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.

Similar Messages

  • Soft proofing in Lightroom vs photoshop

    PS give options in softproof
    - legacy macintosh gamma 1.8
    - internet standard sRGB
    - monitor
    I find that printing (Epson R3000 from a brand new Lenovo all in 1) gives me very accurate "printed pics look like monitor pics" if I choose legacy macintosh gamma 1.8 option. If I pick the other options they look great on screen but washed out on the picture. 
    I use raw initially, then adobe RGB consistently. My monitor is calibrated with ColorMunki.
    Is there a way to softproof the gamma 1.8 option in lightroom?
    any other suggestions?

    No...
    What printer? How are you printing out of Lightroom? Using LR Manages Color or Printer Manages Color?

  • 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.

  • Changing color profile in Lightroom 5 Soft Proofing from ProPhotoRGB to sRGB is not showing any changes, changes in Photoshop CC are dramatic

    I am working with  the color profile ProPhoto RGB in both Lightroom 5 and Photoshop CC. In preparing for my first Blurb book I have tried to generate pictures in sRGB in Lightroom, using the Soft Proofing feature, but there are no changes at all. Then I transfer the same pictures into Photoshop, change the color profiles and the results are dramatically different.
    What can I do to achieve the same results in Lightroom

    With an average monitor what you see on-screen is already soft proofed to sRGB (or something very close to it), because that's all the monitor is capable of displaying anyway. So soft proofing to sRGB won't tell you anything. You won't see any difference.
    In Photoshop it sounds as if you assign profiles. That's not the way to do it. If you convert correctly you won't see any difference. Same principle as above: there may be clipping in the process, but what you see on screen is already clipped, so no visual on-screen difference.
    With a wide gamut monitor soft proofing becomes slightly more useful. But still you won't see any changes occurring outside Adobe RGB. You'll get a better idea by keeping an eye on the histogram. Ideally, all three channels should taper gently off towards the endpoints. If any one or two channels are backed solidly up against the endpoint, on either side, that's gamut clipping.
    If Blurb gave you a real profile, one that reflected their actual printing process, you could soft proof to that. But apparently they don't.

  • I use lightroom with the soft proofing feature for my printing. I used to make a copy proof, but all of the sudden something changed, and even if I'm on the copy in the developing mode it prints the original. Also, If i chose a file that was already in li

    I use lightroom with the soft proofing feature for my printing. I used to make a copy proof, but all of the sudden something changed, and even if I'm on the copy in the developing mode it prints the original. Also, If i chose a file that was already in light room to print, even though I have the chosen file up in the developing mode, it will instead print the most recent file that I added to lightroom. If found a way to work around these problems, (check make this the copy in the soft proofing, and copy my settings and delete and reload the old files) but it's a slight hassle and it didn't use to do this. Not sure why it changed. Could I have accidentally changed a setting?

    See
    iOS: Device not recognized in iTunes for Windows
    - I would start with
    Removing and Reinstalling iTunes, QuickTime, and other software components for Windows XP
    or              
    Removing and reinstalling iTunes and other software components for Windows Vista, Windows 7, or Windows 8
    However, after your remove the Apple software components also remove the iCloud Control Panel via Windows Programs and Features app in the Window Control Panel. Then reinstall all the Apple software components
    - Then do the other actions of:
    iOS: Device not recognized in iTunes for Windows
    paying special attention to item #5
    - New cable and different USB port
    - Run this and see if the results help with determine the cause
    iTunes for Windows: Device Sync Tests
    Also see:
    iPod not recognised by windows iTunes
    Troubleshooting issues with iTunes for Windows updates
    - Try on another computer to help determine if computer or iPod problem

  • Lightroom 4 soft proofing doesn't show installed ICC profiles

    If I go to printing options there are many paper profiles I can choose. However in the Other menu of the soft proofing tool, there is no profile except the visualization ones.
    I have an HP officejet 8500 pro printer and windows 7 64 bit.

    Disregard my second message about not understanding your email reply.
    I thought I had to hit "H" to see a link -on the email- to confirm my registration.
    I didn't realize it was your answer.
    Since I had just installed my 3.4.1 update and the default on my installed version of LR, and since my 'pins' have never been hidden, the 3.4.1 default of hiding the pins was a problem and is likely to fool a lot of users that hadn't read about hiding those pins yet.  Shouldn't the installation of -any- new version, pick up the defaults currently in LR?  That is an issue.
    We're good now.
    Thanks for the response.
    Michael

  • Is Lightroom 2.2 color managed? How to soft proof?

    I was just told that LR 2.2 is not color managed and softproofing is not possible... is this true?
    I also have PS CS4... What is the best way to use LR 2.2 for you image editing in a color managed workflow if you also want to Soft proof before printing when you also have PS CS4?

    It is correct that LR does not have soft proofing. But you don't have to print from PS to use soft proofing.
    For color images, when I've finished with Develop in LR, I then edit in PS and do the soft proofing there. I have recorded some actions (two per paper type - one for each rendering intent - relative and perceptual) which I then apply as appropriate. The actions apply two adjustment layers - a curve and a hue/sat (to do a saturation bump - not necessary for all papers). I then tweak if necessary, flatten the layers and save the result.
    I then print the PS edited file in LR. In my case I also rename the file to indicate the paper and rendering intent, plus I keyword it accordingly.
    It's a pain but works very well. By printing in LR you can take advantage of the built-in output sharpening, and it's generally more convenient to set up - at least for me.
    I have an Epson 2880 - when printing Black and White I use Eric Chan's profiles for the 3800 ABW mode - they seem to work fine for the 2880 - at least for me - I get results that match what I see on screen. For B&W I do not need to use PS at all - I just print directly from LR - no need to soft proof.
    Selby

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 to sRGB not working as expected

    I've gone through three customer reps via chat on this, and none of them had a clue.
    I recently discovered the soft proofing capability in Lightroom 4, and watched an Adobe video about it. Looked pretty cool. I experimented with soft-proofing for printing to an Epson Artisan printer. I'd always struggled a little bit with prints being too dark, etc., but now I was able to produce the best prints I've ever had.
    But then I started to experiment with soft proofing for sRGB. My photo club takes photo submissions as sRGB, and they then show them on a monitor during meetings. Sometimes they don't look so good. So, I figured soft-proofing them first would help correct that.
    So, I've got a photo that has a lot of red in it (a flower). The soft proofing indicated pretty much all of the reds were out of gamut. I tried reducing the saturation, but they had to go pretty much completely desaturated (black and white) before Lightroom said they were in gamut. I also experimented with change the hue, but still no luck.
    I then deleted the soft proof virtual copy, and just exported the original as sRGB. Looked fine.
    This would seem to make the soft proofing to sRGB to be somewhat useless for me (at least for reds - seemed okay for the small number of other photos I experimented with that didn't have that much red).
    Just wondering if anyone else has had issues with this, or if I'm doing anything incorrectly, etc.
    Thanks!
    P.S. Update...  Last chat rep had me try something that seemed to work better. My photos are stored in Lightroom as JPGs with a color space of RGB and a color profile of ProPhoto RGB. If I export that photo to JPG / sRGB, then re-import it into Lightroom, and then do the soft proofing again, it works much better. The downside of this that the two-step process makes it a bit unusable for me.

    > if I'm doing anything incorrectly,
    You should not really try to do the bringing of the colors into gamut too much. I know the videos you see online show this but it is really counterproductive in many cases. You'll often completely desaturate or get really disagreeable hue shifts if you trust the out of gamut warnings as you have noticed. What you should do is turn on the softproof and check whether your image looks good and the colors don't shift too much. If they do or you lose essential detail, try to correct it using the HSL tools or local desaturation. The out of gamut warning is more useful when you are proofing to a printer profile and you might have colors that your display cannot show but your printer can print. For sRGB, not so much in my experience.
    > Last chat rep had me try something that seemed to work better. My photos are stored in Lightroom as JPGs with a color space of RGB and a color profile of ProPhoto RGB. If I export that photo to JPG / sRGB, then re-import it into Lightroom, and then do the soft proofing again, it works much better
    That's a silly answer that rep gave you. What happens when you export to sRGB is that all your colors will get truncated hard(it uses a relative coloremtric conversion) to the sRGB profile, so if there was detail there that you wish to preserve you just lost it and you won't be able to get it back. Of course if you then soft proof the sRGB jpeg to sRGB, you will have an easy time conforming it to sRGB, since it already is! The out of gamut warning it might show you on sRGB jpegs without any correction is not correct - a known bug or strangeness with how Lightroom handles these and just tiny touches on the sliders will make them disappear. It is fooling you and in fact you were better off not even trying to soft proof and simply exporting to sRGB and ignoring soft proofing.
    P.S. the monitor problems you have noticed in your photo club are probably more an issue of the monitor not being calibrated and probably not using a color managed application to show the images. If your monitor is calibrated and that one is too and using a color managed app to show the images should give you very good correspondance in color between your monitor and that one regardless of what color space you choose for the images. That might perhaps be a good thing for the club. You really need to be calibrating monitors and use only color managed apps for display.

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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. 

  • 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.

Maybe you are looking for