Soft-Proofing issue

I'm having hard time understanding soft-proofing even if I watched the video softproofing video. I turned S-P on for a bright and vivid image, create a virtual copy, set target colorspace to sRGB. It tells me that some colors are too saturated so I select them and reduce them until the RED goes away. It now gives me a poor copy of the original (dull colors). How come, when I export my image as .jpeg with a sRGB color profile, my target jpeg is identical to my untouched RAW file.
I thought the goal of soft-proofing was to make sure that I can emulate the limitation of a target color profile (like sRGB). In my case, if my colors in the jpeg export are identical to my RAW image, how come LR shows them as too saturated?
can someone enlighten me.

theslayerizer wrote:
My problems is that LR indicate color limitations in my picture but when I export my source picture with jpeg in sRGB it displays exactly like my source in Lightroom. So why does it show me limitations that I don't really see when I do my export. If the soft proof was accurate, my expectation is that my exported jpeg should have color issues due to the color warnings that LR showed me when I turned soft-proof on.
First, the OOG isn’t accurate. See the other thread here on soft proofing. If I export data as sRGB from LR, re import it and ask to see Out Of Gamut (OOG) overlay for that space, some OOG still shows up. It should not. It doesn’t when you do the same operation in Photoshop.
But the real use here is to show you what colors are in the LR color space (Melissa RGB) that can’t be reproduced on any device based on any profile. So it is useful to some degree. But in the end, there isn’t anything you can do about it IF you decide to convert to that output space. You view something soft proofed in sRGB and there is an ugly red overlay. You are going to convert to sRGB so colors are going to clip as a result. In my video, I illustrate it is simply educational, and easier to simply let the profile do it’s thing and convert to a smaller color space (because that is what you need). You could screw around and attempt to do this manually with HSL or other controls, but the net results are not as good and just take longer. So use the OOG overlay with some care and don’t be overall alarmed. Taking wide gamut data and funneling it into a smaller gamut is just something we have to do.

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

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.

Dueling Features: Soft Proofing vs Print Adjustment

I'm really trying to appreciate the value of the new soft proofing feature that's got many around here excited. While there are other uses I'll get to in a minute, is it fair to say this feature is designed to make printed output predictable and save paper? I watched Julieanne Kost's tutorial and saw how we can identify out-of-gamut colors on our display device and any number of output devices/processes/papers. Her mooring pole example only seemed to illustrate the inherent compromises we have to make. If we're lucky our monitor IS showing us a hi-fidelity rendering of the image gamut and we're making an informed creative decision about which way we accommodate outlier colors in the output space. If, as in her example, both ends of the line are out of gamut, I'm not sure we're doing much more than fiddling. Not that I have anything against the illusion of control... if I did I couldn't stay married.
So assuming we've got a good monitor and decent eyes, soft proofing gives us some predictive power over what we're going to get before we feed a 24 x 30 sheet of Exhibition Fiber into the 9890 and blow $6 plus ink.
More useful in my own case is the potential to tailor image adjustments to client's prepress requirements. If I can get a prepress profile from a magazine client I can try to give them images that print better on their presses while staying true to my vision. Am I on the right track here?
Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities. One saves paper, the other says "throw another sheet in the machine and let's see what comes out"
I'm purposely trying to be humorous. I picture two LR teams arguing across the meeting room table. The calibrationists vs the gunslingers. MadManChan tell me it ain't so.

VeloDramatic wrote:
Getting back to the title of my post, the print adjustment sliders just leave me scratching my head. After working so hard for the calibrationists out there willing to spend an hour to save a sheet of paper, along comes the no-preview-try-it-you-might-like-it approach of the brightness and contrast sliders. Talk about appealing to two different mentalities.
Yup, very confusing. Especially if the issue is, my prints are too dark compared to my display which this is presumably supposed to fix. If the prints really are too dark, the RGB values need to be fixed and we have to wonder why the user didn’t see on their calibrated display, the RGB values are too dark. If instead, the print is darker appearing than the display, the fix seems to be to properly calibrate the display or fix the print viewing conditions to produce a match. And if the print is only too dark appearing compared to the display, what do the sliders do once you have a lighter (matching) print next to your too bright display and move the print away? Seems it would appear too light, not a good solution.

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

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 CS3 and OS X 10.5.2

Issue: Printing with calibrated Artisan Monitor, Epson 4000, Epson Driver version 3.09 results in light magenta proof image but apparently correct image when printed. Hardware platform: Mac pro dual 2.8GH Xeon, 16G memory, 15k sas boot and identical scratch drive.
Printing with application controlled settings (CS3), setting printer to paper profile (Premium Luster), soft proofing on monitor, disabling color management in print dialogue, preview image looks light with magenta cast (as it always did in windows CS3 with Epson preview) but print usually matches soft proof. When I set printer profile (in the CS3 print window)to Adobe RGB or generic RGB, the preview image looks like soft proof, but print very dark. I am totally new to Mac OS, long time XP user, so don't understand much about colorsync, etc.
Is this a photoshop bug, problem in OS X 10.52 or something else?
I also downloaded Colorburst Rip demo and it prints fine, but I much prefer to use native printer driver to save money as planning to upgrade printer.

All the monitor is doing in Photoshop is faithfully PROOFING the Source File (through a Source Profile-to-MonitorRGB Conversion).
"Soft Proof" here usually means Photoshop> View> Proof SetUp> Custom: specific target ICC Profile
Epson Print Preview is not color managed (use it for layout only).
WHY on earth "set printer profile (in the CS3 print window)to Adobe RGB or generic RGB"?
Printer Profile should be set to Specific Printer/Paper/Ink ICC profile...
http://www.gballard.net/psd/printing_Epson_Photoshop_cs3.html
All the printer is doing is PROOFING the Source File (through a Source Profile-to-Printer Profile Conversion).
If your printed PROOF is off, it is either a bad printer profile or bad settings (assuming your monitor is good and you are basing your judgment on the monitor)...

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.

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

Photoshop CC quits when setting up soft proof for Moab Slickrock paper

I use a Mac Pro with Mountain Lion and Photoshop CC, all with current updates. I had no problem downloading and using the Moab Slickrock icc profile from their website to make a test print. When I try to set up soft proofing, view-proof setup-custom, and choose Slickrock as the device to simulate, Photoshop quits suddenly. I tried it multiple times, restarted the computer, restarted Photoshop, removed and re-installed the profile all to no avail. I then installed the profile for Moab Lasal, and was able to set up soft proofing for Lasal with no problem. I can set up Slickrock with my copy of Photoshop CS6 with no problem and also with Lightroom 5.3 it will soft proof. I wrote to Moab and they said it was a known bug with no current solution.
Do you have any idea what is going on?
Soft proofing is not critical, but I do like to use it when I can.
Eric Brody

I am having this issue as well. I tried lightroom, but the soft proof is buggy there - it's a known bug I saw written up on MOAB's page. Supposedly Photoshop CS5 worked OK softproofing with this profile, but evidently, CC does not.

Soft Proof view mode problem for MOAB Slickrock Metallic Pearl Paper

I use the Soft Proof mode in Lightroom (LR) for editing printed output, and use either custom color profiles that I make (Spyder Print) or profiles supplied by the paper manufacturer. This feature works very well, much like the Custom View mode in Photoshop (PS). MOAB/Legion makes a neat paper called Slickrock Mettalic Pearl, that mimics the old Cibachrome prints, and the supply a color profile that works well in PS. However, when I toggle on the Soft Proof mode using this profile in LR, the image goes completely white, except for deep blacks which show up as bright green. When I actually make the print from LR, the print comes out okay, but there's no way to know if it's true to the proof view, since the proof view is unusable.
Viewing, editing and printing the same image in Photoshop (PS) 5.1 works fine. Editing and printing when view mode (Proof Setup > Custom) is to the same profile produces a print that's true to the proof view. So it seems that the problem is between LR and the .icc file. Here's the link to the profile file: Go to MOAB Slickrock Metallic Pearl Epson R2400 EPL.icc.
http://moabpaper.com/icc-profiles-downloads/epson/epson-stylus-photo-r2400/
iMac; OSX 10.7.5
LR 4.2
Photoshop CS5 12.1
Printer: Epson Stylus Photo R2400 (Photo Black ink)

Looks like a compatibiitly issue with Adobe LR soft proof:
http://moabpaper.com/display/Search?moduleId=3387293&searchQuery=Lightroom+soft+proof
...and PS soft proof:
http://moabpaper.com/moab-support-forum/post/2109935#post2144949

LR4: Soft Proofing Batches Of Unique Pictures?

Hi. I was wondering if there is a way to do batch processing for soft proofing different pictures similar to the sync functionality? I created a customer user preset however it seems to copy over the existing settings vs updating the +/-'s in the different areas. For example, I have a bunch of photos from different scenarios, events, actions, times, etc..
When I am soft proofing to a custom profile, looks like I just need to apply a few universal tweaks to WB (+100), exposure (+20, maybe +30), contrast (+10), blacks (-10), and clarity (+10, maybe +15) to get the soft proof copy to look like the master copy. Then I can quickly go through the soft proof copies and check. Is there a way of doing this?
Also, is there a way of creating a soft proof copy of all the pics in the develop module at once?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Cheers,
George

smilingcdn@yahoo wrote:
Andrew and trshaner, thanks for the replies. Andrew, your answers definitely leave the impression that its a challenge to have good quality pics from big box photo labs. I guess this is a chance we choose to take.
I've always gotten very good results from my Costco Photo Center in Ocean, NJ. Post #28 at the link I provided shows tests results I got using sRGB with and without soft proof corrections:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4865815#4865815
smilingcdn@yahoo wrote:
I will need to read more the potential downside by not having the local adjustments not reflected in the global adjustment tools. Not familiar with this yet.
There's no downside as long as you remember that's how you are applying the "additional" corrections to your soft proof copies. If you need to go back and make additional corrections to any of the soft proof copies you can either update the Graduated filter settings or apply a 2nd Graduated filter with those changes.
Just be aware that LR applies the Local Adjustment BEFORE the Global Adjustments. The potential danger is that if you apply controls like +Exposure to an image area that is near 100% highlights you will push the image into clipping. The Global controls will NOT be able to recover the clipped data! The same holds true for an image with deep shadow areas. If you use -Exposure your shadows can become clipped. This applies to use of ANY Local adjustments for ANY purpose, not just soft proof adjustments, so you need to be aware of it at all times.
Since you'll only be making minor color corrections and very moderate tonal corrections to the soft proof images there's very little likelyhood you'll see this issue. For all other usage apply Local settings that REDUCE HIGHLIGHTS and/or RAISE SHADOWS and you won't have a problem.

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

Soft-Proofing issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for