Native Colour Profile for OS X

Does anyone know of a colour profile I can use in OS X lion that passes through the raw RGB values to the monitor like Windows does? None of the colour profiles that come with Lion, Adobe's suite or my monitor pass through the native RGB values of what's on-screen. For an example of what I mean by native colour profile, if I set the RGB colour value #45f4d3 in Photoshop or in CSS for a web page, I want the value #45f4d3 sent to my monitor, rather than some slight offset of that.
In other words, I want a colour profile that mimicks colour profiles being turned off completely (which I don't believe is possible under OS X; I will never understand why).
Thanks,
Tom

It has absolutely nothing to do with whether my monitor is calibrated or not. I want the RGB values encoded in my non-colour managed images and in my website stylesheets to be sent to the monitor as they are, without being altered by a colour profile.
To see what I mean yourself, go to the following web page: http://html-color-codes.info/#insertcolor (you can use any website colour picker, as long as it displayed RGB values and is driven by CSS).
In the colour picker, choose a colour, then launch the "DigitalColor Meter" app that comes with OS X and set the drop-down to "Display native colors". Compare the RGB values reported by the colour picker on the website with those reported by the digital color meter. If they're different (which I'm betting they are) then that's the problem I'm trying to resolve.
My end goal is simply to make the colour of my Mac be the exact same as it is on Windows, which basically means I want my Mac to pass the raw/native colour values to my monitor. Seeing as though I can't simply turn colour profiles off, I need a dumb colour profile that emulates this.

Similar Messages

  • Do I need to set AI colour profiles for use in ID?

    My previous set up:
    Mac
    CS2 (Illustrator, Photoshop, Bridge)
    Quark XPress 7
    My new set up:
    PC (Win 7)
    CS5 (Illustrator, Photoshop, Bridge, InDesign)
    My problem:
    I work for a company that prints newspapers, but my dept also does work for glossy sheetfed printers (magazines leaflets etc)
    All my work is exclusively CMYK.
    With my previous set up - I didn’t want to have to switch my colour profiles via Bridge as I was constantly juggling two types of jobs:
    Our tabloid press - Profile - ISOnewspaper26v4 (CMYK)
    Sheetfed Printers - Profile - ISO Coated V2 (Fogra 39) (CMYK)
    So I set my CS2 Suite colour settings to  ISO Coated V2 (Fogra 39) and set an action in Photoshop to convert jpegs / eps photos to ISOnewspaper26v4.
    So my CS2 working space was set for Sheetfed glossy publications and if I wanted to set a picture to the correct profile for newsprint I just had to open the picture and hit the action that applied the ISOnewspaper26v4 profile.
    Regarding Quark – I set up separate templates for each type of job:
    One for Profile - ISO Coated V2 (Fogra 39) and one for - Profile - ISOnewspaper26v4.
    Regarding Illustrator - I found that Quark 7 didn’t differentiate between Illustrator colour profiles, or if it did, it didn’t show up in ‘Usage’.
    If I went to Quark Usage and went to ‘Profiles’ it only listed the Quark profile and any Photoshop profiles, not any Illustrator profiles.
    So in Illustrator I just set colour profiles to ‘do not colour manage this document’. So that I only had to worry about changing profiles for Photoshop jpegs / eps’s.
    So I had a good little system going that served me well and now my company decided to move us to PC’s and CS5; and I still have the same problem – juggling newsprint jobs and glossy magazine jobs and not wanting to have to synchronise my CS suite colour settings every time I switch between jobs...
    So I was hoping to stick with my little system on PC / CS5.
    So basically my question is, do I need to worry about Illustrator colour profiles if I am bringing Illustrator files into InDesign? (To clarify, my Illustrator files are always pure vector, so there is no chance of some rogue RGB jpeg sneaking through on a Illustrator file)
    Im open to suggestions regarding my set up, but really would prefer not to have to keep switching my colour profiles.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    First, I wasn't suggesting that your PDFs be exported to RGB, but it is a common workflow these days to keep photos in RGB until you convert them to the correct profile during the export process. This maximizes the potential for re-purposing your documents and allows you to use the same RGB photos for different output purposes without having to do separate CMYK conversions for each destination, so long as you don't need to do any tweaking after the conversion.
    And to answer your question, if the .ai files have no embedded color profile they will ALWAYS be considered to use whatever the CMYK working space is in your ID file, so the numbers will be preserved. This means that there will be slight differences in color on output on different devices (the whole point of color management, after all, is to preserve the appearance of colors by altering the numbers for the output device).
    Does the vector work you get from Thinstock come with an embedded profile? Is there any color that is critical for matching, such as a corporate color (which should be spot, but that's a different discussion), or do you use the same art in both the newspaper and magazine, and does the client expect a match (which we know isn't going to happen anyway)?
    If there's no embedded profile when you start, there's no way to know what the color was supposed to look like, so color management is not possible, really. You can assign a profile, but you'd be guessing. Since the correct appearance at that point is unknown continuing with out color management shouldn't present a problem. The only case where you would need to manage the vector art would be if the color APPEARANCE is critical or you need it to match across different outputs, and in that case you would need to assign a profile and allow ID to preserve the profile on import and remap the numbers, which means you would likely get rich blacks someplace. Since it's unlikely that you can get a good match going from glossy to newsprint, I probably wouldn't even try -- you wouldn't want, for example, to tag the art as newsprint, and have it print subdued on the gloss if it would look better or more correct with the other profile. Color management would be much more useful if you were going from sheetfed to web on the same stock.

  • Accurate colour profile for Canon 40D?

    Hi all,
    I have an Canon 40D but unfortunately my colour checker is not compatible with the new DNG Profile Editor (it's a PerfectPix Natural).
    Has anyone here made a profile for the 40D using the Gretag colour checker that they'd be happy to share with me? I realise that your 40D may not replicate colours in exactly the same way as my camera, however it's got to be closer than any of my other profile options at the moment.
    Thanks in advance,
    James
    PS... I hope this request isn't inappopriate, the user to user forum for Camera Raw seemed like the best place.

    Hi David/Eric,
    I understand what you mean about the contrast, however I am comfortable that my images are exposed correctly on the whole. I guess it's just very hard to quantify, and very hard to prove, where my images are not "right" colour wise.
    I also realise that white balance plays a major role in this type of subjective comparison... The issue I'm finding is that when I am flicking between profiles for an image there are times I just can't find anything that's right.
    Maybe the biggest issue, at least in part, is perception. When analyzing an example image I've seen the following behaviour for each profile:
    - Camera Standard is probably best, but while on this example it's okay, in some images it's over-saturated.
    - Adobe Standard is close, probably slightly too green.
    - ACR 4.4 is up there too, best in some cases but can have issues with skin tones.
    - Camera Faithful is next on the list but tends to look flat and lifeless (even though no change other than profile).
    - Camera Portrait makes faces too pink and skies too blue. In general it seems to over-saturate.
    - Camera Landscape makes faces look pretty good, but skies and landscapes are WAY over saturated.
    - Camera Neutral looks relatively good colour wise but has no contrast and looks under saturated.
    The problem is, in this one example they've behaved in a certain way. In another example (even one where I've manually white balanced) they'll behave differently... suddenly Camera Standard will look terrible and ACR4.4 will look the best... or Adobe Standard.
    I guess the issue is I'm just not confident that LR is reproducing the colours that the camera saw... but only because I don't think the profile is right. Once I know that the profile is right (and whether I'm being silly or not, I would be satisfied that Joe Blog's 40D is going to be almost identical to my 40D) then I'll know that the faces look a little red because I've got my white balance wrong. Right now there are three that are "close" to what I saw, but I'm not confident that any of them are spot on.
    I hope this makes sense. I'm not attempting to be difficult, to be honest I figured that the creation of the Profile Editor would lead to a proliferation of downloadable camera profiles that were supposedly "colourmetrically accurate" for each camera... maybe I'm just a little quick on the bandwagon.
    Cheers,
    James
    PS. I realise that colour gamut of the monitor plays into this also, but I am assuming that if I can SEE that the colours are too saturated then I'm not exceeding the gamut... I guess it's possible that my "washed out" profile Camera Faithful is exceeding the gamut and subsequently doesn't look very good?

  • Colour profile for Epson printer

    When printing from Elements 9, which ICC colour profile should I use with my Epson PX720WD printer?

      Yes that should work as long as you keep all the settings consistent throughout the entire workflow. Also make sure you haven’t set “No Color Management” from the Editor menu:
    Edit >> Color Settings

  • Cinestyle Colour Profile For iPhone 6 Video

    Hi !
    I'm a pro photographer and just started playing with the iPhone 6 video ... it's amazing.
    However, I find the colours and contrast too punchy and severe - so the video files it creates are not great to edit and grade in Final Cut Pro X.
    Does anyone know if it's possible to use a 'Technicolor Cinestyle' type colour profile in the phone when shooting to change the look ?
    If not, is there any way to increase the dynamic range and lower contrast ? Or is there any video app that would do this whilst shooting ?
    Bit of a long shot i know, but any thoughts would be helpful ...
    Thanks !

    You can post a video to YouTube, but I don't think it's necessary. I believe you.
    I found only one other recent post like yours and it has no responses: After iOS 8, no sound when playing video taken from the back camera..
    Just curious if you have the same problem using the front and back camera when recording?
    I don't think it's a universal issue so you might try another reset. Other than that, I think a restore would be the next step. Could be that your installation got flubbed.

  • Change colour profile on export of jpeg for using files on windows pc

    My father, who is 80, has a mac and aperture.
    He is reasonable proficient using it, but as a windows user myself I'm unsure of the in's and out's of things and it always falls on me to help him when he has a problem.
    He also has a windows computer, which he has a programme on for making calenders.
    The problem we have is that when he saves his photo's after editing in aperture to a dvd, he puts this dvd into his windows pc and he cannot see any of the previews.
    On opening up any picture in photoshop on the pc, it asks if he wants to use the embedded colour profile or change it.
    I'm wondering if Aperture is exporting using a certain profile which windows cannot read? Thus doesn't show the preview.
    He needs the preview to pick which pictures he wants to use on the calender.
    He then stores all his pictures on the dvd.
    I'm pretty sure he shoots as jpegs, not raw. Though I need to ask him.
    He has several different cameras, and I think he has trouble with all of them. I'm pretty sure one is a nikon d5300 (I just googled red body nikon)
    Is there a colour profile for aperture when saving as a jpeg that is compatible with windows?
    It's a hundred mile round trip to visit and to then sit down and try to work it out by trial and error would take some time. 
    So if I can find an answer and call on the phone to tell him what to do, it'd save me a lot of time
    I'm not sure what Mac he has, what OS he's using or which version of Aperture, he only recently bought it, so guess at the latest one.......... I know I'm a great help !!!!!
    I can find out if needed, but thought there might be an easy fix....... I know, whenever is there an easy fix for anything!!!
    Cheers,
    Graham

    There is no standard for a 'Preview'. It's a feature of the software that is opening a file as to how it shows those files to the user for selection. Some software will look in the file header for a thumbnail, some will use the files associated icon (if it has one) and some will just present a list of file names. I seriously doubt changing the colour profile output by Aperture will have any impact on this.
    Although Aperture doesn't have a calendar feature, iPhoto does and as of the last year or so, Aperture has an option to open it's library in iPhoto. So if he has a current enough version of Aperture and iPhoto, he could avoid the issue altogether if he is happy to switch into iPhoto to make the Calendar.
    If he wasn't using DVD (say a USB thumbdrive instead) he could run a utility on the PC to create icons for the files where the icon is a thumbnail of the picture, which the calendar software might then use when prompting for images to load. But the use of DVD complicates this, as it depends on the DVD drivers and file systems in use on the DVD.
    Chances of resolving this remotely, remote
    Andy

  • Colour management profile for LaserJet 2200 printer?

    I am reasonably familiar with the basics of colour management. My monitor is calibrated, I use Epson's standard colour profiles for my Epson 3800 inkjet printer and what I see on the screen is more or less what I get out of this printer. However, I am having less success in controlling the printing on my HP LaserJet 2200 of monochrome images contained within an InDesign CS4 document.
    The obvious answer would appear to be to use a purpose-designed printer profile for the HP LaserJet 2200 but, so far, I have failed to find a source for such a profile. Can anyone help?
    David

    When you save a grayscale (if you save in grayscale mode and aren't just saving a completely desaturated or otherwise made to look like grayscale RGB or CMYK mode image) in Photoshop you should be saving with a grayscale profile like Dot Gain 30% of Gamma 2.2 or something else from the list. These profiles are designed to match printing conditions of various types or different types of monitors (and I'm not going to go into a lot of detail here).
    Photoshop understands grayscale profiles, InDesign does not, so it looks at the numbers and says these are all black, so they belong in the black channel, and I'll put them in that channel in the current document CMYK working space. Different CMYK profiles behave a little differently when you print, but to be perfectly honest, I've never really investigated the consequences of choosing one over another for printing grayscale, because all the information is already black and I don't think assigning a new profile would change anything (though CONVERTING to a new profile might well take your grayscale and make it a 4-color image).
    Dot gain is the amount of "spread" that happens to each halftone spot wne the ink is absorbed by the paper, and the number is usually defined as the amount of gain for a 50% dot. Dot gain causes images to print darker. For a classic illustration, think of using an eyedropper to drop a single drop of ink onto a sheet of tissue paper, and you'll get the idea. Coated papers usually have better ink "holdout" (they are less absorbent) than uncoated papers, and thus lower dot gain.
    Laser printers don't use liquid ink, but they do have gain. The toner is melted and gets absorbed into the surface of the paper as it goes through the fuser which is what keeps it from falling off as a pile of dust.
    So how do the prints look now, and what are the settings you are using in the print dialog?

  • CCP colour profiles and different lenses

    Hi,
    I just got a Nikon D7000 and I've been playing around with my ColourChecker Passport to set up some standard colour profiles for use in ACR as a general starting point for processing. I've been pondering if it's worth my while to create different profiles for each lens I have, something I've not previously done when profiling my old D60, where I just created a series of profiles (including some dual-illuminants) by using one lens and capturing the target under a variety of different lighting conditions (e.g. tungsten, flash, sunshine, etc).
    Anyway, I just tried creating a profile for my 105mm 2.8 lens under tungsten lighting, having previously (yesterday) created one under the same lighting with my 50mm 1.4 lens and I've been comparing them in ACR using the colour dropper. I’ve opened up the images used to create the profiles, applied the profile generated using the ColourChecker software for the corresponding lens, and then set the white balance using the ‘off-white’ colour patch with the eye dropper WB tool. I then used the colour dropper on the same colour patches in each image. I’ve noticed that the RGB colour values aren’t matching quite as well as I’d expected (note that I thought it potentially unrealistic to get a perfect match): blues and greens seem to be roughly the same, so for example with patch #3 (third from left on the top row), one is at 69,72,115 and one at 70,77,115, but reds and oranges seem to be a bit further out of sync, e.g. with patch #15, one is at 99,45,29 and one at 109,51,34; with patch #16 one is at 166,167,29 and one at 175,179,33. This surprises me a little, as I thought the idea of CC was to calibrate the profiles so that colours were essentially the same across different lenses – and different cameras if applicable. I have to say though that, colour values aside, when eyeballing the two images on my monitor (profiled) they do look very similar, which I guess is the main thing!
    I wonder if perhaps I’m missing something here? I’m quite prepared to be told that I’ve got this all wrong!
    Also, I wonder if others on the forum using CCP have gone to the trouble of creating lens-specific profiles, or if they’ve just created profiles for their camera body using one lens? This is the approach I took with my D60, but having done more reading on CCP I know that some folk do advise to create separate profiles for each lens they use (and I am of course aware that the CCP user manual also states to do this). Do you even create a profile for each and every shoot (when possible)?
    I’d be very interested to hear your opinions on this as I’ve not been using CCP for all that long and am always eager to learn more.
    M

    First of all, a color profile is for correcting color, not luminance, so compare the HSL or Lab coordinates not the RGB values so you can just ignore the L coordinate.  From your given RGB numbers, you can already tell that one of the images is brighter than the other so it is just confusing looking at the RGB values and guessing what you would expect the three values to be in the other image.  For comparing two images, I would concentrate on the Hue number in HSL coordinates, since Saturation can change with contrast, and Luminance can change with Exposure and Contrast.
    Also, as part of your eyedroppering comparison, another thing to do would be adjust the "Exposure" of the darker image until the L number (in HSL or Lab) is the same as the L in the brighter image and then see what the other two numbers are--maybe the other two numbers won't change, and then you can try putting one of the HSL values in the "Old" patch of the color-picker and the other in the "New" patch and see how much different they look.  You'll have to do this comparison in Photoshop not ACR so use ProPhotoRGB when you export to keep the colors as close to the same as you can.
    The two questions you seem to have, are:  does using a lens-specific profile make enough difference to real world situations to bother with, and where are the variations I'm seeing when the profiles are applied to their source images coming from since I would think they would be the same.
    For testing whether the profiles computed for the two lenses make a noticeable difference even with your two profiles that don't appear to correct the same, apply the two profiles to the SAME CC image (one of the two you created your profiles with), save an sRGB JPG of each, and see if you can tell the difference, either side-by-side, or even better, when you flip back and forth in some sort of photo viewer--like with Windows Picture Viewer when those are the only two images in the folder.  By apply the two profiles to the same image you have mitigated any luminance and white-balance differences in the source image and are merely looking for differences in the effect of the two profiles. 
    If you can't tell much difference between the same image using each of the two profiles then it's just an academic exercise.  I like academic exercises, but am also a perfectionist and lazy so I would do the experimenting until I found out I'd perfected things enough that I can't tell any difference then I can stop.  In other words, do I need to profile for various lenses or not, or am I just doing it because I like to control everything as much as possible and it really doesn't make any difference. 
    Before answering the other question, about where any profile variations might be coming from, understand that the combination of white-balance and color-profile is attempting to convert the colors of an object photographed in the lighting scenario the profile was created for into the colors of the object photographed in a standard lighting scenario.  In my mind the works out to be "make the colors of the object look like it was photographed in sunlight".  The issue that requires making a profile and not just white-balancing, is that any part of the object that was colored the same as the light color will be neutral when the white-balance is done, and more generally the closer the color of the object is to the color of the light, the more neutral it will become when WB is done.  For example, if you have a red ball and a gray ball and photograph them in red light, they will both look gray when white-balanced.  A real-world example of this would be flesh-tones in incandescent light, when white-balanced will have even less color and be more neutral or pale or even bluish, than the skin photographed in sunlight, so after white-balancing, the job of an incandescent profile is to boost the reddish colors and diminish the bluish colors so the skin looks like it would in sunlight.  This might be an argument for NOT WBing skin in incandescent lighting.  In severely-colored lighting, especially nearly monochromatic lighting such as sodium vapor lighting, correcting the colors to be as if in sunlight will be impossible, but to the extent the lighting isn't monochromatic, the colors can be made to look more normal, if not perfectly normal..
    To understand whether the differences you're seeing in the profiles are due to the lenses being different color or due to variations in the profiling process, itself, think about where the variations could come from and how you might test for each: 
    Was the source lighting exactly the same color between the two shots with different lenses (that were taken a day apart)?  Test by eyedroppering the WB of same neutral-color patch in each photo and see if there is any difference in the Temp/Tint numbers.  You cannot test the source-lighting color unless you have shot with the SAME lens for both days, so if you don't have shots with the same lens, seeing that the WB is not much different between the two shots can give you some comfort that the difference in the profile was not a difference in the source lighting.  The source lighting might have changed if there was some daylight mixing in on one day and not the next, or if the A/C was running on one day and not the other and the voltage was slightly different and the redness of the light was different.  One other thing that can wreak havoc in repeatability of both color and exposure is if any of the lighting is fluorescent CFL or tubes, because that sort of gas lighting changes intensity as the voltage varies and reverses 60-times per second and this variation is especially noticeable if the shutter is fast.  So while your lighting may have been incandescent any changing daylight or flickering fluorescent lighting mixed in might have changed the source-lighting color enough to make a variation in the profile more than the color of the lenses might have.
    This first question dealt with the photos taken with each of the two lenses.  The remaining questions are about testing with just one lens. 
    Is the profiling process repeatable?  Test by creating two different profiles from the SAME CC photo and be a little sloppy about when marking the corner patches, and see if you get different numbers applying those two profiles.  An idea where things might not be repeatable, is that there are slightly variations in the color of the color patches (you should be able to move the eyedropper across the color patch and see if the RGB numbers change) due to slight color noise and depending on where you put the "corner" markers on the CC image, you'll get slightly different results. 
    Does the exposure make any difference?  You can determine this by taking a photograph using the SAME lens in the SAME lighting (a few seconds apart), and just varying the exposure by 1/2 or 2/3 of a stop, and then computing a profile for each exposure and apply those two profiles to one of the exposures and see if the non-L coordinates of HSL or Lab eyedroppered. 
    If you check all these variations you'll have an idea of how much each affects the profile and then can judge if the magnitude of the differences you're seeing are related to variations with creating the profile, or actually related to differences in the lenses and thus a new profile for each lens might be warranted, assuming you can tell the difference, still.  I mean even if you can tell the difference between the profiles created with different lenses, are the differences from the lens significantly more than the differences due to exposure or lighting color or corner-patch placement?
    I haven't tried computing a profile for each lens; however, I have created a dual-illuminant profile (2700K and 6500K) and then computed new color-matrix slider values (the ones under where you set the profile) for various lighting conditions using Tindemans' script and despite the slider values being not close to zero, I can hardly tell any difference on the few images I've looked at.  Once exception to not having the color-matrix sliders make much difference is when using the dual-illuminant profile with fluorescent lighting, which has a significant Tint value compared to either of the standard illuminants, but in the case of fluorescent lighting, I'd rather compute a whole new profile, than use a slider-corrected dual-illuminant profile.
    Besides eyedroppering Lab or HSL coordinates in Photoshop, another way to check for color variations is to create a color-error plot in the Color Check module of Imatest and see how far the squares and circles are off from each other for each color-patch.  An example of such a color-error plot is linked below, where it shows how far off the colors of a color-checker are in incandescent lighting after computing a color-profile in incandescent lighting.  You'd expect them to be completely correct, but they aren't, and is a lesson in color profiles only being to go part way in making the colors look as if they were photographed in sunlight:
    http://www.pbase.com/ssprengel/image/101322979
    If you click on the above image, you will return to the thumbnails for color-error the gallery, and in the gallery description you can see links to both Imatest and Tindemans' script if you care to pursue things more in depth.  Imatest is not free but does have a free 30-day trial, which should be enough time to get some useful information out of it.

  • Colour Profiles missing in InDesign and Illustrator CS3

    Adobe CS3
    Mac 10.5.8
    Hi, I recently brought a new HP Printer (HP Photosmart B110) and installed the software for for it and all the colour profiles for the papers were visible in the drop down box (they were HP Premium Photo, HP Advance and HP Premium Plus Photo) but after updating the drivers they all vanished (see image for InDesign and Illustrator examples).
    I contacted HP and uninstalled all the HP software as well as deleting HP related files and then reinstalled the software again but the Colour Profiles were still not visible. I have contacted HP again and they have said that it's something to do with my Adobe software so I was wondering if anyone can help me with solving this problem?
    Thanks
    Chris

    HP is fond of pointing the finger at Adobe, and in fairness their drivers often don't work well with InDesign (HP printers account for the largest number of printer related problems on the forum by far, and I don't think it's just due to market share), but installing color profiles has NOTHING to do with any Adobe software. If the profiles were being installed properly by the HP installer, they's be in the system someplace (probably the colorsynch folder) and they'd be available to other programs even if Adobe apps didn't find them.
    If the HP low-level tech feeds you that "it's an Adobe problem" BS again, immediately ask to be escalated to someone who knows what they are talking about, and take names.

  • Colour profile problem?

    I'm using Indesign CS2 to create large numbers of web banners but have just noticed some odd colour behaviour after creating my templates. I prefer Indesign to Photoshop and Illustrator for this because it allows better control of text. Colour profiles for all applications is sRGB.
    In InDesign CS2 I have a box filled with r255 g0 b0:
    1. Export as a jpeg and open with photoshop the red changes to r248 g0 b0.
    2. Copy and paste the entire page into Photoshop gives r255 g0 b0.
    3. Put an image with transparency over the red box and export as a jpeg gives r208 g5 b24.
    I have gotten aroung this problem by not using transpapency in images - but why would transparency affect the colour of other elements on the page?
    Many thanks in advance...

    I try to export a page or spread as a jpeg and the color profile is stripped. I've made sure transparency bleed space is RGB but I still get no profile in the resulting jpg.
    Any thoughts?

  • Printer profile for Canon inkjet

    I am having a bit of trouble getting my printer to render colours satisfactorily.
    My printer is a Canon Pixma iP 3600 but I am not sure which settings give optimum results from Illustrator RGB files.
    1) Should I specify a colour profile for Illustrator or is Emulate Adobe Illustrator o.k.?
    2) Is there anything else I should do if I use Indesign for output?
    3) When I go to print, Color Management in the Print dialogue gives me various Printer Profile options, including:
    Does anyone know which of these Canon  iP3600 series profiles works (or is supposed to work) best? (I have had dismal results using Adobe RGB and can find nothing about profiles in the printer handbook. For example, I don’t know the difference between MP2, PR1, PR2 etc.)
    As for Rendering Intent, it is important in this case that colours reproduce as accurately as the printer will allow. My instinct tells me to use Absolute Colorimetric because I have adjusted the colours in my files very carefully.

    Steve,
    Have you tried a custom RGB test sheet (maybe with notes on settings written into it for each combination) and a waste of raw materials?

  • Camera profiles for Canon 7D?

    IN LR 3.2 I get no profiles specifially for the 7D. No camera vivid option, for example. Is this because Adobe isn't yet supporting this model?

    Read what I said. There are separate colour profile for every camera. If you want to check then visit the folder I posted. In LR these profiles show up dependent on the camera that created the file. If you create other profiles for a specific camera these will also show. Profiles that are not for the camera will not show as an option in LR.
    LR knows which camera made the file and loads the full set of available profiles for that camera. In the case of the 7D these are called stuff like Landscape, Vivid, etc., based on the names for various styles that the camera can produce with jpgs. Other cameras may have different naming conventions and many camera will only have an Adobe Standard profile, which will be named as such with the number that relates to the version of ACR which was in use when they were first created. So for your camera, if the profiles are installed, you should be able to choose between Adobe Standard, Vivid etc., all individual proifle for the 7 D which will not show up for any other camera unless you visit the actual folder where they are located as I previously posted.

  • Colour Calibration for 24" iMac and setting up an ICC profile

    Hi,
    Can anyone recommend a way for calibrating the display of a 24" iMac (not too expensive)? I will mainly be using Photoshop, Aperture and web browsing (I do not need for business, but like to have the best set up possible).
    Also, on a similar note, can anyone suggest a cost effective way of getting an ICC profile for use with Photoshop (CS2) and Aperture for an HP Photosmart 3210 please?
    Thanks

    Hi Kevin
    As your based in the UK feel free to contact me with regards to obtaining display profiles for your 24" iMac, and possibly output profiles for your printer.
    We are hoping to add a 24" iMac (or should that be BigMac to our studio as a training machine and backup to our other Macs in the very near future. As soon as we get our machine it will only be a day or so before I get it profile and I would be quite willing to email you a copy of our screen profile free of charge for you to test, this should get you pretty good results.
    As part of our business we carry out colour management training and that obviously includes creating colour profiles. We use a Gretag i1 Pro to calibrate and profile our screens to a very high level so I think it may be worth you giving me a call soon. Feel free to call me on 01773 717446 or email me at [email protected]
    G5 Dual 2.0, PB15"DL, Quicksilver 733   Mac OS X (10.4.4)  

  • PNG colour profiles - and this format for print

    I know it's taboo to talk about PNG for printing.
    But I can't find and I've searched the forums - there was a post made about embedding colour profiles a while ago.
    I know PNG is a RGB only format, but I'm 36.8% sure I read something about embedding either RGB or ... wait for it CMYK profiles into PNG files.
    If anyone can shed any light on this - and how about PNG for print - I've been against it for a long time - but it is a lossless format, it can carry 64 bit data.
    I know I know - but I thought I'd ask anyway - see what people think.

    You can't save a PNG with a profile out of Photoshop, but it looks like you can embed one via the image events scripts that ship with OSX (/Library/Scripts/ColorSync/embed). Unfortunately ID ignores the embedded profile and uses the document's assigned profile instead. PNGs do respond to ID's RGB profile and the RGB profile will have an effect on the CMYK separation when it happens.
    Here's ProPhoto and sRGB:
    From your ID document you can also assign a profile, which conflicts with the doc's profile, by selecting the png and choosing Image Color Settings.... So, you could assign AdobeRGB as your doc's profile and assign sRGB to all your pngs.

  • Colour profiles within PS are off for one monitor only?

    Hi guys,
    I'm having a very strange issue with colour management in Photoshop CS2 currently.
    Photoshop seems to be calibrating all documents in a strange way on only *one* monitor. If I drag the file across to the other monitor the colour is completely different.
    Of course it sounds like my monitors being off, however when dragging the file across monitors Photoshop slowly updates the colours for the next monitor. You can see it display the wrong colour at first, then correct it (hopefully that makes sense).
    Another symptom of it is when I go to 'save for web'. Here, the colours revert to what I believe are correct.
    b It's worth noting that this has only started to happen since some Windows updates. One being an option update from Dell for my monitor - I can't seem to find any information about it though!
    My tester that I've been using is a plain white to black gradient. What I'm seeing is a lot of cyan in the middle of the gradient. I've saved off an example:
    http://2dforever.com/photoshop.png
    As you can see, all the greys are very green, but if you look at the gradient tool in the toolbar itself, the grey appears fine.
    I'm unsure how I can adjust the colour profile from Photoshop for one monitor - am I missing something really obvious here?
    Just to note: I'm on Win Xp SP2, Photoshop CS2, and I've cleared the preferences.

    Since you only mention Photoshop as having a problem, this is almost
    certainly, as you suspect, a monitor profile config problem.
    Color profiles for individual monitors are configured in
    Start>Settings>Control Panel>Display>Settings>(Advanced Button)>Color
    Management.
    In Settings, click on the monitor whose profile you want to verify before
    clicking on the "Advanced..." button. I would start by adding and
    defaulting the profile for the monitor that is causing problems.
    The Microsoft XP color control panel applet makes setup easier, though it
    is not really necessary. If the link below fails, google for keywords
    Microsoft XP color control panel applet.
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=1e33dca0-7721-43ca-9174-7f8d429fb b9e&displaylang=en

Maybe you are looking for