Rendering intent when displaying, exporting or soft proofing?

I am trying to make use of soft proofing to adjust my images for a given output device for which I have ICC profiles. The two profiles I am playing with are for a Lambda and a Fuji Frontier. The Lambda working space almost fits within Adobe RGB, it exceeds it in only a few places but is noticeably smaller for a number of other colors. The Frontier working space is for most colors a bit smaller than the Lambda and about equal for only a small number of colors. The Frontier working space would also almost fit into sRGB (to give you an impression of its size).
When soft proofing with Aperture, dark greens desaturate more with the larger Lambda working space than with Frontier one. If the rendering intent were relative colorimetric, colors should be clipped more and limited by the smaller working space of the Frontier. If perceptual is used then colors would in general be somewhat more compressed (ie, desaturated) with the smaller Frontier working space. But I see rather the opposite. In short, neither explanation makes sense.
So I tried exporting from Aperture into Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB hoping that both would be big enough to contain most of the internal gamut of Aperture in order not to require much compression or clipping when converting from the internal color space of Aperture (I saw no difference between Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB in the exported files, so I guess both are large enough for my purposes). And I then converted/soft proofed these files from Photoshop into my two output profiles. More options (different rendering intents, black point compensation) but none seemed to really match what Aperture was soft proofing. I still have a lot of ideas what to try out but if anybody could shed some light on rendering intents and soft proofing with Aperture, it would be very much appreciated.
(A related question, what rendering intent is used when converting colors, let's say defined in the Lab space in Photoshop, to the screen? I guess this is defined in the monitor profile, which in turn is created by the monitor calibration software, and therefore might depend on the latter. I would guess some kind of perceptual, but how the colors are really fitted and converted from the larger Lab color space into the smaller monitor one might very noticeably been different calibration software and will be different again for the monitor profile supplied by Apple.)

I went on about this a little more scientific by creating an image with three rectangles: red, blue and green.
All of them are 100%, e.g. (255, 0, 0). Colorspace: ProPhoto RGB.
Results when exporting the images to AdobeRGB and sRGB, concentrating on the reds:
- sRGB looks very washed out
- AdobeRGB looks a bit washed out
- Original ProPhoto has so much red that it almost drives me nuts
Now, I would really expect similar results when activiating soft proofing.
But when selecting either AdobeRGB or sRGB, the reds always drive me nuts.
There is just no difference at all to the original ProPhoto image!
Conclusion 1: Dorin, you were right, previews are in AdobeRGB. What I saw in the reds was the difference between ProPhoto and AdobeRGB. Somehow my screen seems to have extreme reds (calibrated recently with an X-Rite ColorMunki Display).
Conclusion 2: Soft proofing with AdobeRGB and sRGB really DOES NOT WORK!

Similar Messages

Display profiles and soft proofing Windows RGB / Monitor RGB

This might have asked before, but I did not find any definite answer for this. Sorry this gets a bit long.
Short question:
What's the difference between softproofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets? I see differences in my image between these targets.
Long question(s):
Here's some reasoning.. let me know when I go wrong.
I have hardware calibrated my display Spyder 3 elite to sRGB standard. I have understood that the generated display profile contains a LUT table that affects gamma values for each RGB component, so that affects both gamma and color temperature. That table is loaded into video card when Windows starts. In addition to the LUT table, the display profile contains what? Probably information on what color space the display has been calibrated to. Does that matches directly with the LUT table information, but may deviate from sRGB in the case my monitor cannot reproduce sRGB 100%?
Now if I have image that that is in sRGB, but the embedded sRGB profile has been stripped away, should any non color management aware image viewer show the colors properly, if it is assumed that 1) my monitor can handle full sRGB space and 2) my monitor was succesfully calibrated to sRGB and the LUT table has been loaded into video card?
Or does it still require a color management aware program to show the image, which implies that the LUT table information alone is not enough and the display profile contains some extra information that is needed to show the image correctly? I would think this is true, as I needed to turn on color management in Canon Zoom Browser to see images in it the same way as in Photoshop.
Now to the original question, what's the difference in Photoshop when soft proofing with Windows RGB and Monitor RGB targets
I read from www.gballard.net that
Photoshop can effectively "SoftProof" our web browser color:
Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Windows RGB
Photoshop's Soft Proof screen preview here simulates how unmanaged applications, web browsers, will display the file on 2.2 gamma monitors, based on the sRGB profile. If the file is based on sRGB and our monitor gamma is 2.2 and D/65 6500 degrees Kelvin, we should see very little shift here, which is the goal.
Photoshop: View> Proof SetUp> Monitor RGB
THIS IS WHERE the color-brightness-saturation problem will repeat consistantly.
Soft Proofing Monitor RGB here strips-ignores the embedded ICC profile and Assigns-Assumes-Applies the Monitor profile or color space.
The color and density changes seen here show the difference between the monitor profile and the source profile sRGB.
I'm not sure how to read that. Assume here that my monitor has been calibrated to sRGB and the PS working space sRGB. Do in both cases photoshop strip away color profile from the image at first? What happens after that? Does in Windows RGB case Photoshop pass the color values as they are to display? What does it do in "Monitor RGB" case then? Does it assign my monitor profile to the image? If it does, does there also happen conversion from one color space to another? In either one conversion there must happen as the soft proofing results are different. Does either one cause "double profiling" to the image as the monitor is already calibrated?
Thanks

Windows defaults to sRGB if you don't calibrate your monitor so untagged sRGB files should display (more or less) correctly in applications that don't know about color management on systems with uncalibrated monitors.
When proofing against Windows RGB you're proofing against sRGB, it will show you how applications that don't know about color management on an uncalibrated monitor will show the image. This is what you proof against if you want to see how the image will display in web browsers.
When you proof against Monitor RGB, Photoshop will assign your monitor's icc profile to the image which tends to be utterly useless most of the time.

"Missing" rendered files when quicktime exporting

Hello,
when finished a project, everything rendered, everything looking fine, I go to File > Export > Using Quicktime Conversion... (to go to idvd and mount de dvd).
But then, he tells me a file (a render file) cannot be fount and, thus, cannot export the movie. Everything is rendered and I never go to any scratch folder and never deleted any file anywhere...
What can I do? Please help!
Thanks.
Josep

First, if you're going to iDVD export using QuickTime Movie (not Conversion).

What Rendering intent is used when exporting with a different color space?

Hi,
I would be ever so grateful if any one can tell me what rendering intent is used by LR4 when exporting using a custom colour space as there is not an option as there is with the print module.
Thanks.
Message title was edited by: Brett N

Jeff Schewe wrote:
Bob_Peters wrote:
The rendering intent in the Export dialog is Perceptual.
Actually, an RGB color space to RGB colorspace is always only Relative Colorimetric...and adding Perceptual would only work with certain V4 ICC color spaces (you can find perceptual V4 color spaces for sRGB and ProPhoto I think but I'm not sure they would work in Lightroom anyway).
When using an RGB print output profile you can select either Perceptual or Relative and have the intents actually applied.
True.
The case of interest to me is when I have to print a lot of files using a third-party profile and maintain the original filename so it appears on the back. That is why I made the request more than a year ago.
The problem with the Print module is that it clobbers the filename but does allow 2 choices for the rendering intent. Having to deal with weird filenames creates a mess when matching, say, 50 prints with custom notecards.

How to export soft-proofed image?

Hi !
Maybe I'm completely off but I didn't find any info on the subject.
I have soft-proofed image with a profile that a specific printer provided me.
I want to export the image that I soft-proofed to be displaying them as an album in Photoshop.
I didn't find any way to export the soft-proofed files.... Is it something that makes sense ?
Let me know.

Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață wrote:
Just export it and select the soft proof profile in the Export dialog.
To add to this for the OP, you might need to select Other... option from the color space popup to access the profile. It will remain within the list now.
And if it isn’t RGB, it isn’t going to show up (LR only supports RGB profiles).

When Soft Proofing in LR4 most of my loaded printer profiles are not visible

I am running LR4 and CS6 on an HP desktop with 4Gig Ram, Win 7 Home, Profiled Monitor using DataColor
In CS6, all my loaded ICC printer profiles appear when setting up the soft proofing...
In LR4, most of the profiles do not appear...
The problem is that I print to an Epson 7600 CMYK printer with UltraChrome Ink and mostly on Canvas so I need to proof for that environment.
The problem is that I print to an Epson 7600 CMYK printer with UltraChrome Ink and mostly on Canvas so I need to proof for that environment.
Photos of the two different pull downs are attached.

dmcrescent wrote:
Not sure what makes you think the Epson 7600 is a CMYK printer, but it isn't. You may be running a CMYK RIP attached to it, but the printer accepts RGB data, not CMYK. The only reason I can think of needing to profile in CMYK would be if you were using profiles generated for a press. I'm sure there may be others, but can't think of one off the top of my head.
Well you can send either RGB or CMYK to the printer but you have to first setup the proper driver for either. Unless you are proofing (make my Epson simulate a press sheet), I can’t think of any reason to send it CMYK data. The limitation is the driver in terms of what you send it. With a 3rd party driver (might be a RIP, might not) it can be possible to send CMYK data to the Epson. Epson bundles the ColorBurst product for this purpose (press simulation, use of CMYK profiles).
Since the Lightroom path is solely RGB, it can’t do anything with CMYK data. So the profiles are filtered out of the list. And don’t expect this to change anytime soon or ever. If CMYK is your game, well you need Photoshop or some other application to handle this data. And you’ll need another driver. So in context of this post, CMYK is simply not a possibility and that is why the profiles are not accessible.

Rendering Intent

Lately, I've come to the conclusion that the proper rendering intent for printing is Absolute, with the caveat that there is no out of gamut colors with which to accommodate. The text in the selection menu for this function states that Absolute is best for simulating a particular device. Well, duh, it's the monitor I want to simulate, not some veiled look supplied by Perceptual or Relative.
So why are those two the recommended pick? There is no shift in dynamic range when invoking Absolute as soft proof unless there is trouble in gamut. If little to no shift between Relative and Perceptual can be seen, use Absolute.
You don't know how much screwing around with curves etc I have gone through trying to match Perceptual to the screen w/o soft proof enabled.
Who decided on the algorithms for these functions, and what was the criteria, particularly visual? It sure sells a bunch of ink and paper trying to get it right!

Addendum:
Been doing a bit of reading:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-space-conversion.htm
From the article:
"Absolute colorimetric preserves the white point, while relative colorimetric actually displaces the colors so that the old white point aligns with the new one (while still retaining the colors' relative positions). The exact preservation of colors may sound appealing, however relative colorimetric adjusts the white point for a reason. Without this adjustment, absolute colorimetric results in unsightly image color shifts, and is thus rarely of interest to photographers." (Emphasis theirs)
So, I took my test image and proceeded to ad a grayscale to the bottom and printed both Relative and Absolute. The results show that the gray scale shifted color in Absolute, very slightly from neutral to a barest cream color, which corresponds to a gray value I knew to be quite neutral, but slightly low in blue, to more neutral in Relative. This is what I expected to find based on the above definition.
I also noted that the first and last stop of the 21 step part were clipped back to 19 steps in Absolute. I can easily do that with levels, if that's all it takes.
No unsightly colors appeared in the image. I showed the two images to ma associate, who is a colorist by training, and her selection was the Absolute. (Interestingly, after running it I tended toward the Relative! As Jeff said YMMV, but in this case, slightly!).
My whole effort is this: I want to obtain the maximum dynamic range of which the paper/ink is capable. I will specify the white point as I can using the info palette. After that, I want the conversion to do what I asked...white is white black is dMax of the combo. This shading back from this standard by the rendering intent is counter intuitive, as well as counter productive.
So it comes down to this:
What is meant by color accuracy
What is meant by the white point.
I define color accuracy to be what I see on the screen, pre soft proof, white point to be the white of the paper. If I want to depart from that I can do so at will, but to try to get it to match the screen before even departing is a load I wish not to have. The most reliable way to do this would be for the Info palette give out the actual numbers after invoking the soft proof.
But I suppose that's asking too much!
Thanks for looking.

Colors in print preview not matching colors in soft proofing

Hi There,
Just wanted to print a new photo and realized that the colors in print preview do not match the colors in soft proofing. In both cases I selected the same icc profile and rendering method. The print colors matched the colors in print preview. I never had a problem so far. All new prints will be checked with soft proofing and adjusted when necessary. I never paid attention to the color rendition in print preview and all prints perfectly matched the colors from the soft proofing. I was surprised when my print came out of the printer and the colors weren't matching the soft proofing colors, but that of the print preview.
I don't understand why Photoshop renders the colors differently in the first place. Please see attached screenshot for the difference in the blue/cyan colors.
I would appreciate if anybody could point me in the right direction in what is causing this difference. I don't care if the print view colors will match the print, but I do care when soft proofing is not working.
Thank you.
Best regards,
D.

Here are some addtional details:
PS 13.1.2
Mac OS X 10.8.4
12 GB Ram
60 GB free disk space
I printed the same photo from two other computers (MacBook and iMac) with different PS versions (CS4 and CS5). The prints turned out identical to the first one which matches the print preview color rendition on my main computer (MacPro) running CS6. Strangely the colors in print preview of CS5 on the iMac renders the colors identical to the soft proofing colors.

Where are the rendering intent options found in LR on a Mac?

I can't find the dialog to set the rendering intent when printing from Lightroom. How do I change from Perceptual to Relative Colormetric or visa versa? (Also, how do I change the type of paper I'm using, etc.)
I'm using LR 1.3 on Mac OS X 10.5 on a MacBook Pro, printing to a Canon Pixma iP1800.

Read that link and the user generated content: http://learn.adobe.com/wiki/display/LR/Set+print+color+management+-+Learn+More
There is lots of good stuff there. In short you have two choices. You either use driver managed, in which case you set up everything as normal in the driver and you make sure you turn ON ICM in the driver. In this case, the driver controls the color management and it depends on the driver whether you get any control over rendering intent. Or you print Lightroom managed. In which case you choose the correct paper and ink density in the driver and turn OFF ICM in the driver. You then manually choose the correct icc profile for the paper/ink settings combination. The latter can be tough as the icc profiles often have very cryptic names and this is where lots of people get it wrong I think. If you let Lightroom manage color, you get the mentioned control over rendering intent and blackpoint compensation.

Soft proofing in LR 4

I purchsed and downloaded LR 4 online. In the Develop Modue when I want to soft-proof. I press 'S' to get the soft proof menu but do not have the soft-proof box under the image that I see in ALL the examples when going through tutorials. I tried closing LR and restarting computer, doesn't help.

Hit the T key to toggle showing/hiding the toolbar...

Can you soft proof for Blurb in Lightroom? Can't get Blurb icc to show up in list.

I have added the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc to Library/ColorSync/Profiles and Library/ColorSync/Profiles/Recommended, but when I turn on Soft Proof in Lightroom and try to select the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc from the Profile dropdown in the Soft Proofing Workspace on the right, clicking on other to add it, it simply does not show up as an item in the list even though I have added it to the Profiles folder.
The Blurb profile does show up as an option for soft proofing if I try to do it in Photoshop, but I really want to do it in Lightroom to save time since I'm using the Book Module and I know Lightroom so much better than Photoshop.

Yes. I found another discussion on a blog that discussed the whole thing in detail. Has anyone found a profile that comes close that one could use in LR to soft proof for Blurb? Some said they used sRGB, but I compared and there is a huge disparity. Blurb color space is about 2/3 smaller than sRGB.

Soft proofing and Out of Gamut warning

I like to use Blurb for a perfect photo book. I am an amateur photographer but like the most of my pictures on paper.
What's the perfect workflow for soft proofing ?
A friend of me has calibrated my screen (Thunderbolt Apple screen).
My current methode :
I take a picture in RAW with AdobeRGB profile setting, i adjust a few parameters in Lightroom and then go to Photoshop and start de soft proofing with the Blurb-ICC profile.
The result with soft proofing is like there's a white mist over the picture. Then i try to optimize this with various parameters.
When i try the soft proofing with the Blurb ICC profile + out of Gamut warning option .... there are many colors out of gamut .
My second methode :
When i import the raw picture in photoshop cc and i convert the picture to the Blurb profile, then there are no out of gamut colors but everything is in CMYK.
Is this a good way for perfect photo books in Blurb ?
Or must i ignore the out of gamut colors ?
Is it better to make my pictures in sRGB ?
When i want to save the end result in Photoshop cc ( jpeg for Blurb ) must i enclose the Blurb ICC (when in CMYK) , Adobe RGB or sRGB profile (when in RGB) ?
Please help me make a perfect photobook
Mario

Since I don't know what "Blurb" is, I'm going to assume that's your printing service somewhere, and that they have provided you with their target printer profile.
What you describe under current method is absolutely normal, expected behavior. Adobe RGB simply is a much larger color space than whatever this Blurb profile is.
If you care to let me know how or where I can get a hold of this Blurb profile, I can in a matter of seconds prepare an illustration of how the two profiles compare to each other. From where I sit, it would appear you're throwing away a lot of image quality by using Blurb.
There are two wacky ways of getting around your seeing the out of gamut warnings. The first is not to soft-proof at all. (Duh! ) The other one is an unorthodox workflow which works just fine PROVIDED you are aware that the image files as an end product are only good for Blurb and for no other purpose, and that is to set your WORKING COLOR SPACE from the get go to the Blurb profile. Of course that is not the recommended or even kosher workflow. It is only a workaround to the deficiencies of this Blurb profile.
I cannot comment on your "second method" until I know more about this Blurb phenomenon. If they print on a CMYK press, then they are throwing away a lot of colors, even if you send them images in sRGB. Nothing you can do about that.
The one thing I can say is that if the outfit doing the printing is the one that sent you the profile, then they will know how to deal with an sRGB file. The profile they sent you is just what their printing process uses. No need to attach a copy of their own profile.

How to control Display Rendering Intent in PS CS3 & XP?

Does anyone know a way to control the display rendering intent in Photoshop CS3 runing on XP?
The consensus seems to be that Relative Colormetric is always used. If I am using a large working space such as ProPhotoRGB, I would like to be able to switch between Perceptual and Relative Colormetric.
Here is some info I think may be relevant:
http://www.color.org/advantagesv4.pdf says one of the advantages of v4 over v2 is to "permit profiles containing multiple rendering intents to be specified for input and display devices as they currently are for output profiles".
Using http://www.color.org/version4ready.xalter I see that my system is not v4 compatible, but Photoshop CS3 does correctly render images with v4 profiles on my computer.
When I look at the profile that came with my monitor, using ICC_Inspector from http://www.color.org/profileinspector.xalter, I see it is ICC version 2, and the rendering intent is listed as Perceptual.
If use Monitor_RGB as my working space, and do edit > convert_to_profile, converting from ProPhotoRGB to MonitorRGB:
Using engine:Microsoft_ICM, I get different result for Perceptual vs Relative_Colormetric.
Using engine:Adobe(ACE), I get the same results for all intents, and they all look very close to Microsoft_ICM Perceptual.
However the original image in the ProPhotoRGB space is apparently rendered to my display space using Relative Colormetric because it looks like the image produce using convert_to_profile: Microsoft_ICM Relative Colormetric.
Thanks.

Let me think about this.
Looking at my monitor profile with the Color Sync Utility (I’m on a mac), the rendering of the profile is Perceptual.
With Photoshop, I open a saturated Pro Photo image. View: Proof Setup: Custom. Device to Simulate, Monitor Profile.
This is supposed to show me a file conversion to my monitor color space. I see no change in color (as long as preserve numbers is disabled). It makes sense, because the conversion is something that happens anyway. I can never truly see a Pro Photo image. It must be translated to my monitor profile before I see anything.
I can change the rendering and black comp all day long and it does not affect the color I see. I have to assume that what I see is actually a Perceptual rendering, not Relative Colorimetric, because Perceptual is the intent embedded in the Monitor ICC profile.
CMYK is a little different. With the same image open, View: Proof Setup: Custom. US Web Coated SWOP v2. Relative Colorimetric, Black Point checked. Simulate Paper White.
Now duplicate the image. Convert to Profile: US Web Coated. Relative Colorimetric, black point enabled. Now View: Proof Setup: Custom. Device to Simulate, monitor profile. Absolute Colorimetric.
Comparing the two images, the color is a dead on match.
In the second image (already converted to CMYK), if I change the rendering and black comp, the color shifts dramatically. This behavior is different from what I saw earlier, soft proofing Pro Photo to monitor, where the rendering and black point settings did not change the image color.
So at this point I have to conclude that Photoshop can control the display rendering for a CMYK image. But with RGB, it’s locked in somehow. I would imagine it defaults to Perceptual, not Relative Colorimetric. Can you open your monitor profile and check the rendering?
I have a utility that actually allows me to change the intent of an ICC. I went ahead and did that to the monitor profile and saved a copy, with Relative as intent. Using this in Proof Setup (with Pro Photo image) also yields no change. Makes sense, because the color gamut of the new copy is identical, and Photoshop is rendering a file conversion.
To get the Relative Colorimetric display requires changing the system profile to the new profile. Unfortunately when I do this, the screen color goes absolutely bonkers. All color are super saturated and I can hardly make out anything. I have no idea what that means.
I apologize for rambling on, I’m probably not much help. Thanks for the link and I will look into this matter more when time allows.

Rendering intent exporting to AdobeRGB and sRGB

LR works with the color space ProPhotoRGB. With highly saturated colors this colorspace is larger than AdobeRGB and sRGB. As I see it now is that while exporting to these color spaces, Lightroom uses the method as in Photoshop called Convert to Profile, which maintains the color appearance, but shifts the color numbers. High saturated colors will be clipped. Is this assumption correct? Is it possible to use in Lightroom the method Assign Profile, where the color numbers (and detail) are maintained?

LR4 and LR5 provide the ability to 'Soft Proof' your image in the Develop module:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/lightroom/using/WS2bacbdf8d487e582-5591e4a41341ae6cc6d-8000.ht ml
This allows you to make adjustment changes using a Soft Proof virtual copy to correct for out-of-gamut colors. You have the option to preview the soft proof image using Perceptual or Relative rendering. The LR Export module does not provide this option under File Settings> Color Space and uses Perceptual rendering, which is generally the best choice. It is available using the Print module with Print to> JPEG FIle, if you should find an image looks better using Relative rendering.
Most of the images I process have very few out-of-gamut areas that change color significantly when converting to even the much narrower sRGB color space. This tutorial may be helpful if you do encounter images that have undesirable color shifts or exhibit banding in the target color space:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/whats-new-in-lightroom-4/soft-proofing-images/

Weird behaviour when soft proofing.

I'm finding that if I open an image in DEVELOP, when soft proofing is ALREADY switched on, the sliders usually grey out as soon as I make a first adjustment, the histogram display disappears as well. Toggling the soft proof check box brings everything back to life.

I'm on Win 7 Pro 64, HP Z800, Nvidia Quadro FX3800, Xeon 6 Core. Wacom Intous.
...and I'm still getting the problem. I suspected maybe the Wacom tablet so disabled the service but still get problem with a mouse. I created a new catalogue and imported some different images,
still get the problem, except for the FIRST time I try it with a new image, then everything's OK but subsequent tries give the problem. The files are either layered tiffs of finalised images or DNG or Hasselblad 3F
originals.
The grey outs occurred after the first adjustment, after choosing "Make Proof Copy". I have now checked the "Don't Ask Again" button and the problem seems to have gone away. Just a little glich I guess.
Cheers.

Rendering intent when displaying, exporting or soft proofing?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for