Phocus=Aperture workflow - washed out images in Phocus

I just found a glitch which should be addressed when latest version is released
I installed Phocus on our Mac Pro's one early 4c model and latest 8c and found that the Hasselblad RGB profiles had not been installed in Library/ColorSync/Profiles.
So you need to do an install in Administrator mode and then open it in Admin mode as when you first open Phocus it then installes profiles.
If you install in user mode it asks for authorization and installs application but when first opened it does not install profiles or even ask for authorization to do so?
Bizarrely I installed on Mac Book Pro as user and it worked ok??
Phil

You are probably right, it is an issue with color profiles and gamut. Aperture does use a different raw converter, which will create some variance. In fact, many like the look of straight Aperture raw conversions over straight ACR conversions. But if the washed out look is dramatic, and Photoshop opens your raw files okay, then it must be a profile issue.
It may help to explain how you are exporting from Aperture. Are your source files raw files, PSDs, TIFFs, or JPEGs? Are you exporting masters, or are you exporting versions? If you're exporting versions, take a look at your "source preset" when exporting. What color profile are you embedding?
Although if you are embedding any color profile, Photoshop and Lightroom should pick it up.
All I've read is that Lightroom manages profiles more transparently than Photoshop, but perhaps someone could jump in here and say how it is managed.
Finally, what purpose are you exporting and importing into Lightroom? If you're migrating your library to a Lightroom catalog, you may be best served by using the Aperture migration plug-in.
Aperture import plugin now available
The plug-in still has issues with foreign characters, importing all previews, and face keywording and keywording previews. You'll be better off waiting until these issues are fixed. Even if you can't, the plug-in would still be a better option than a manual attempt, unless you're doing something other than migrating your Aperture library.

Similar Messages

4K TV not recognized correctly: MacBook Pro Mid2014 15" reports a Samsung UE40HU6900 4K TV as 8K (7680x4320). This results in an ugly, washed out image half the size it should be. Is there a fix for this? (OSX 10.10.1)

MacBook Pro Mid2014 15" reports a Samsung UE40HU6900 4K TV as 8K (7680x4320).
This results in an ugly, washed out image half the size it should be. If you turn off scaling everything is tiny as 8K are displayed on a 4K screen. To get the actual 4K resolution you have to turn on scaling. Still 8K is transferred to the device, but doubling the data lines makes the picture look washed out and create obscure effects for line borders.
Did anybody encounter this problem before? Is there a fix for this? (OSX 10.10.1)

You have the MacBookPro6,2, the Edsel of Macs. It may be covered by this program:
MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2010): Intermittent black screen or loss of video
Make a "Genius" appointment at an Apple Store to have the machine tested.
Print the first page of the panic report and bring it with you.
Back up all data on the internal drive(s) before you hand over your computer to anyone. If privacy is a concern, erase the data partition(s) with the option to write zeros* (do this only if you have at least two complete, independent backups, and you know how to restore to an empty drive from any of them.) Don’t erase the recovery partition, if present.
*An SSD doesn't need to be zeroed.

!HELP! Washed out images

What can I do to fix washed out images caused by spotlights in a theatre. The theatre is dark with a single and sometimes two spotlights on the stage.

In the future....
1) Man both cameras
2) Use Manual Controls
3) lock your shutter at 60... set gain to 0dB (or as low as possible if you need extra gain)
4) activate the cameras zebra stripes
5) control your exposure using the iris
if you don't know how to activate your camera's zebras check the documentation for your camcorders. if you don't know how to use the zebras to judge exposure there is plenty on the internet about it.
Get the best footage you can at the shooting stage. You can do more with SLIGHTLY underexposed footage, as video holds more detail in the blacks than the highlights. Once you overexpose (clip) your video signal there is no information to work with. Just white.
PowerMac G5 2.7GHZ, 3.5GB Ram, 2x 250GB Sata, 2x 250GB G-Drive, Kona LH Mac OS X (10.4.9) Final Cut Studio, PS:CS2, Shake, BitVice

Costco and soft proofing show dull washed out image

OK, so I am trying to utilize my nearest costco to print some images from lightroom 5. I am getting back dull washed out prints.
Facts:
I shoot in RAW in manual mode
I am using sRGB when I do my post processing
I export to jpg for printing
I used the costco LR5 plugin from Alloyphoto to upload to Costco
I have installed the printer profiles from drycreek for the specific location/printer and have chosen the correct profile as I export
I made sure that I chose to have Costco NOT autocorrect the color
Even when I use LR5's soft proofing, I get the same result on my monitor
I checked the print I got back and it says that they did NOT autocorrect (taken with a grain of salt)
The machine they are using is a Noritsu QSS-A, so I know my profile is correct
I have attached a screen shot of what I am seeing.
Why am I seeing this on my soft proofing as well as my prints?
How can I solve this and get vibrant prints?
Any advice would be helpful.
Message was edited by: moviebuffking

moviebuffking wrote:
I have calibrated my monitor as good as I can get without specific hardware. I have 18 years experience calibrating monitors (via optical media and my eyes), so I know that mine is very close.
It is virtually impossible to "accurately" set the Luminance, Gamma, and Color temperature "by eye." This is most likely the cause of your prints not matching the screen image you see in LR. That being the monitor's Luminance (i.e. Brightness) level is too set to high.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/colour_management/prints_too_dark.html
To see if this could be your problem I downloaded the posted screen shot and cropped out the 'Copy' image, which has your adjustments applied to it. Here are my results:
Click on image to see full-size
I needed to apply a full F stop (+1.0 EV) of Exposure correction to achieve a good midtone brightness level for the print image. You'll notice I also added -50 Highlights and +50 Shadows along with +25 Vibrance. I bet the image with my adjustments added looks way too bright on your uncalibrated monitor.
You have two (2) issues–Monitor Calibration and LR Basic Panel Control Adjustments
Monitior Calibration
I would highly recommend investing in a hardware monitor calibrator such as the X-Rite i1 Display and ColorMunki, or Datacolor Spyder models. If you tell me what make and model monitor you are using I can recommend specific calibrators.
Temporarily you can try adjusting the monitor "by eye" to get it closer to the desired 120cd/m2 Luminance, 2.2 Gamma, and 6500K Color Temperature using the test patterns at this site:
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
When the monitors Brightness and Contrast controls have been correctly set the screen image should look much closer to the prints you have recently made with the LR Soft Proof adjustments. So in fact you will be adjusting the monitor to make it look bad with the LR adjustments you applied. The proper monitor settings will make the Lagom test patterns look correct AND should make your bad Costco prints now match the screen image using you original LR settings.
After changing the monitor's Brightness and Contrast settings try readjusting a few of the image files you had printed and send them to Costco as check prints. Compare them again to your monitor's screen image. They should be much better!
LR Basic Panel Tone Control Adjustment
LR's PV2012 Tone controls can provide much improvement to your raw image Highlight and Shadow detail. Start with all of the Tone controls at their '0' default settings and adjust them from the top-down in the order shown below.
1. Set Exposure for the midtone brightness ignoring the highlight and shadow areas for now. Setting Exposure about +.5 EV higher than what looks correct for the midtones seems to work best with most images.
2. Leave Contrast at 0 for now. You’ll adjust this after the first pass.
3. Adjust Highlights so that blown out areas are recovered and “fine tonal detail” is revealed.
4. Adjust Shadows to reveal fine detail in dark areas. For most normal images simply setting -Shadows = +Highlights (Example -50 and +50) works very well.
5. The Whites control sets the white clipping point, which you can see by holding down the ALT key as you move the slider. Adjust it to the point where you see clipping just appear with the ALT key.
6. The Blacks control sets the black clipping point, which you can see by holding down the ALT key as you move the slider. Adjust it to the point where you see clipping just appear with the ALT key.
7. Now go back and adjust the Contrast control to establish the best midtone contrast.
8. Lastly touchup the Exposure control for the best midtone brightness.
9. If necessary “touch-up” the controls using the same top-down workflow.
moviebuffking wrote:
Am I correct in assuming that the soft proof (with a certain profile) is a "preview" of what that print will look like?
Soft Proof does two things. It shows you what the image's colors will look like in the target color space (i.e. printer profile). You can see what (if any) colors are "out of gamut" by clicking on the small icon in the upper-righthand corner of the Histogram. You can also see if any of the colors fall out of your monitor's gamut by clicking on the small icon in the upper-lefthand corner of the Histogram.
When you check 'Simulate Paper & Ink' the Soft Proof image's contrast and color saturation are changed to make it look closer to what the "reflective" print image will look like when held next to the monitor for comparison. Many people have difficulty using 'Simulate Paper & Ink' since it requires using precise light levels for viewing the print and a well calibrated monitor.
In summary my best suggestion is to purchase and use a good hardware monitor calibrator on a scheduled basis to insure you have an "accurate" screen image inside LR and other color managed applications like PS.

Disconnect+reconnect external display = washed out image

hi guys
I need some expert help on this. Using a Dell E178 WFP external display on my 2010 Macbook Pro via mini-DVI-to-VGA adapter. This display has no EDID it seems so I use SwitchResX to create the necessary resolution override (1440x900). SwitchResX has nothing such as daemons or helpers installed on top, so this boils down to graphics drivers.
My problem: When I reboot the machine, the display has the necessary brightness, contrast, and colour balance. If I unplug the display, wait a sec, then plug it back in, the image comes up very bright and washed out, and I can't get a "true" black out of the display.
What this isn't: I have a ColorSync profile, and make sure it is successfullly loaded, i.e. I go through the trouble of opening up system preferences>displays>color to make sure it reloads. This is not a ColorSync problem. It is not the 2.2 vs 1.8 gamma problem either. Ctrl+shift+eject does not fix it. Creating a new colour profile does not fix it either. The usual SMC, permissions, safe boot, etc tricks don't work either.
Apple engineers have sent me a copy of TimingSnoop but were baffled by the display having a "fake" EDID (when run without SwitchResX TS detects no EDID at all). Since I refused to roll back my entire system to 10.6.4 or uninstall SwitchResX (it does not interfere??) they closed the bug stating "insufficient information".
10.6.4 did not have this problem, and my hardware is perfectly fine.
Rolling back the graphics to 10.6.4 fixes this issue (but creates other issues)
I'm looking for information on this. Has anyone had the same happen? Is it confined to sans-EDID displays?
Have googled a lot but I'm running out of search terms... Anything could be of help?
Thanks in advance.

Again, this is not the gamma problem that's fixed by just opening the display preferences and resetting the colour profile.
This seems to be somehow related to the display's EDID and the video adapter (Nvidia) not resetting properly when first unplugged and then plugged back in. My support request with Apple is more than a year old in total now and replies have been trickling but all of them add little (if anything at all) to a fix.
My particular problem is finding these "a lot of" people who are experiencing this problem. Everyone I've seen so far talks about the gamma/colours problem, never about the brightness and reboot. So yours is the first instance of someone having exactly the same problem. Hopefully we can find more people? Do you know where I should be looking?
Another idea I've had is to possibly talk to the OSX86 community? If Apple are not interesting in issuing a fix for this, maybe someone else has done some work? After reviewing Apple's code (at least that part which is made public) I'm pretty convinced this is in Nvidia's territory, and that gives me very little hope..
I'm interested to know if this has been fixed on Lion at all..? Ideas?

Washed-out images in Lightroom 2.4

Beginner's question-Help, please. Images taken in Nikon D700 show perfect lighting in camera's LCD. Now, when imported into Lightroom 2.4, lighting becomes washed out.
Help, please!

Most probably there is a develop preset applied on import.
In the Import Dialog, on the right side, in the panel <Apply during Import> select <None> for "Develop Settings".
If you don't see this you have to expand the Import Dialog by clicking on the small triangle on the bottom left.

Photos uploaded to Picasa after being adjusted in Aperture look washed out.

I imported color pics (RAW and JPEG) from my Nikon D70 to iPhoto. I brought them into Aperture, adjusted the shadows and uploaded them to Picasa (using the Picasa Web Albums Uploader, not the "Aperture to Picasa" plugin. The pictures on Picasa are totally washed out. This doesn't happen when I adjust in iPhoto and upload to the same place. I then downloaded the Kodak (ofoto) uploader. Same thing- washed out, almost gray photos.
Thanks.

View>>Onscreen Proofing
Is it turned on?
View>> Proofing Profile
What is the profile set on?
DLS

Spot light washes out image in photoshop

Hi I have an image, and i have created a layer for a spot light which i created but the spot light washes out the colour of the image.
Any help would be appreciated

If the spotlight is on its own layer, by it self. You can lower the opacity of that layer.

Still Image distortion and washed out image quality after exporting

Hi,
I am a relatively new Final Cut Studio 2 user I've taken a few classes and I know the basics and a little beyond. So far my projects have been coming out well until I started having to add still images to my projects. When I add these images I size down in Photoshop CS3 appropriately, usually they are really large tiffs or standard jpegs. Then when I import them into Final Cut I size them one more time to match the wire frame. When I play the movie I created in Final Cut it looks great but after I export it using compressor I either get a pixilated type of image distortion or the images are washed out, but its usually only on certain images not all images in the project are affected. My projects usually end up embedded on our website or up on youtube or bliptv, so I have been bouncing between the H.264 300Kbps for medium bandwidth streaming and H.264 800 Kbps for high bandwidth. Would someone be able to tell me if there is a better codec I should use for the web that would get rid of these problems that I am having or do I need to size my images in a different way? Any tips would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
The Louse~

No help on this

Washed out Images in AECC

Everything I bring into AECC is washed out extremely and I don't know why.
Anyone know anything about this?

We need to know a lot more if we're going to help you. Please provide answers to the questions listed here: "FAQ: What information should I provide when asking a question on this forum?"

Aperture is swapping out images.

I have aperture on my laptop and am working with an aperture library of over 27,000 images. All but the most recent master images are referenced on an external drive which is backed up separately of my aperture vault backups. Last week while looking through some images from 2005 the thumbnails started changing before my eyes into images from a different project. My master images are stored by date, I've checked the external drive and there are images missing in the folder for that date. I'm assuming that my aperture database is corrupt. I tried consolidating the images from that project but it brought in the wrong images.
My issue now is; do I try to sort out the copy of aperture that I'm working on and re-import the images that it's unhappy with, or do I restore from a backup and work from that. As the images in question are very old I have no idea how far back this problem might go so restoring from a backup isn't necessarily going to help. Is there any way I can look at the aperture database to find out what's actually going on.

I've tried restoring to a backup that looked O.K and the problem has repeated itself. I have vault backups which I can restore to and I also have time machine backups. The restore from vault takes a long time and the time machine backups have to be copied to another location because the library won't run from the backup location. It's going to be very time consuming to try to go back and sort out when the problem occurred. Is there any way I can look at the aperture database in these files to try to find a backup which is clean?

Borderless printing washes out image

Hi,
I have a MP160 (Pixma Series) that works very well.
Today I've tried to make some bordeless printing and when I use this option — changing Paper Size from A4 to A4 (borderless), the colors of the images fades a lot, resulting on a very light printed image.
If I choose back the simple A4 (with borders), the images prints well again.
I found a way to resolve this, by changing Media Type from Plain Paper to Photo Paper Pro (Media Type under Quality & Media options) and changing Print Quality to High instead of Standard (this option is grayed out for Plain Paper when I set A4 bordeless). But this workaround makes the printer velocity goes down a lot, using more ink (I'm assuming that), even this printing a very little lighter imagem than the A4 Standard print quality.
Is there a way to solve that, printing borderless on standard quality?
I'm on Mac osX 10.8.5, printing from Preview app.
Thanks,
baga

baga is right. I've had a couple of different Canon printers, including the one mentioned, and have always had an issue with borderless printing. You may believe, as anyone who is using your product would, that with all settings the same there should be no difference in print quality between bordered and borderless but I can assure you there is. I'm sure baga gave up quickly on this thread since you wouldn't acknowledge the issue. This is apparently the best Canon can offer and is as good a reason as any to avaoid the product if borderless printing is a priority.

Washed out logo

I am trying to print a logo in a pages doc. I have converted the logo to a png, tiff and jpg but all seam to print as a washed out image. Actual colour is a sky blue but it comes out looking muddy. Whats going wrong? - This also happens in Word 2008.
Any ideas??

Check that you have assigned a source ICC profile to the logo
I am trying to do this, but in Preview both the 'Match Profile' and 'Assign Profile' are grayed out for my color document. Do have any idea why this is?
Take a deep breath ... -:)
Photographers live the simple life. They work with JPEG documents and TIFF documents that have one and only one object per document by definition.
If the file format you open supports one and only one object, then you see the embedded source ICC profile or the source ICC profile assigned by the system in the ColorSync Profile popup.
If the ColorSync Profile popup says Generic RGB/CMYK/Gray profile, then the JPEG or TIFF has no embedded profile and you are seeing the ICC profile assigned by the system.
If the ColorSync Profile popup says anything other than Generic RGB/CMYK/Gray profile, then the JPEG or TIFF has the source ICC profile whose name you see embedded.
Pick a JPEG from Corbis or PhotoDisk, see if it has an embedded source ICC profile, and see what happens when you change to another source ICC profile - the colours change.
If there is no source profile to say what colours the colourants in the JPEG or TIFF should form, then there is no conversion to the colour managed display.
What happens if the file format supports two or more objects at the same time, e.g. two raster objects with two source ICC profiles, or a vector object with one source ICC profile for the stroke and another source ICC profile for the fill which is perfectly possible?
If you drag one of your JPEGs into Pages and pick File > Print > PDF > Save as PDF, then you have a file format that supports several objects at the same time that may be in several colourant models and several colour spaces at the same time, too.
So, for PDF you can't assign a source ICC profile or change an already assigned source ICC profile in Apple Preview. You need to do that before you place raster objects and vector objects into the application that produces the page description.
Also, in Pages'06, the Print / ColorSync / Color Management pull-down menu is locked on 'Standard' which lets Pages manage the color. The other option 'In Printer' is grayed out which prevents me from using my printer and its ICC color profiles from managing the color.
This is as designed.
First, Pages is not doing any colour management. Pages is a client of the operating system which is doing the colour management.
Second, if the Epson driver is fed by an Epson driver, then the Epson driver expects the colourant conversion to be computed by the system which is what Standard means.
The Epson printer could in principle be fed by a PostScript interpreter running on your studio Mac or on a Mac server or Windows server in a prepress shop.
In this case, In Printer means that the system does not compute the colourant conversion, but converts the ICC file format into the PostScript file format and lets the computer running the PostScript RIP do the colourant conversion.
It is significantly simpler if you begin from a concept of the principles of the ICC architecture, and then ask yourself how a given application or configuration of applications should work. Not that this is any consolation, unfortunately.
/hh

Pic HERE: Losing color/washed out when exported

So I exported my movie using H.264 and the result is a washed out image.
The left image is the exported footage and the right is the footage viewed in FCP.
Is this a common problem or am I just doing something wrong here?
[img]http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/6871/1190482208.jpg[/img]

The only difference I could see was that the whites were (Slightly) brighter in the left.mov pic... Maybe a slight shift in "warmth" or saturation in the mids (I can see it in the mans face far right).
Hey, you are compressing and something has to give. Simply boost the controls in FCP that are important to you before compression based on the results you see. Keep in mind that every web viewer’s computer will display something different.
Props to you for being fussy!

Images imported from Aperture showing up 'washed out' in Lightroom.

I am aware that Lightroom uses ProPhoto RBG. When i export images from Aperture to a folder then import into Lightroom the images appear very different. Is there a setting i am missing as the images seem 'washed' out in Lightroom. When i export to the desktop and open in Photoshop they look the same as in Aperture. After i import to Lightroom and open in Photoshop they still look washed out.
New to Lightroom and trying to find the right alternative to Aperture.
Many Thanks in advance.

You are probably right, it is an issue with color profiles and gamut. Aperture does use a different raw converter, which will create some variance. In fact, many like the look of straight Aperture raw conversions over straight ACR conversions. But if the washed out look is dramatic, and Photoshop opens your raw files okay, then it must be a profile issue.
It may help to explain how you are exporting from Aperture. Are your source files raw files, PSDs, TIFFs, or JPEGs? Are you exporting masters, or are you exporting versions? If you're exporting versions, take a look at your "source preset" when exporting. What color profile are you embedding?
Although if you are embedding any color profile, Photoshop and Lightroom should pick it up.
All I've read is that Lightroom manages profiles more transparently than Photoshop, but perhaps someone could jump in here and say how it is managed.
Finally, what purpose are you exporting and importing into Lightroom? If you're migrating your library to a Lightroom catalog, you may be best served by using the Aperture migration plug-in.
Aperture import plugin now available
The plug-in still has issues with foreign characters, importing all previews, and face keywording and keywording previews. You'll be better off waiting until these issues are fixed. Even if you can't, the plug-in would still be a better option than a manual attempt, unless you're doing something other than migrating your Aperture library.

Phocus=Aperture workflow - washed out images in Phocus

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for