No color space change wanted

I have 1080p clips (h.264) which are perfect in color. But after putting them together in FCPX and exporting, the colors get slightly changed, all looks a bit washed out compared to the original, the black is not quiet so black any more, the white not so white and the colors a bit less strong. Now I have tried export directly from FCPX, with or without preferences/color analysis, exporting via Compressor and used all the different color space settings there (source, standard, SD 601, HD 509) it makes no difference. I never achieve the quality of the original. What else can I try?

Try editing the project as Pro Res 422.
Russ

Similar Messages

Color space change when using photoshop elements plug in

When I select photo and edit with photoshop elements, Aperture makes a copy of the file as expected, but I can see the image color/hue etc. has changed, why? Is there some setting I am missing? The color of the image shouldn't change, should it? Just doesn't make sense!

Where do you see the color change of the copy?
In the thumbnail or preview before it is send to the external edtor?
When the image is opened in the external editor?
Or after it is send back from the editor?
I do not see any color changes when I use PS CS5; it may help to see a screenshot.

Trying to Export - Quicktime to DPX - in Linear (R709) Color space NOT LOG

Hello,
I am trying to export an image sequence through compressor from a Linear (R709) color space. When I try to do the dpx image sequence output it changes the files to LOG.
Is there a way to pass the material through without any color space changes?
Thank-you,
Carl

FYI, In the Inspector, and filtes, COLOR tab> Output Color Space: Default for Encoder (CAN NOT BE CHANGED - It is greyed out)

Color Space Problems w/ Files?

I use Lightroom 2.5 to manage my photos. There are several things I don't understand regarding embedded color spaces in files.
When I export a file from LR to Photoshop CS4 as a TIF in the Adobe RGB color space the file shows as "Uncalibrated" in the EXIF & XMP metadata.
Using PS CS4, if I save a JPG file from the above Adobe RGB TIF file, and then use the edit -> convert to profile function, with Destination Space -> Adobe RGB selected, toggling the preview check box shows a color shift in the image. If I convert an image to the same color space why is there a color shift?
Is the color profile stored in the EXIF or XMP metadata?
Jack

I can provide some general information on the topic, though I do not use Lightroom so thers may jump in.
Information about color space is contained within the tiff file proper. That is, in a tag (the T in TIFF) and if I am correct it is tag 262 (PhotometricInterpretation). I do not know if LR also puts this info into the metadata.
When you convert a file to jpg you invoke the YCbCr color space and convert your source data into it. That is, the "compression" process also involves a color space change if you did not start out with YCbCr. This could account for the color shift you are seeing.
Paulo

Changing color spaces/profiles

How do I change the color profile of files that were processed using ProPhoto color space to sRGB? Thanks in advance.

Thanks Lundberg02. So if I want to change the color space of some files from ProPhoto to sRGB for web use, I should be converting and not assigning the color space, correct?

Script for color space conversion RGB to CMYK - URGENT Help Wanted

Excuse my ignorance with the basic nature of this question, I don't use InDesign, but I do have a pressing problem regarding it.
My book publisher has just emailed to say that my photography book has been set for the printers in InDesign and the photographs have AdobeRGB color space (which was what I was aksed to send.) The printer needs the images to be in CMYK. The publisher said that he was "pretty sure Adobe Acrobat converts the InDesign files to CMYK" and that he has sent the printer RGB images in the past and they "came out OK". He said that if this will not work, he needs to convert all of the images separately to CMYK.
Can you help with the following:
1. Is he right about the above - can Adobe Acrobat convert the files?
2. Can anyone offer me a script that will convert all of the images in InDesign to CMYK? or will he need to change them individually?
Thanks for any suggestions with this urgent request.
Stephen

1. Acrobat can convert.
2. No need for a script, if the printer needs CMYK, you can export a CMYK pdf.
3. To get the highest quality conversions, you might want to do it in Photoshop.
4. If the images are color managed and the printer has a modern work-flow a color managed RGB PDFX-4 pdf is probably the best way to go...
Harbs

How to change the color picker/color space view?

I wanted to change the color picker/color space view to what it looks like in the other Adobe programs. I have gotten used to using the color picker from the other programs and I have had problems with the look and function of this color view.
In InDesign the color picker looks like this:
And the Photoshop/Illustrator/etc. looks like this:
I've tried changing the "Convert To Profile..." and the Transparency Blend Space, but neither have done anything to what I want to be done.
Is there some way to change this in InDesign?
Note: I want to change the looks of the gradient-like area if that isn't obvious.

I was wanting to do the same change as you, until I saw your two images.
Within the InDesign image you've selected a dark blue colour (R:16, G:49, B:152) AND you've got the (R)ed channel selected.
Within the Photoshop image you've selected a white colour(R:255, G:255, B:255) AND you've got the (H)ue channel selected.
In Photoshop I can recreate both of your images by having the same settings for RGB/CMYK and selecting the same channel item as you have in those images.
That's all.
There is no difference between the two colour selection dialogs except where the HSB, RGB, CMYK and LAB are placed.

I don't want Prophoto color space!

Why does Lightroom convert all Raw photos to Prophoto color space? Even if the gamut is considerably larger than the gamut of sRGB color space, I don't want my photos appear terribly desaturated. My Nikon D200 has an exellent color, but it's destoyed by 199$ Lightroom! When I convert my photos in Lightroom and save them with sRGB color space selected, there is absolutely no color change: the color is the same as in Prophoto color space. I don't print my photos at home, and I don't want to have terribly desaturated print from Kodak service. Please, can anybody say how can I get my photos with sRGB colors from Lightroom ? Thank you!

<blockquote>Why does Lightroom convert all Raw photos to Prophoto color space?</blockquote>LR does not "convert" your raw images to prophoto. Prophoto is just the color space used internally. You can asign sRGB on export as you wish. I believe sRGB is even used as default on export. No harm done here. Alexander. -- Canon EOS 400D (aka. XTi) • 20" iMac Intel • 12" PowerBook G4 • OS X 10.4 • LR 1 • PSE 4

Hi, I'm working on a document in PAges 09. Any idea on how to change the document color? I want it black instead of white.

Hi, I'm working on a document in PAges 09. Any idea on how to change the document color? I want it black instead of white.

Nichelle,
You must add your own background object, and then make it Black.
Insert > Shape > Rectangle
In the Wrap Inspector, set to Floating.
In the Graphic Inspector, set Stroke to None and set Fill to Black.
Grab the corners of the document and stretch the document to cover the entire page.
Back in the Wrap Inspector select "In Background".
Format > Advanced > Move Object to Section Master.
Regards,
Jerry

PS CS with color space set to Prophoto RGB - will ACR change embedded profiles?

Probably a foolish question but my problem is that I have a mixture of files:
My own files (all initially RAW (NEF) which I import into ACR as 16 bit Prophoto RGB ).
Files from family members and from slide scanning performed elsewhere - they are in 2 groups:
The first of these from elsewhere acquired files were all JPEGs that I converted to Tiffs in Bridge before setting out to edit them-- all unfortunately 8bit and sRGB.
The scanned files were scanned as tiffs but also 8bit and sRGB.
My normal procedure is that I in ACR I have set the files to 16 bit and Prophoto RGB. In PS the same but also to preserve embedded profiles. I have the impression that working with the "foreign" files in 16 bit does give me more room for editing but that I should continue with the embedded profiles.
Is there a way to ensure that the color profiles are not changed in ACR even if the line in the middle below says 16 bit Prophoto RGB (I have PS CS5). I would hate to have to change this line each time I view a file in ACR. I would hate more to loose the editing facilities in ACR as these acquired files do need som special care before they are mixed with my own in our family albums. I prefer the 16 bit Prophoto RGB option for my own files as I like to play with them - i.e. apart from including them in Photo Albums.
I do see that a logical way is to process all the acquired files before going to my own files but it is so much more practical for me to work with a mixture of the files sorted chronologically - a year or month at the time.
I would even consider getting an upgrade to CS6 if this version could help me.
Can someone enligthen me?
Thanks, Git

Hi, Tom.
The real issue here is getting accurate color. You can't get accurate color by setting your monitor profile to sRGB. sRGB is a virtual color space that doesn't describe the exact color gamut of any physical device. But, in order to display sRGB or any color space accurately, you need to get a characterization of your monitor.
Here is an AWESOME way to get access to a colorimeter: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/pantone-huey-colorimeter Looks like for $32 you can rent this for a week. Go in on this with a friend and profile both of your monitors and hardly pay a thing. If you have a reasonably good quality LCD monitor, this custom profile you make will be fairly accurate for many months. At the very least, this is way more accurate than having no regular calibration at all.
Hope this helps!
Bret

Change Aperture previews color space from Adobe98 to sRgb

Hi,
I'd like to change the default color space for the jpg previews that Aperture generates from the masters of my library.
I now have all my jpegs saved as Adobe98 but it's important for me to have them saved as sRGB because when third party apps and devices go to read them, they can't reproduce the right colors if they find the wrong color profile.
Thanks in advance for your help!

I don't know how many different ways to say that you cannot change the color space for previews. The files themselves have specific image data that corresponds to a specific color profile that is Adobe 1998 you cannot change the way Aperture generates these. Changing your system has nothing to do with it.
As for work-flow - If you need this to work and it doesn't then it never has so I really don't see how it is changing your work-flow that never existed?
RB
Ps. External devices like projectors work fine as long as your presentation software respects the source profile and has an output device profile - what kind of "device" are you using?
Message was edited by: rwboyer

PS CS6 Smartobject - Changing color space not working

If I initially open a smartobject from ACR into PS CS6 using one color space, eg. sRGB, should it then be possible to click back into ACR and change color space to Adobe RGB ???
This is important to me, since working most of the time in sRGB, batch editing lot's of files (for timelapse-video, hence sRGB), but sometimes it may be nessecary to go back and use Adobe RGB to make a best possible print of one of the stills.
This is not working for me. I thought I should be able to do absolutely non-destructive editing when working with smartobjects from ACR, but this may seem to not be the case.
Ole

I understand now that a copy of the original RAW file is made when working with SO.
Still, when checking what color space I am working in (in PS CS6), after changing from sRGB to aRGB, PS still tells me I am working in sRGB!!
So what I am asking, going back from a SO in PS, into ACR, to change the color space, does not work.
Is there a workaround for this?
Or is it something I still do not understand here?

Open in external editor -- original color space workaround

I was frustrated--like other's whose posts I've read--by the fact that when opening files (tiff, jpeg, psd) in an external editor they are all converted to the Adobe 1998 rgb space.
I am working around this comfortably and by using some Automator actions that I got from Ben Long's Complete Digital Photography site: http://www.completedigitalphotography.com/?p=414#more-414
In my Pictures folder I have an Auto Processing subfolder with Photoshop droplets and lots of 'hot folders' tied to Applescript folder actions. I made two new folders: OPEN in Photoshop & IMPORT to Aperture
The Open in Photoshop folder has attached from Automator the following actions from the default Finder suite: Open Finder Items and Move to Trash.
The Open action is self explanitory, the next step of moving the recently opened file to the trash guarantees that I can't save to the source file. This forces Photoshop to do a Save As even if I hit command + S. The Save As prompts me for a location and I choose the Import to Aperture folder.
The IMPORT to Aperture folder has attached the Import Photos action from Ben Long's Aperture suite. By selecting the Delete the Source Images After Importing Them option and the Show Action When Run option I get a prompt asking what project to add the new files to and the old files are deleted from my hot folder after the import.
This isn't a perfect round trip solution because I still end up with two copies of the image in Aperture--even if I was just opening the source image to tweak an adjustment layer. I might create an Applescript that would prompt the user and delete the precvious copy of the image if desired.
Like many of you I was feeling blue yesterday about rumors of changes in the Aperture team at Adobe. Blue not because I beleive Aperture's going away, instead because I expect if this rumor is true that we will see some delays in the short term while the new team gets up to speed.
While I am waiting for that to happen I intend to use this discussion site to find creative workarounds for Aperture's current limitations and share them as widely as possible. Many of you are already doing the same.
Thanks!

Yes you could do that.
I was part of the alpha/beta test group for Adobe CS2. Most of my work was with scripting and automation, especially for Bridge. I did have a very good dialog with Bruce Fraser, Seth Resnick and other testers whose opinions are as good as fact in my book.
The consensus was that most digital cameras--certainly the pro models--had a color gamut substantially larger than Adobe RGB (1998). Note that ACR give the option of developing an image into sRGB, Adobe RGB, Color Match RGB, or Pro Photo RGB; 8-bit or 16-bit. That's the way I want it in Aperture.
If you use the perceptial rendering intent (this is almost certainly what Aperture is using as its undisclosed default setting) then you will compress the wider gamut of the camera into the smaller Adobe RGB (1998) gamut. If in Photoshop you used the Convert to profile command and choose the perceptial rendering you would probably expand the color gamut back out a little bit. Why bother? Aperture really should have options for open in external editor like the very good export version settings.
I have in my Aperture library a bunch of 16-bit grayscale scans and some CYMK files that seem to be working fine with the workflow above and Automator actions. (Lab files won't import.) I wouldn't want to go through the convert to Adobe RGB (1998) and reconvert to proper space with these files. My workflow is letting my store these files in Aperture and still edit in native color spaces in Photoshop with minimal effort for a round trip. I like it.
P.S. I said in my original post that it would be easy to write an Applscript to delete the orignial file in Aperture when reimporting a slightly modified Photoshop version. It may be possible but its not easy in the current version which only has a bare skeleton of Applescript functionality.

Why does Lightroom (and Photoshop) use AdobeRGB and/or ProPhoto RGB as default color spaces, when most monitors are standard gamut (sRGB) and cannot display the benefits of those wider gamuts?

I've asked this in a couple other places online as I try to wrap my head around color management, but the answer continues to elude me. That, or I've had it explained and I just didn't comprehend. So I continue. My confusion is this: everywhere it seems, experts and gurus and teachers and generally good, kind people of knowledge claim the benefits (in most instances, though not all) of working in AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. And yet nobody seems to mention that the majority of people - including presumably many of those championing the wider gamut color spaces - are working on standard gamut displays. And to my mind, this is a huge oversight. What it means is, at best, those working this way are seeing nothing different than photos edited/output in sRGB, because [fortunately] the photos they took didn't include colors that exceeded sRGB's real estate. But at worst, they're editing blind, and probably messing up their work. That landscape they shot with all those lush greens that sRGB can't handle? Well, if they're working in AdobeRGB on a standard gamut display, they can't see those greens either. So, as I understand it, the color managed software is going to algorithmically reign in that wild green and bring it down to sRGB's turf (and this I believe is where relative and perceptual rendering intents come into play), and give them the best approximation, within the display's gamut capabilities. But now this person is editing thinking they're in AdobeRGB, thinking that green is AdobeRGB's green, but it's not. So any changes they make to this image, they're making to an image that's displaying to their eyes as sRGB, even if the color space is, technically, AdobeRGB. So they save, output this image as an AdobeRGB file, unaware that [they] altered it seeing inaccurate color. The person who opens this file on a wide gamut monitor, in the appropriate (wide gamut) color space, is now going to see this image "accurately" for the first time. Only it was edited by someone who hadn't seen it accurately. So who know what it looks like. And if the person who edited it is there, they'd be like, "wait, that's not what I sent you!"
Am I wrong? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I shoot everything RAW, and I someday would love to see these photos opened up in a nice, big color space. And since they're RAW, I will, and probably not too far in the future. But right now I export everything to sRGB, because - internet standards aside - I don't know anybody who I'd share my photos with, who has a wide gamut monitor. I mean, as far as I know, most standard gamut monitors can't even display 100% sRGB! I just bought a really nice QHD display marketed toward design and photography professionals, and I don't think it's 100. I thought of getting the wide gamut version, but was advised to stay away because so much of my day-to-day usage would be with things that didn't utilize those gamuts, and generally speaking, my colors would be off. So I went with the standard gamut, like 99% of everybody else.
So what should I do? As it is, I have my Photoshop color space set to sRGB. I just read that Lightroom as its default uses ProPhoto in the Develop module, and AdobeRGB in the Library (for previews and such).
Thanks for any help!
Michael

Okay. Going bigger is better, do so when you can (in 16-bit). Darn, those TIFs are big though. So, ideally, one really doesn't want to take the picture to Photoshop until one has to, right? Because as long as it's in LR, it's going to be a comparatively small file (a dozen or two MBs vs say 150 as a TIF). And doesn't LR's develop module use the same 'engine' or something, as ACR plug-in? So if your adjustments are basic, able to be done in either LR Develop, or PS ACR, all things being equal, choose to stay in LR?
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
PS RGB Workspace: ProPhotoRGB and I convert any 8-bit documents to 16-bit before doing any adjustments.
Why does one convert 8-bit pics to 16-bit? Not sure if this is an apt comparison, but it seems to me that that's kind of like upscaling, in video. Which I've always taken to mean adding redundant information to a file so that it 'fits' the larger canvas, but to no material improvement. In the case of video, I think I'd rather watch a 1080p movie on an HD (1080) screen (here I go again with my pixel-to-pixel prejudice), than watch a 1080p movie on a 4K TV, upscaled. But I'm ready to be wrong here, too. Maybe there would be no discernible difference? Maybe even though the source material were 1080p, I could still sit closer to the 4K TV, because of the smaller and more densely packed array of pixels. Or maybe I only get that benefit when it's a 4K picture on a 4K screen? Anyway, this is probably a different can of worms. I'm assuming that in the case of photo editing, converting from 8 to 16-bit allows one more room to work before bad things start to happen?
I'm recent to Lightroom and still in the process of organizing from Aperture. Being forced to "this is your life" through all the years (I don't recommend!), I realize probably all of my pictures older than 7 years ago are jpeg, and probably low-fi at that. I'm wondering how I should handle them, if and when I do. I'm noting your settings, ssprengel.
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
I save my PS intermediate or final master copy of my work as a 16-bit TIF still in the ProPhotoRGB, and only when I'm ready to share the image do I convert to sRGB then 8-bits, in that order, then do File / Save As: Format=JPG.
Part of the same question, I guess - why convert back to 8-bits? Is it for the recipient? Do some machines not read 16-bit? Something else?
For those of you working in these larger color spaces and not working with a wide gamut display, I'd love to know if there are any reasons you choose not to. Because I guess my biggest concern in all of this has been tied to what we're potentially losing by not seeing the breadth of the color space we work in represented while making value adjustments to our images. Based on what several have said here, it seems that the instances when our displays are unable to represent something as intended are infrequent, and when they do arise, they're usually not extreme.
Simon G E Garrett Apr 29, 2015 4:57 AM
With 8 bits, there are 256 possible values. If you use those 8 bits to cover a wider range of colours, then the difference between two adjacent values - between 100 and 101, say - is a larger difference in colour. With ProPhoto RGB in 8-bits there is a chance that this is visible, so a smooth colour wedge might look like a staircase. Hence ProPhoto RGB files might need to be kept as 16-bit TIFs, which of course are much, much bigger than 8-bit jpegs.
Over the course of my 'studies' I came across a side-by-side comparison of either two color spaces and how they handled value gradations, or 8-bit vs 16-bit in the same color space. One was a very smooth gradient, and the other was more like a series of columns, or as you say, a staircase. Maybe it was comparing sRGB with AdobeRGB, both as 8-bit. And how they handled the same "section" of value change. They're both working with 256 choices, right? So there might be some instances where, in 8-bit, the (numerically) same segment of values is smoother in sRGB than in AdobeRGB, no? Because of the example Simon illustrated above?
Oh, also -- in my Lumix LX100 the options for color space are sRGB or AdobeRGB. Am I correct to say that when I'm shooting RAW, these are irrelevant or ignored? I know there are instances (certain camera effects) where the camera forces the shot as a jpeg, and usually in that instance I believe it will be forced sRGB.
Thanks again. I think it's time to change some settings..

Color space problem/confusion

I posted the following message to another thread, but at the recommendation of a member I am starting a new thread here. For a couple of answers see the thread below.
http://forums.adobe.com/message/3298911#3298911
I will provide much more information hoping an Adobe support person will chime in. This is extremely odd.
System: HP, AMD, Windows 7 64-Bit, Nvidia 9100, all updates to Windows, latest Nvidia 9100 driver
Display: Samsung 226CW, Windows settings 32-bit color, correct resolution,
Calibration: Done with ColorMunki, D65 target, done after monitor has been on for more than 30 minutes
Personal: (I am adding this information with some hesitation, please excuse it if it sounds like I'm bragging; I am not). I have multiple posts on my blog, have made many presentations on color managed workflow and am very comfortable with the settings in Photoshop and Lightroom. Please take this only as a baseline information, I am not bragging. In fact, I am begging for information!
Problem:
Any, I mean ANY, original JPEG image in sRGB space coming out of the camera with no adjustments, any PSD file in sRGB space, any TIFF file in sRGB space look significantly paler in Lightroom and in Photoshop CS5 than they look in other Windows based image viewers like FastStone or XnView. This should not need these applications to be color space aware, but the situation is the same with or without their color managment turned on or off. I have done the following:
1. Totally uninstalled Lightroom 3 and reinstalled it
2. Recreated a brand new Lightroom catalog/library and reimported all the images, converting all the RAW files to DNG (just in case!)
3. Recalibrated the display
When I view a file, any file and I will use for the sake of simplicity a JPEG file in sRGB color space, in Lightroom it looks pale. Since the file is in sRGB color space, I have verified this, the rendering in Lightroom should be the same as rendering in anything else. But it is not. I took my monitor and connected it to this system with the same odd behavior of rendering in Lightroom being much paler than outside. It appears as if I am viewing an image in Adobe RGB in a windows viewer that is not color managed.
I further tried the following:
1. I copied various versions of one file, all in sRGB color space. One PSD and two JPEG files from the folders of the above system and copied them to my system, Intel, Windows 7 64-bit, display calibrated and profiled with ColorMunki to the same standards as the problem system above.
2. Imported them to Lightroom on my system
3. The rendering in Lightroom is identical to rendering outside Lightroom for all the files and all are same as the rendering in FastStone on the problem system. Outside rendering was done using FastStone as on the problem system.
My deduction is that something on the problem system outlined in the opening of the message is interfering with the Adobe rendering engine and I have no idea what it could be. I WILL GREATLY APPRECIATE if an Adobe engineer could chime in and steer me in the right direction. I am willing to try other things but I have run out of ideas despite the fact that I have reduced much of the problem to the lowest common denominator of sRGB and JPEG against a PSD in sRGB.
Waiting anxiously of your help.
Cemal

Also, I know enough to calibrate a monitor when it is connected to a new computer. That said, even without calibration the behavior should have changed to display all the images in question the same but perhaps with somewhat off colors. Am I right? I am not arguing the point, I am rhetorically raising the question. If the 226CW is wide gamut and 244T is not, when I connect 244T on the same computer the wide gamut issue should be eliminated, should it not? I am not talking at this point about the "correct" color, but the same color in or out of Lightroom.
Unfortunately when you connect another monitor to a computer and don't calibrate or manually change it, Windows will not change the monitor profile. Macs will autodetect and change the profile but this innovation has not reached windows yet. The behavior you observe is caused by managed apps using the monitor profile and unmanaged apps not. If the monitor profile is not changed, the behavior doesn't change.
BTW, for a "cheap" software to be color space aware it does not need a quantum leap in technology I believe. It simply needs to know how to read the ICC profile and the LUT, is that correct?
It's extremely simple to program color management into apps. Standard API libraries have been available in Windows for over a decade. The reason why this hasn't happened is related to the fact that Microsoft hasn't made IE color managed and the software makers do not want to confuse folks when images look different in their program vs IE. Considering that this still is the biggest issue people wrongly complain about in every color managed application (just check Photoshop fora) that is maybe not that strange.

No color space change wanted

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for