Soft proofing - implementation suggestions

Reading this thread it seems the Lightroom team is seriously considering or actually implementing soft proofing for LR3.0. Since it's not in the current beta, the users cannot give feedback on the implementation. Instead, let's use this thread to give suggestions on how soft proofing should work.
Here are my suggestions:
availability: soft proofing should be available in all modules: you need it for print and web output, but the necessary corrections are made in the develop and library modules.
UI placement: the film strip seems to be a logical place for a tool that can be used from within all modules.
features: soft proofing would need an on/off toggle, a clipping indicator toggle and a list menu to select/create soft proofing profiles (with a choice of relative/perceptual; black point would be nice but doesn't fit the 'lightroom way').
monitor proofing: make it easy for users to select the profile corresponding to their monitor. That way they get a warning that their monitor may be 'cheating' them (especially on laptops).
further: the tool could show a warning if it is switched on with the 'wrong' profile for the active module. For example, for web you should only use sRGB, for print the same as selected for the printer and for the slideshow perhaps only the monitor profile.
Anyone else?
Simon

Jeff Schewe wrote:
I disagree for several reason: 1) the Develop module is the ONLY color accurate viewing environment, 2) Develop already has a before/after built in that can be adapted to the task of showing a before and an after with the after representing the output space. 3) the Develop module allows the creation and or selection of Develop templates as well as snapshots. Snapshots might make an excellent vehicle for carrying image adjustments.
I am not sure what you mean by the develop module being the only color accurate viewing environment. I just checked it by setting my monitor gamma to 1.0, and all modules applied the necessary adjustments to the images. The only difference I could find is that the other modules use heavily compressed JPGs, leading to the occasional artifact when viewing at 1:1.
I really believe that soft proofing itself is fundamentally an analysis tool that should be accessible from all modules, and not necessarily be linked to image adjustment tools. If someone wants to work on a set of images for a particular output process, he/she should be able to make all necessary changes with soft proofing turned on, and have the effects visible in all modules. Of course, in practice many users will want to target different output media for the same image, and such tools are important, but need not be a show-stopper for soft-proofing to appear.
On your number (2), I personally don't find before/after view essential, or even that useful, when making adjustments for printing. When you want to compress an image into the gamut of a printer, I tend to make small adjustments in the context of that particular image, not with a reference to some master image. The exception to this case would be if you really have something which you would call the 'master' (say, some really famous image), and you want the output to be as close as possible on more restricted printing process. In any case, I wouldn't consider a before/after view as essential. And when it's needed, it could be implemented by an on/off toggle as well, IMO.
I find snapshots quite cumbersome, and especially for the purpose of keeping track of such 'output versions'. The problem is that they exist inside the develop module, they are 'all or nothing', and there is no easy way to transfer partial settings between snapshots. For example, suppose I have three 'output versions' of an image, and I decide to change some of the underlying settings (say, the white balance). Then I don't have an easy way to synchronize these changes between the output versions. Another issue is that there is no easy way to recall snapshots from outside the develop module. If I want to print a couple of images for which I have the necessary adjustments at some other time, I have to go in and select the appropriate snapshot for each of them. In the context of these 'output versions', this is something that should be possible from the library module, where you select the versions you have worked on before.
Also note that while Develop might be the place for adjusting the image for the output, the creation of an output adjustment might be best called up in Print (or Export). So you might create a saved preset that contains the output device, the specific profile, the rendering intent and whatever output based adjustments the image (or images) may need. That could be done directly in the Print module...
The three main factors that soft proofed adjustments require is a change in the tone curve required by differences in dynamic range or outputs, hue and saturation adjustments to counter or alter the way a profile may render a certain (or several) colors and a local area contrast adjustment in the form of Clarity. Ideally, the soft proofing tools should contain a soft proofed histogram, color samples in the output space and tone/color adjustments suited for correcting for the output condition.
Ok, I can see a benefit to a separate output adjustment tool that is specifically aimed for the type of adjustments you'd make when soft-proofing. The settings for this tool could be linked to the output device and profile, so that they would switch automatically according to the profile that is selected. When soft-proofing is turned on in the library module, there could be an icon in the images for which a particular output transformation is defined. And because soft-proofing would be fully functional in the develop module, you could inspect which other images need further adjustments.
I don't think it's very useful to have a 'preset' for this tool for a particular output profile and rendering intent, independent of the image. That's the job of the profile itself. However, it should be possible to easily copy-paste such settings between images. For example, if I have shots a number of images in bright green grass, I will probably need similar adjustments for all of them. Also, settings should be copyable to serve as a starting point for use with a different profile.
The 'output adjustment tool' itself should IMO contain two things:
1) Photoshop-like hue/sat control (with selectable color ranges) [most important]
2) Manual tone curve adjustments.
I wouldn't mind if the tool is only accessible from within the develop module, as long as you can see the soft-proof from all modules. The soft-proofing functionality (separate from this tool) should also take care of adjusting the histogram in the library and develop modules.
Summarinzing, I see room for two separate tool sets that do not necessarily need to be implemented at the same time. The first is an overarching soft-proofing solution that makes the effects of the output transformation visible throughout the workflow. The second is a separate output adjustment tool in the develop module, that is able to link it's settings to the currently selected output device/profile.
Simon

Similar Messages

Soft proofing issue in CS4 using iMac and Epson 3880?

I have had great success printing to an Epson r1900 never using soft proofing. Purchased a new 3880 and having colour problems. A suggestion was made to use soft proofing. Monitor is calibrated using iOne-looks very good to the eye. Working space from camera to PS is Adobe RGB. I am setting my custom output device to ICC profile for paper (ilford and hanhmule) Is this correct/ 9or should I be setting to Epson Apple RGB? On screen, the proof color looks WAY off the monitor non-proof version, which is spot on, but when I print the image it doesn't look at all like the "soft proof" it looks more like the monitor version. I have read everything I can find-printing on the 3880 is a crap-shoot. Sometimes it matches the screen, sometimes it doesn't and when it doesn't it also isn't matching the soft proof.
Suggestions?
Thanks!
NJ

Victoria....
Seems I was to much an optimist...heh
As I mentioned I did get LR4b on the Imac to find the icc profiles of my epson 2880 but while I was trying to figure out why it would not read my epson 3880 icc profiles and others LR4b suddely corrupted the pref filels once again and I was at ground zero... Just like I was when I first posted on the forum.
I again threw out the LR4b pref files and it brought back the epson 2280 profiles only??
So why can't it find my epson 3880 icc profiles or others and only the 2880's... and why do the pref files corrupt. I was actually soft proofing when the corruption took place and the icc profiles disappeared.
I'm running the exact same OS on my Macbook Pro and none of these issues have surfaced.
Oh... I did notice that the fact I require authenication to trash LR4b on the Imac did excist on the Macbook Pro as well ... so I'm guessing this normal or I have two wierd computers.
Got to love computers..
Thanks
George

Printing, Soft Proofing & Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions

Printing, Soft Proofing, and Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions
There are 2 common ways to set color management in Adobe CS2:
1. use managed by printer setting or,
2. use managed by Adobe CS2 program.
I want to ask how Color Management for Adobe LR 1.2 differs from that in CS2?
As is well known, Color Management by printer requires accurate printer profiles including specific model printer, types of ink and specific paper. It is clear that this seems to work well for LR 1.2 when using the Printer module.
Now lets consider what happens one tries to use Color Management by Adobe LR 1.2. Again, as is well known, Color Management by printer must be turned off so that only one Color Management system is used. It has been my experience that LR 1.2 cant Color Manage my images correctly. Perhaps someone with more experience can state whether this is true or what I might be doing to invalidate LR 1.2 Color Management.
Specifically, I cant use Soft Proofing to see how my images are changed on my monitor when I try to use the edit functions in LR 1.2. Martin Evening states in his text, The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book that it is not possible to display the results of the rendered choices (Perceptual or Relative) on the display monitor. While it is not clear in Evenings text if this applies to LR 1.2, my experience would suggest that it still applies to the 1.2 update even though the publication date of his book preceded this update.
Can someone with specific knowledge of Adobe LR 1.2 confirm that Color Management and Soft Proofing with LR 1.2 hasnt been implemented at the present.
The writer is a retired physicist with experience in laser physics and quantum optics.
Thanks,
Hersch Pilloff

Hersch,
since just like me, you're a physicist (I am just a little further from retirement ;) ) I'll explain a little further. computer screens (whether they are CRT or LCD) are based on emission (or transmission) of three colors of light in specific (but different for every screen) shades of red, green, and blue. This light stimulates the receptors in your eye which are sensitive to certain but different bands of red, green and blue as the display emits, making your brain think it sees a certain color instead of a mix of red green and blue. Printers however, produce color by modifying the reflection of the paper by absorbing light. Their color mixing operates completely differently than displays. When you throw all colors of ink on the paper, you get black (the mixing is said to be subtractive) instead of white as you get in displays (the mixing there is additive). The consequence of this is that in the absence of an infinite number of inks you cannot produce all the colors you can display on a monitor using a printer and vice versa. This can be easily seen if you compare a display's profile to a printer profile in a program such as Colorsync utility (on every mac) or
Gamut vision. Typically printers cannot reproduce a very large region in the blue but most displays on the other hand cannot make saturated yellows and cyans.
Here is a flattened XY diagram of a few color spaces and a typical printer profile to illustrate this. Most displays are close to sRGB, but some expensive ones are close to adobeRGB, making the possible difference between print and screen even worse.
So, when the conversion to the printer's profile is made from your source file (which in Lightroom is in a variant of prophotoRGB), for a lot of colors, the color management routine in the computer software has to make an approximation (the choice of perceptual and relative colorimetric determine what sort of approximation is made). Soft proofing allows you to see the result of this approximation and to correct specific problems with it.

Strange sRGB soft-proofing behavior

I am wondering if the CMS gurus might have an idea about this:
I am using Photoshop CC, but had a similar experience with the previous version and on a different machine.
I have a wide gamut NEC monitor which has been profiled using i1 Display. The generated profile is selected in Windows as default profile. Everything seems OK with this side of things.
So I have a bitmap file with sRGB embedded profile, and my working space is sRGB. Colour appears correct in 'normal' editing view, i.e. PS is already adjusting what it is sending to the monitor based on the fact that it is an sRGB image. To confirm, I can look at the same graphic in Firefox with CMS switched on, and it looks the same as in Photoshop. And it looks "correct". Furthermore, if I soft-proof to "Monitor", what I see makes sense too. (Overly vibrant colours). And that's also visually consistent with looking at it in Firefox with CMS switched off.
So far so good. The fun begins when I ask PS to softproof the image to sRGB. Now, you might ask what would be the point of that, since in theory I'm already looking at it being rendered into sRGB colour space. Regardless, what I expect to happen is that soft-proofing to sRGB makes absolutely no difference to what I see. However this is not the case! The on-screen representation changes markedly... not only is it overly saturated but there is a colour shift as well! To make matters more confusing, when I use the Info box to show the raw and the softproof colour values, they are identical, as they should be. So the numbers seem OK, but the on-screen rendering is clearly wrong.
I also see a similar effect if I do a "convert to profile sRGB" with preview switched on. Up until I hit the OK button, the preview rendering is "wrong". Once the conversion completes (which did nothing because it was already in sRGB space) it renders as it did before.
I'm wondering if this is some kind of weird bug that happens when you softproof to the space you're already in?
MT

tozzy wrote:
it's very confusing behavior and leads you to wonder if there are other times when the on-screen CMS rendering behavior can't be trusted.
In my observation there are two forms of color-management implementation, both controlled by Adobe: The first is the traditional Adobe Color Engine as executed by the CPU - this is run if you have the [ ] Enable Graphics Processor setting unchecked or have it checked but are using Basic drawing mode in the Advanced Settings section. Phtotoshop also reverts to this CPU-resident color-management while you are moving a window and when you're using View - Gamut Warning.
The second form is executed by the GPU and is used when in Normal and Advanced drawing modes. This GPU implementation is presumably faster, but is also observably inaccurate under certain specific conditions. For example, if your document is in the ProPhoto RGB color space, it will show subtle color banding in a pure gray gradient.
The GPU-resident color management transforms have also been seen to add multi-value output level jumps, resulting in visible banding, in high bit depth gray gradients, where the CPU-resident code does not.
I reported these inaccuracies to Adobe some time ago, but either the GPU-resident color-management code is inscrutable or they just have other priorities, because the inaccuracies remain.
I just brought all this up, tozzy, since you mention the problem going away when the CPU-resident color-management code is invoked. To retain GPU acceleration for other things, but use CPU color-management, try using Basic drawing mode if you're concerned about getting the most accurate displays from color-management. Remember that you have to close and restart Photoshop after making changes in these settings.
-Noel

Soft proofing problem with wide-gamut monitor

Hi,
I've just upgraded to a wide-gamut monitor (Dell U2713H).
I set the colour-space to adobe RGB when using Lightroom (I'm on LR5).
When I select soft proofing , my picture goes grey (that is, where I was displaying the photo in the border, then changes to a uniform grey within the proofing border). If I click on 'create proof copy' the picture then displays.
When the picture is grey and I move my mouse over the image, I can see the RGB% values change, as if there is an image there.
Previously, I had a (rather) low-end viewsonic and had no problems - Soft-Proofing worked fine. All I did was install the new monitor.
I'm running windows 7, nvidia 8800GT card, 8gb memory. No system changes prior/after changing the monitor.
Everything else on the monitor works fine (better than fine, actually, it is a great monitor)
Soft-proofing in photoshop (CS6) works fine, for what that is worth.
I'm a bit stumped. Can anyone help?
hans

1234ewqrd wrote:
I set the colour-space to adobe RGB when using Lightroom (I'm on LR5).
What do you mean by this? Are you selecting Adobe RGB as color profile for you rmonitor? Or are you talking about selecting Adobe RGB as softproofing color space in Lr?
The fact that your images are grey in Lr is a strong indication that your new monitor is not calibrated and is way off the chart. It might be brand new but that does not mean that its tonality and color display is correct for photo editing in Lr.
Calibration is done with a piece of hardware called a spectrometer and the accompanying software. Brand names are Spyder, ColorMunki, GretaghMacbeth. After calibration the software creates a profile that is used by the monitor.
You don't select any other profile than the profile created by calibration and profiling for photo editing - irrespective of which program you use for photo editing.
In the meantime - as a temporary remedy and until you get the calibration tools - you can set your monitor to sRGB. Be aware that sRGB is a much smaller color space than what you rmonitor is able to display; with sRGB you basically prevent the monitor from displaing wide gamut.
See here on how to set the monitor to sRGB:
http://members.lightroomqueen.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/1137/188/how-do-i- change-my-monitor-profile-to-check-whether-its-corrupted
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4977176#4977176
Everything else on the monitor works fine (better than fine, actually, it is a great monitor)
You have no way of telling if the monitor works fine, i.e. if the monitor has the correct intensity (brightness) and if it displays the colors correctly, i.e. as a true representation of the color numbers. Our brain automatically adjusts colors to what they ought to be. What we see is basically unreliable for photo editing. Only a calibrated monitor will display the colors correctly.
Also, when you calibrate select an intensity (brightness) of araound 110 cd/m2 - irrespective of what the software suggests. Often monitors are way to bright which results in prints that are too dark.

Soft Proofing: may not work on my screen

First of all: Thanks so much for implementing soft proofing! Especially in such an easy way! I was really hoping you'd do it exactly like that.
Anyway, I've got a wide gamut monitor (Thinkpad W520 laptop screen). And I've got an image with a lot of strongly saturated reds (PowerShot S95, RAW).
Now, if I switch between Loup View and Develop View, I can see a huge difference in the reds because the Loup preview is sRGB (medium quality). I can also see the same difference when exporting to sRGB vs. exporting to AdobeRGB.
However, if I engage soft proofing and select sRGB, the image still looks the same. Only the little preview in the upper left changes to what I would expect.
That's not exactly what I would expect ^^
On the other hand, if I select a custom profile (AdoramaPix, lustre paper), the whole rig seems to work.
More information:
- Windows 7, 64 bit with 64 LR4 beta
- Whether relative or perceptual doesn't matter
- Only seems to affect sRGB
- The image shows very, very clear differences between sRGB and AdobeRGB on my monitor, so it's definitely not a visual problem on my end
- The histogram changes when switching between sRGB and AdobeRGB in soft proofing mode
- I really cannot see the slightest change in the image when switching
I hope you can find a fix or point out what I'm doing wrong because I would really like to use soft proofing for images published on the web, which is of course in sRGB.

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!

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.

Soft proofing to send to online printer

Its my understanding that LR 1.0 doesnt support soft proofing. To that end, I'm hoping someone will have some suggestions for me. I use an online printer for all of my customer's prints. I'm coming from Aperture with a mix of Capture NX. Both of those progams have the ability to soft proof with the online printers' profile so that I can 'see' what I'm going to be getting back during the adjustments process of my workflow. I absolutely love everything about LR so far. However, I can't seem to get my head around a workflow that will allow me to 'soft proof' using LR as my base program to ensure that I'll be getting back what I see on my screen.
Does anyone have any suggestions for me??
I'm using a Mac with LR 1.0. I also have Capture NX, and PSE 4 for MAC.
Thanks guys (and gals)

I suppose some people will tell you that you don't need soft proofing if you have good color management. But its probably another function that LR is missing.
I do most of my printing in qimage, which is probably better than the LR print module. It has soft proofing and costs about $50. It also has better resampling and sharpening than LR.
I'm not a pro but a lot of pros seem to like it.

Adjustments for soft proofing to avoid washed out look

Hi, I've downloaded and installed my photo lab's printing profile. When I soft proof, everything looks washed out and lacks defnition. Blacks look gray and have little detail. Kind of an overall washed out look. I've tried adjusting contrast and saturation, but am underwhelmed with the results. What are the proper steps and areas of adjustment to try and achieve a closer match between the soft proof usng the lab's profile and my calibrated montior? Specific steps and areas of adjustment would help. I know the photo lab's printer gamut and paper makes the difference, but am left thinking there's a simpler way to adjust the photos for best results.
Thanks!

Hi, thanks for the suggestion, but you misunderstood my question. The profile is correct, the soft proofing is working as designed, the question is what controls/adjustments can I make in Aperture to adjust the photo to reduce this washed out look prior to sending the photos out to print. What Aperture adjustments have users found to correct for printer/paper/ink deficiencies? - L

Regarding SOFT PROOFING:

I almost always use LR5 for prints and on the same printer and paper combination. Should I be doing my whole workflow with Soft Proofing "on"? If not, due to different outputs, doesn't that mean that you must do the entire set of adjustments over for each type of output?

MrScoobydoobee wrote:
I almost always use LR5 for prints and on the same printer and paper combination. Should I be doing my whole workflow with Soft Proofing "on"? If not, due to different outputs, doesn't that mean that you must do the entire set of adjustments over for each type of output?
I would suggest that you do your general LR processing on the basis of what looks good on the screen, as a general-purpose image, prioritising tone and hue that best portray the picture content - the optimum material for your output-specific processing to work on. Softproofing is way too specific for this stage, IMO.
When it then comes to considering a particular output, only then would one (optionally) use softproofing - but LR will automatically generate a proofing (virtual) copy if you change anything while in this mode. You will therefore not be altering the processing of the main image version. This won't get into a "tug-of-love" between the varying requirements of different outputs, but stand apart from those issues.
The specific adjustments you make in response to what softproofing tells you, are insulated within that separate virtual version (which is named with the softproof profile used). This need involve only a small subset of the LR adjustments, you don't need to start from scratch. Perhaps one may add just toning, print aspect ratio crop, and paper-specific tonecurve tweaks over the top of the general-purpose edit; whatever is called for. Maybe even save these into a Develop preset, if they are expected to be re-usable with other images that may undergo the same output.
Then your final LR output can itself apply output sharpening, resampling, output profile etc on the fly, to suit each particular case, regardless whether softproof has been used or not.
RP

Soft Proofing for Blurb

How do I creat a color profile in Lightroom for Blurb? I know they use HP Indigo printers (which are CMKY) but I would like at least a compatible color profile as well as options for when I creat books with different paper types. Do you have any suggestions so that I can be sure that my images are soft proofed for printing through Blurb?

Keep in mind that your monitor puts limits on how useful soft-proofing is. If you have a standard-gamut monitor, what you see on-screen is already soft-proofed to sRGB (more or less). If your target profile has a larger gamut, you won't see any difference on-screen.
If you want to do this in Lightroom, just soft-proof to sRGB and you'll probably be fine. The histogram will show you if there is substantial channel clipping, and you can adjust to that. However, since you have Photoshop, my choice would be to do it there, using the Blurb profile.
Printing conditions vary widely around the world and CMYK-profiles likewise. To give you an example, US Web Coated (SWOP) v2, which is the Photoshop default, has a gamut much smaller than sRGB. In Europe the corresponding standard is ISO Coated v2 300% (ECI), which has a gamut that practically corresponds to Adobe RGB. To soft-proof effectively for this you need a wide gamut monitor.
Where the Blurb profile places in this I don't know.

Iphoto book -- how to soft proof

Does anyone know of a way to get a soft proof profile for an Iphoto book?

If you're using CS3 from within iPhoto for your editing then just set it up to manage the color as seen in this screenshot and follow the workflow described below.
Using Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) as Your Editor of Choice in iPhoto.
1 - select Photoshop as your editor of choice in iPhoto's General Preference Section's under the "Edit photo:" menu.
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
NOTE: With Photoshop Elements 6 the Saving File preferences should be configured: "On First Save: Save Over Current File". Also I suggest the Maximize PSD File Compatabilty be set to Always.
If you want to use both iPhoto's editing mode and PS without having to go back and forth to the Preference pane, once you've selected PS as your editor of choice, reset the Preferences back to "Open in main window". That will let you either edit in iPhoto (double click on the thumbnail) or in PS (Control-click on the thumbnail and seledt "Edit in external editor" in the Contextual menu). This way you get the best of both worlds
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
If you're using a digital camera and not shooting raw then the camera's RGB profile will be very close to the sRGB IPC61966-2.1 profile that you can embed with PS and you shouldn't have to edit a photo just for the profile. However, if you do edit with iPhoto's editing tools the profile that gets embedded will be the one that the monitor is set to. iPhoto only embeds profiles on files it creates, i.e. modified files.
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

SRGB or Blurb icc profile better for soft proofing prior to Book module?

As I understand it images destined for Blurb are converted by the Lr engine into sRGB behind the scenes. To achieve best chance of colour accuracy in the finished Blurb book, is it better to softproof using a sRGB profile or the icc profile* offered on the Blurb Support website. On the surface this icc profile is recommended (by them) for their Booksmart process. Anyone know if that is similar to the Lr Book module process? There is no mention of Lr anywhere on the Blurb color management pages.
It would be great to pin down the answer to this. I cannot find any recommendation for best work practice aimed at getting good colour reproduction in these books; and trial and error, whilst acceptable in making inkjet prints, is a very expensive route when applied to printing a Blurb book.
* And even then, as far as I can see, there is no method for differentiating between the Blurb papers. It is just one profile to fit all.

I tried using 'Export Book to PDF' in the LR Book module with 'Book' set to 'Blurb' and the PDF images are all tagged as sRGB profile and 8-bit color.
SUGGESTION
If you set 'Book' to 'PDF' under 'Book Setting' you can use Adobe RGB profile, 300 ppi, and your own Sharpening selection, which as Andrew Rodney mentioned is a better choice. You can submit the LR Exported PDF at Blurb's 'PDF To Book' upload page and they will do the proper CMYK conversion on their end. The only issue is that the images are still exported in the LR Book module as 8-bit color JPEGs. This may cause banding with a wider gamut profile, but that should be apparent when reviewing the exported book PDF.
Here are some comments from Blurb concerning using Blurbs 'PDF to Book' workflow, which is similar to what I just described:
From Me:
My Workflow Details:
My objective is to process all images in LR4 and then export them as 300 dpi, ProPhoto RGB profile, 16 bit TIFF images for layout in InDesign using Blurb's InDesign plugin (Blurb Book Creator CS6 v2.0.2.34d8). I will soft proof the placed images inside InDesign using its 'Proof Colors' tool and the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc profile. Once the InDesign layout is complete I will do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process using the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1.
Blurb's Resonse:
Response Via Email(David) - 07/18/2012
Using InDesign and our Blurb InDesign Plug-in does mean you're using the PDF to Book Workflow. This is because your InDesign files will ultimately be exported/uploaded as PDF files.
Regarding, "Once the InDesign layout is complete I would like to do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process":
Unfortunately, there is no option for this and it's actually unnecessary during the export process. Our printers convert and process all images as CMYK using the Blurb ICC Color Profile, so even if you upload/export them with an RGB color profile, they'll be converted to CMYK for the production process.
My Response:
Customer By Email - 07/19/2012 05:10 AM Thanks for the explanation David. It sounds like I can just upload the PDF file using my ProPhoto RGB profiled PDF, but I would prefer to do the conversion from ProPhoto RGB to Blurb ICC CMYK profile. This way I can see the results before uploading the file to Blurb. Can I use the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1 with Output > Color Conversion to Destination > Blurb CC profile, and then upload the PDF file myself? If so please advise where I should upload the file on the Blurb website.
Blurb's Response:
Response Via Email(David) - 07/20/2012 03:49 PM Hi Todd,
If you do end up exporting your PDFs with the workflow you're referring to, you can upload your files here:
http://www.blurb.com/make/pdf_to_book
IMHO there's no reason why Adobe and Blurb couldn't work together so ProPhoto RGB 16-bit images can be used in the book PDF that gets uploaded (or exported!) to Blurb's website. Blurb then handles the CMYK conversion using full-gamut 16-bit images and not clipped sRGB 8-bit images.

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.

Can I soft proof in LR4 like I can in PS CS5?

I haven't used LR 4 yet, but did view the soft-proofing tutorial.
I applaud Adobe for adding this functionality in LR4. It was one of the most obvious lacking features in the previous version, and I've still been mostly doing all my printing through PS CS5.
While soft-proofing is not a perfect replacement for test printing, I've been mostly satisfied with proofing in CS5.
Proofing in LR4 seems a little different, but by using a virtual copy it looks like if I use my printer/paper profile I should theoretically be able to not only be able to deal with color gamut issues, but also adjust contrast & brightness to more closely match my original developed image, and could compare the original with virtual copy in compare mode. Is it that simple? And if so, why is there a contrast & brightness adjustment in the Print module? That latter adjustment would be similar to what one goes through in PS CS5 when soft-proofing prior to printing. However, why have it if it can be done in the Develop module......and regardless, from the video tutorial it looks like you can't preview the image after making those adjustments in the print module nor compare it with the original......thus forcing one to make multiple prints until the result is satisfactory.
Just seems to me there is a bit more tweaking to do in LR4 to make the soft-proofing more functional. Or, perhaps I'm too stuck with the paradigm set forth for soft-proofing in PS and need someone to clarify how I can achieve the same result in LR just as confidently.

Beaulin Liddell wrote:
BTW, I've benefited immensly from your and Martin's Evenings books.......you've never steered me wrong.
Thanks for the kind words...but LR4's soft proofing is worth the effort to use. It really is better than Photoshop's soft proofing. I'm still on the fence regarding VCs vs Snapshots for soft proofing It's a tossup but the VC part has been built in while making a snapshot wasn't.
The advantage of LR4's soft proofing is you get the ability to do a Before/After while still using the full range of LR4's controls to adjust the printed version. Makes it really easy to nail great print (assuming you have good print profiles).
As for the Print module Brightness and Contradt...that's really a special case that doesn't involved color managed output. It's a crutch for those who don't have a locked down system. It's east to tweak but you have to make example prints since the controls don't actually display but only impact the output. I tend to avoid that.

Soft proofing - implementation suggestions

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for