop a DNG into Photoshop (sRGB) everything looks great. Then I proof colors for the web (monitor RGB) the reds become oversaturated. I don't see this problem when I develop the same DNG using Bridge (ACR 3).
Any picture that I develop using LR that looks great in Photoshop, becomes way too red when published on the web.
Whats going on here?

I have confirmed this finding using Photoshop CS3 beta - same problem in converting to the web - too red!

All my prints using: Lightroom 5, printer color management turned off, and non-generic ICC profile (e.g. Epson Premium Glossy) have magenta tint or cast

I'm using PC with: Windows 8.1, 64bit, Lightroom 5.4, Epson R3000, 6.75 (latest) driver, color management turned off in printer settings, Lightroom configured to manage color. If I use a generic ICC profile such as Epson sRGB, the prints look OK. But when I use any ICC profile dedicated to my paper and printer combination, such as Epson Premium Glossy, or one created using ColorMunki print profile, the prints all have a medium to heavy magenta tint or cast. The effect can be seen before I even print in the Epson Print Preview. Yet when I soft proof, I don't see this effect. I suspect the problem lies somewhere in the CMM process, but I can't pin it down. Any tips or suggestions are appreciated.

Thank you kindly for your insightful response. As it turns out, the answer is half correct. I've found others who'll say the same thing, that double color management will lead to a very magenta result. I believe this was certainly the case when I first started playing with the settings, Where I went wrong, is that after I corrected my settings by turning off printer manages color and letting Lightroom do the color management, is that the Epson Print Preview was still showing magenta with certain profiles. Not wanting to waste more money on paper and ink, I used the preview to gauge whether I was going to get a normal print or not. Then one day I ignored the print preview's magenta cast as a 'warning' and I went ahead printed the photo anyways. Because I used a profile that I created with ColorMunki Photo, the picture came out perfect (i.e. a very good match to what I was seeing in Lightoom on my monitor). The lesson learned is that for judging the final color correctness, the Epson Print Preview can be way off target and your best bet is to ignore it.

Invalid Color Management in Lightroom? (RAW)

I've noticed the strange thing, how Adobe Camera RAW 4.1.1 displays the same image differently in Photoshop CS3 & Lightroom 1.4.1
Here are the screenshots from both programs:
What I've got in Lightroom/develop mode:
http://www.imagebam.com/image/956c3d6537871
What I've got in Photoshop:
http://www.imagebam.com/image/17a67c6537874
Notice the reds on the face and oranges on the trees on the background. 1) Face on second, photoshop variant is more reddish. 2) The contrast differs as well!
3) There is more orange on the leaves on the second image.
That's all happens in the preview in Lightroom - if I export image as a JPEG and open it in Photoshop - the images will be the same. But BEFORE the export they're DIFFERENT! What's wrong?
(Image is shot on Sony Alpha 350, white balance and all the settings in Camera RAW are the same in two programs).

>yes they are, but in practice PDF causes lot's of bugs.
My experience is opposite in that pdf is usually the only thing that actually works for multipage documents and things containing vector graphics. For single page photos of course tiff always works, but there are lots of clueless operators that do not know their behind from a color profile.
>In my experience colors will be different even for an eye of a consumer. On some printers red will be more reddish, on others green more greenish etc. The contrast will differ either. Maybe you and we use different printers. BTW I work on Windows, maybe that's the point.
I have always had basically perfect results. There was a time when Lightroom interacted wrong with printer drivers when you used profiles inside of the program instead of having the printer driver manage for you. This has long been fixed. Of course there are subtle differences between printers and it would be good if Lightroom had some sort of soft proofing to judge this in advance. The differences are usually pretty minor though nowadays.
>Well, Noritsu, as I know, for example, uses its own color management profile, which you cannot tune even in Photoshop. If you use sRGB, it will be ignored, and you'll get a very low contrast print with desaturated color and you have to be there when it's printed to tune it with the lab assistant. Usually they do it themselves ... well... good. I have SOME good experience with Costco. But for many cases I can't get my colors and contrast without being there when it's printed. And it depends on paper - is it metallic, for example, or matte. The picture will be different. The colors will be different. And you can't check it exactly on your monitor being at home, or in office.
I tested this extensively. If you do this right, it is very hard to see the difference between a sRGB print and a print converted to the profile. With well-tuned Noritsus, you get a small difference in oranges, and a tiny difference in greens - independent of the paper you use. This is the whole point of these machines. If you feed them sRGB, they should give you great results. Maybe my local costcos is very good, but I doubt they are very different from other labs. I tried both Matte and Glossy and they both showed the same result. This is borne out by softproofing in Photoshop that shows exactly the same effect. Note that I wrote about using lab profiles with Lightroom extensively and always tell people to use the profile, but in reality it really is not that important.
See for example: http://lagemaat.blogspot.com/2008/05/great-prints-from-labs.html
If you see large differences in contrast and saturation, there really is something wrong with your calibration workflow or your lab. FOr good prints, the only thing they need to do is to turn off their auto color correction, which with most labs you can do automatically in the online submission pages. I should tell you that you do have to judge prints under good lighting. Often these differences are simply caused by one day being sunny and the other overcast when you walk out on the parkinglot and take out your prints. This is not a real difference. Use a good high color rendering index lamp of high color temperature and you will see that they were the same. My local costcos is calibrated by drycreek photos every month and the profile hardly changes at all over time.
>I don't know, Jao, maybe your point in photography is different, and you don't pay so much attention on colors. These things are subjective! Maybe you pay more attention on other components of photo. In my experience it takes lots of time to prepare a 40"x30" photo for print and then it takes more time and money to colormatch it.
Actually my work is almost always about color. Perhaps I don't sweat it as much. I'd really like Lightroom to have some kind of soft proofing though showing how anal I am about color. I don't use costcos for prints larger than 12x18 as they don't do it locally, but I usually use smugmug's lab (EZprints) for the really large prints. They color manage for you and supply a profile that you can soft proof to if you want. They also appear to scale and sharpen the prints somehow. I've always had outstanding results from them and you can send back the images that you don't like at no cost, although I have never had to do that. I also use smugmug for galleries that clients can order from directly. They have always been very happy with the prints.
>And I work in Windows, maybe your Mac does it better, maybe that's the point of my sad story. But Windows is my karma for many reasons.
The point maybe, also, you print every time on the same printing hardware in Costco - that can explain it all.
I have been happy with my costcos and with EZprints, but I doubt that it is much of an issue. As said, I don't use inkjets very often as they are so darn expensive and annoying to operate but I have never had much issue with bad prints. There is no reason why you could not get windows to behave better. The only thing that you need is to calibrate regularly. I have seen on this forum that windows tends to corrupt monitor profiles over time. The issue is always fixed by recalibrating regularly. Once every month should be plenty.

Lightroom's color management paper options don't match any paper i can buy from Canon

Up to now I have been using "managed by printer" for printing on my new Canon MG8250. But i have seen several suggestions that i should let Lightroom manage the colors so i decided to give this a go by choosing "other" instead.
This gave me a list of papers to choose from: Canon IJ Color printer profile 2005, fine art photo rag 2, GL2/SG2, GL3/SG3, MP2, Other fine art paper 2, PT1, PT2, PT3. All the names being preceded by MG8200 series apart from the first one
However, when i looked up the papers available from Canon, these were all different: Photo paper pro platinum (PT-101), photopaper pro luster (LU-101), photo paper plus glossy II (PP-201), photo paper plus semi-gloss (SG-201), glossy paper everyday use (GP-501), Matte photo paper (MP-101)
There are some papers here which look as if they they might relate to the lightroom list eg PT-101 and PT1, SG-201 and SG2 but, at the moment, i am particularly interested in which option should be used to match the photo paper plus glossy II (PP-201) paper which I have bought - GL2 looks as if it might be a contender
Any help would be most appreciated

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?

Color management through Lightroom

I'm using Lightroom and getting poor results from my new iP8720 printer. How do I turn off color management in the printer?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

KISS
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 9, Lightroom 6

Lightroom 3: cannot access color management / print dialog

Whenever I go to print anything in Lightroom 3 (or CS5 for that matter), I cannot access the print / color management settings in the print dialog box. The words are there with black lines through them, with the warning that the bundle doesn't match the architecture - or something like this. I have installed the newest print driver software (Epson 2200, work horse). Help! I have not been able to solve the problem with Adobe either.

After trying to figure this out for weeks, I did find a related post on Lightroom's Facebook page. It is the 64 bit issue. To solve, highlight the application icon, go to "Get Info" dialog box, and click on "open in 32 bit mode". Same applies for CS5. Good Lord, what a hassle.

Color Management With CS2 & Lightroom

I think I have finally figured out how to sync all my color management settings with CS2, Lightroom, my Nikon300, and my jpg viewing software. All are set to color profile sRGB and a picture looks almost exactly the same in every program.
My main use with these programs and the desire for good color is shooting a ton of basketball game pictures and color correcting and painting them in Photoshop.
My question: Is sRGB the best choice color profile, or does anyone have an opinion on an alternative profile.
Thanks for your opinions.

Okay, that's what I'm looking for is an opinion or two. I take these "Photoshopped" files and print 8x10's on my Epson R800 and I'm still fighting a little with what's on my screen versus what prints. I know that's another whole issue, but I just wanted to feel I was at least on the right track with the color management and color profile choices.

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

Vista color management & CS3

Two weeks ago I wrongly faulted my new Dell 2707WFP monitor for its high contrast and saturation after many failed profiling attempts using the Spyder2Pro with the updated Vista software. I'm still at a loss as to why images are dark and overly saturated in Photoshop, Bridge and Lightroom. They were all fine on an older Dell system running XP home and CS2. I've gone so far as to purposely inflict various gamma curve settings in Spyder to bump up the low end luminance but resulting profiles still show images clipped in the low end and overall saturated even as the desktop and the PS interface turn a sickly pale.
I'm new to CS3 and Lightroom and so I'm not sure if the following is normal. When I view a NEW batch of images that were not previously viewed in Bridge, they are normal looking, however when I click on a thumbnail, it then reverts to the same garish contrasty version that I see full size in the above adobe software when opened. The same thing happens in the WINDOWS PHOTO GALLERY viewer but NOT in WINDOWS EXPLORER. In Explorer the thumbs are as they should be...normal, and if I open them in Microsoft OFFICE PICTURE MANAGER or in Quicktime PICTUREVIEWER, they open as normal images.
All this sounds like a profile issue of some kind, but as far as I know, everything appears to be set correctly in both PS and the profiling software. However, Im not sure about the system settings regarding profiles. In the Windows COLOR folder all the profiles are where they should be and I can select which one to load using the Spyder Profile Chooser. And again, I do restart PS when I change a profile. Could this be some kind of Vista bug??
Other notes:
If I do a screen shot and paste it back into PS, it turns DARKER than the original file.
When I do additional calibrations I restart PS to load the latest profile.
All files tagged sRGB and in sRGB workspace. PS shows this correct space and likewise the correct monitor profile in COLOR SETTINGS
ATI CATALYST CONTROL CENTER fails to run on bootup so windows shuts it down. No fix that I can find for this.
Running Vista Home Premium on a Dell Inspiron 530 E6550, 4GB memory, Radeon HD2600XT
Thanks again for your help!

Found this on the DATACOLOR site in their SUPPORT CENTER:
Incorrect Color outside Photoshop on Wide Gamut Display
Solution >>I just purchased a Dell 2407 HC display, considered wide gamut and the spyder 3 elite. I've used the spyder 3 to calibrate the monitor. In photoshop whenever I "Save for Web" or "Save as" in the sRGB color space, I wind up with over saturated oranges and reds. I'm needing to save in the sRGB for web work. My working color space is set to sRGB which looks fine when editting in photoshop, but as soon as I save it out of photoshop the reds and oranges are over saturated. I purchased the spyder 3 because of the wide gamut support, is there something I'm missing in calibration?
The display profile is not at fault here. The ICC profile for the display tells any application that uses color management what the color values for the display are. Thus Photoshop, which is using the profile, corrects for the colors on screen, giving correct results. A non-color managed application (such as Internet Explorer for Windows) would not use the profile and thus the colors would be oversaturated on your wide gamut screen. This is not the fault of the profile (that would make the color look wrong in Photoshop, where the profile is being used), but the lack of a profile (which makes the color look wrong in non-color managed applications).
This is the problem with using a Wide Gamut display for viewing in non-color managed applications. A typical gamut display is not color correct in such applications, but is at least approximately correct; a wide gamut display is noticably oversatured in some colors. On the Mac many applications, including web browsers and OS utilities, are color managed, so it is less of an issue than on Windows.
Article Details
Article ID: 723
Created On: 10 Jan 2008 07:31 PM
So if the color is off outside PS, then its not the fault of the profile. My problem is the image is off INSIDE PS, and by the same reasoning, then the profile is at fault. If the profile is to blame, is this a Spyder issue or Vista issue? So far noone seems to know anything including Adobe tech support and Dell. Been waiting 2 wks to hear from the Spyder people.
Would really appreciate some input on this. thanks.

CS6: Can't switch off color management in the printerdriver when photoshop manages colors

So this is weird: I'm using CS6 Extended and Lightroom 5 on a Windows 7 Pro machine, printing to an old Canon Pixma Ip5200R. When i print from Lightroom, i am using a special printer profile for the pixma and my photopaper, so color management is switched off in the printer driver. The photos print fine.
Now when i print the same photo from CS6, it has a magenta color cast, so clearly something is wrong with the color management. Even though i am using the same printer, the same paper, the same printer profile and - of course! - had set photoshop to manage the colors, and switched color managent off in the printer driver. The magenta cast could be an indication that the photo is double colormanaged.
It took my quite a while to find out what happens, and this is really weird: When i re-checked the printer driver settings, i noticed that the color management settings did not stick. The canon printer driver offers the options "driver matching" "windows ICM" "none", e.g. having color management done by the printer driver or windows, or switch color management off. So when i go to the PS print settings and set it to "photoshop manages colors", add the correct printer profile, i have to check the settings in the printer driver and make sure that color management is set to "none". I set it to "none" and click OK. Now everything should be configured correctly. But it's not - because when i re-check the print driver settings, i see color management is set to "diver matching". I can go to the print driver settings again and agian, but whenever i check, color management is set to "driver matching". This setting simply does not stick. No wonder i get a mangenta cast on my prints, the colors are doublemanaged by photoshop AND my printer driver.
Now, this is getting weirder: Only the color management settings don't stick. I can change other settings like print quality and the stick.
But - how do i get rid of this? The culprit seems to be photoshop, not the printer driver. If i print from lightroom, i can change the color management settings in the (very same) printer driver and they stick. When i set the photoshop print dialogue to "printer manages colors" i can change the color management settings in the (very same) printer driver - and they stick! So this looks as if photoshop stops me intentionally from using the correct printer driver settings, that is from switching off the printer drivers color management if it is set to manage colors.
I have already resetted my personal photoshop preferences, but this changed nothing. What am i missing? What is going wrong? Your help is very appreciated.
Tobias

Hi all, Just to let you know that I finally solved my problem myself.
Essentially what had occurred was that I had updated my Epson driver for my printer , but it hadn't installed, despite informing me that it had! To cut a long story short when I checked in System preferences the older driver for Leopard O/S was still the current driver. I proceeded to ask Epson support for assistance, bu despite their efforts I could not immediately resolve the problem. They were directing me to my Utilities program to remove all traces of my current driver from Printer Utility which did not exist. When I queried this they stated it was not always visible and I should proceed to the next step then install the new driver. Problem was they required me to access this invisible utility in order to complete this process, and yes before you ask I had informed them I was using an Intel Mac with Snow Leopard 10.6.2 O/S. Finally I ignored their advice and took the following steps:
1. I opened System Preferences and double clicked the Printer & Fax icon.
2. I highlighted my Epson R2400 Pinter and removed it by clicking the minus sign at the bottom of the Printers window.
3. Next I did a search and deleted any old drivers for my R2400 that were on my system with the exception of the new Driver.
4. I restarted my Mac Pro.
5. I reinstalled my new printer driver which I had previously downloaded from Epson Support.
6. I restarted my Mac Pro and found that the new driver had installed correctly and full functionality had been returned to the Print Features Dialogue box i.e I could now turn of color management and access advanced features to set the quality of printing using the full spec of the R2400.
Hope this post will be helpful to others if they have a similar problem
Regards Denis
Message was edited by: Denisimo
Message was edited by: Denisimo

Logic of Lightroom Color Management

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for