Soft proofing in Aperture

Is it possible to apply a printer profile in Aperture to soft proof an image, then adjust color settings, hue/saturation, etc, in Aperture and then export that profiled image into Photoshop for final image management before sending the image to my ImagePrint RIP software for printing on my 2200?
Thank you.

First, go to "View --> Proofing Profile -->" and select the printer profile you want to use.
Then, do "View --> Onscreen Proofing" which will then have a check mark next to it.
Be careful to remember you're in "proofing" mode, or you may get confused. I spent a whole day, wondering why all my images were B&W, before realizing I had a grayscale profile selected and "Onscreen Proofing" on.

Similar Messages

Soft Proofing in Aperture 2

Am I missing something, there doesn't seem to any option to simulate paper colour whilst soft proofing in Aperture 2. If it doesn't do this I still need to go into Photoshop to soft proof properly?
Thanks
Ian

Ian,
AFAIK, profiles should be computed using the specific printer, inks, and paper—you don't apply the paper type afterward. I use an online print lab and have separate profiles for different printer types.
Cheers,
Andreas

Soft Proofing in Aperture vs Others

I posted this in another thread, but didn't get a reply so I thought I'd try another Subject title. Sorry.
Someone was having a problem with Aperture to Photoshop using CYMK. I'm having the same problem Adobe RGB images. I use Gretag/Macbeth to calibrate my monitor. When I proof in Aperture, the result is VERY desaturated compared with the soft proofs in Photoshop (direct from Aperture), C1, and Canon DPP. The others all soft proof identically. I haven't had a chance to print anything yet from Aperture, but I know my onscreen versions are very accurate compared to my printed output when using the other programs. If I leave Aperture proofing off and proofing off in the other programs, then the screen versions are pretty close. But I really would like to use proofing. Anybody else found this problem and worked it out? Thanks.

Ian,
AFAIK, profiles should be computed using the specific printer, inks, and paper—you don't apply the paper type afterward. I use an online print lab and have separate profiles for different printer types.
Cheers,
Andreas

Soft Proofing: Aperture vs Photoshop

I'll start by saying that I,m no expert in this area...
So why do I see such a difference in soft proofing in Aperture vs PhotoShop?
The difference between my calibrated screen and a printer's ICC profile is much bigger in Aperture then it is in Photoshop.

They are totally different apps but with a small amount of overlap.
You need (inexpensive) Photoshop Elements for individual image editing. PE is poor for management of batches of images.
Aperture and Adobe's Lightroom are (a bit more expensive) apps for the management of batches of captured digital images. You will want one of them (here we prefer Aperture) as you get into shooting substantial batches of DSLR captures. Aperture will deal with the editing issues of 98% of your images, but you definitely want PE for the 2% which will likely include your best shots.
-Allen Wicks

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!

Soft proofing in Lightroom

In Aperture (dare I mention it?) there is a "View" setting for soft proofing. You input your printer model and paper and the display changes to the actual colors the printer will output. It comes pretty close. I can't find such a setting in Lightroom.
Canon 20D, Intel iMac 20, HP 7160, monitor frequently calibrated with a Spyder2 Pro, Lightroom V1.
If I import a photo from the camera into Lightroom, the colors on the monitor are quite different from the object shot. If I do NO editing at all, just print, the colors on the print are quite close to those of the subject though a long way from the monitor picture.
This is no help at all if I want to edit the photo in Lightroom...

Yeah...LR lacks soft proofing presently.

Soft Proofing?

For those here who are having success with their printing. What if anything are you doing about lack of soft proofing in LR.
My current situation is, I get acceptable prints only 50% of the time. Everything is color managed of course and I'm printing to Epson R2400 using Velvet Fine Art Paper and Epson current icc profiles.
What happens is I can make Develop adjustments to two similar images and when I print one comes out fine and the other does not.
Following advise of others I have set up presets for my printing and still check settings after clicking print button. All appears good but result are unpredictable.
I have managed to get some very nice prints on VFA paper so I know it's possible. Just seems like something in the settings is not sticking from one print to the next. Any thoughts on this issue? Like many others here I can print from Aperture or PS with 100% perfect results every time.
I have tried doing preview after starting the print dialog (osx) but the previews are always very oversaturated and very bright. I understand from reading elsewhere that OSX preview is not reliable. I've also tried printing to pdf first and opening in Acrobat however the result is still bright and oversaturated but not as much as the preview version.
I really want to stick with LR but this unpredictable printing thing is making it tough for me to do so. Trying to get consistent prints has so far cost me almost as much in paper/ink as I paid for LR. Since print output is my main goal it's important to me that I get this working. Otherwise LR will become a doorstop.
For the record: (in case Andrew Rodney weights in) I'm shooting with a Nikon D200, Raw in AdobeRGB, Macbook Pro with monitor calibrated with spyder2, using paper/ink icc profiles from Epson (I know their canned, but their the same ones used in PS with perfect results)in LR for my R2400 printer connected directly to my Macbook Pro using firewire.
Is there something I'm missing?
THH

"P.S. when a print comes out bad is always muddy, blocked up in the shadows and somewhat washed out overall(looks like its foggy). Is that a clue to anything?"
It's a clue that your image needs the contrast range of a glossy paper vs a watercolor paper...or that you need to go into the shadows to "open" them up so they print.
The d-max of a glossy paper (like Luster) can hit 2.39/2.4 on Luster but a watercolor paper can only hit 1.7 or so d-max. What that means is that between max white (paper white) and max black )d-max) a watercolor paper is gonna plug up from the midtones down to the shadows...black will be black which is the d-max.
And yes, having a soft proof function in Lightroom would greatly aid in evaluating how much "opening" of the shadows you need to do. Which is why I tend to round trip from Lightroom to Photoshop back to Lightroom very important fine art type prints. While in Photoshop, I can take advantage of local tone/color corrections while doing sharpening and image enhancements such as a mid-tone contrast adjustment, saving the -EDIT file back into Lightroom for printing. While in Photoshop (before saving) I will softproof using the paper profile I'll be using and add an ajustment layer or two (usually a curve and a Hue&Sat adjustment).
The imprtant factor here is to separate out problems using Lightroom functionality such as not using OS X saved presets, remembering to update LR templates and using the correct settings to print from issues of printing difficult to print images on low d-max papers.

How to use ICC profiles and soft proofing profiles?

Hi,
I got an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and Epson Hot Press paper which, upon investigation, received great profeesional reviews and, having never printed digitally before, I don't know how to use profiles for soft proofing or printing.
I don't know where to go in Aperture or what to do. My driver is up to date and I downloaded the paper profile - not sure where it ended up. What's next?
So far as I know, soft proofing is about calibrating the monitor to the paper - am I correct?
Thanks guys,
Raphael

Raphael,
A good reply is going to require a full-size keyboard, which I don't have access to just now. Here are some starter pages:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.htm
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml (a bit grumpy and out-dated)
Fwiw, I print to Epson Hot Press using a 3880. Imho, it's a _great_ printer, and that combination of printer and paper produced state-of-the-art results. (Not suitable in all cases, but if that is a look you like, the only thing that I've seen that surpasses it is the Epson 9900, and without looking at prints side by side you can not tell them apart.)
Your profile ended up wherever you have told your browser to save downloaded files. The Epson site should provide instructions on where to move the file. Once it is in the right Finder folder, when you next Aperture it should show in your list of profiles.
Keep in mind, though, that soft-proofing is useless without a well (read: hardware-calibrated) calibrated display.
HTH,
--Kirby.
(Sent from my magic glass.)

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

OA2: Soft Proofing Profile for Apple Print

Hi,
Does anyone know what Soft Proofing Profile to use the Aperture 2 "built-in" Print & Book Services? Or perhaps where to get it?
Thanks
Message was edited by: styrvolt

Hi
This has cropped up a few times before, the general opinion seems to be to use Average McCoy Gloss for proofing Apples print services.
Check out this link : http://discussions.apple.com/click.jspa?searchID=9295427&messageID=6190046
for more info, David is still holding a copy of the profile at the link provided in the thread.
Good luck
FlatE

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: how to A/B?

Hi all,
I'm kinda new to soft proofing, so maybe this is a silly question, but here goes:
My workflow for printing is that i first tweak my photos so they look like how i want them on my computer monitor, for uploading to Flickr.
After that i choose the one(s) i want to print (Epson 3880) and go into "soft proofing" mode.
After i've tweaked the photo to compensate for the print, i want to A/B with my original. What i've noticed is that i need to generally add a bit more brightness and vibrance to approach (on physical paper) what i see on my computer screen, so i want to be able to A/B between my original photo and the proof copy.
But the thing is, when i do this the "soft proofing" module remains engaged for both my proof copy (that's ok) and for my original photo (not ok!) which was tweaked to look good on the computer and never meant to be printed, and on which i never did any soft proofing!!!
This makes it really hard to A/B between the two copies.
So why doesn't the soft proofing module automatically turn off when you switch to another photo on which you haven't done any soft proofing?
Hmmm, clear as mud methinks!
But does anyone see what i mean and could offer any tips?
Thanks! ......... D

Daz V wrote:
So why doesn't the soft proofing module automatically turn off when you switch to another photo on which you haven't done any soft proofing?
Soft Proofing "simulates" on your computer display (transmissive) what the print copy (reflective) will look like in your hands. The two are radically different in contrast ratio, black level, and white level achievable, so it makes little sense to try and compare the two. They will always look quite different. The goal is to adjust web based images so they look good onscreen, and print based images with 'Soft Proof' so they look good in the actual reflective light viewed print copy. What are you trying to achieve?
You can view them side-by-side by windowing LR and your browser and viewing the image in both at the same time. In fact that would be much close to reality, since browsers aren't always properly color managed. Two separate displays would be even better for this purpose.

Is It Possible to Save a Soft-Proofed File?

Let's assume that I have an image, foo.psd, open in PSCS4. I softproof the image for a particular paper and printer. When I hit Ctrl-Y, the image is shown in softproof mode, and the softproofing info is appended to the image name in the PSCS4 window. Is there any way to save a copy of foo.psd with the soft proofing applied, i.e. foo-softproof.psd?
Reed

Reed,
a print looks often different to the monitor. Quite normal
- many monitor colors cannot be printed.
They are out-of gamut for the printing CMYK space.
The RGB image data are converted via the RGB profile
to Lab, which is large enough to represent real world
photos without loss.
From Lab the data are converted to CMYK via the CMYK
profile. Here is loss because of the smaller gamut.
The colors have to be mapped from the larger RGB gamut
into the smaller CMYK gamut. This can be done
a) automatically by Rendering Intent Relative Colorimetric:
in-gamut colors are not changed. Out-of-gamut colors
are mapped to the gamut boundary; this process isn't
accurately defined by standards.
b) automatically by Rendering Intent Perceptual:
all colors - even those which were in-gamut - are
shifted towards the gray axis. This process depends
very much on the scientist or programmer and is nowhere
defined by standards.
So far one doesn't need human interaction, but the results
are not always pleasing. The third and optimal method is
c) image based gamut compression. Reduce the saturation
and eventually rotate the hue in regions which are out-
of-gamut until Photoshop's Proof Color Gamut Warning
doesn't show larger out-of-gamut areas.
Gamut compression algorithms and the color science behind
are explained in this excellent book:
Jan Morovic (accents omitted)
Color Gamut Mapping
John Wiley & Sons, 2008
Manual image based gamut compression is demonstrated here
by many examples (but it's called 'Editing in Lab'):
http://www.fho-emden.de/~hoffmann/labproof15092008.pdf
Attention: 3.4 MBytes.
Chapter 9 shows visualized gamut boundaries for several
color spaces.
IMO you're seeking the impossible (if I'm understanding
you correctly).
Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

Soft proofing in Aperture

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for