AdobeRGB & ISO profiles incompatibility?

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by jonathan_mcgraw, Apr 28, 2019.

  1. You can't operate on RAW files directly. They must be converted to some other format, e.g., PSD in Photoshop. You must also assign a color space in this conversion, so that the editor will know what colors are assigned to each word. The RGB preferences in both Photoshop and Lightroom include AdobeRGB and ProfotoRGB. Monitor profiles are inserted between the image file and the monitor, and are independent of each other. One profile can service many color spaces. One color space can be used with many profiles.

    Grading an image cannot enlarge the color space, and will usually degrade it. It makes sense to start in the widest color space so that less of the image is pushed outside the gamut.

    By my Lightroom (and Photoshop) preferences, RAW files are default to 16-bit TIFF format, ProFotoRGB.
     
  2. What a lively discussion:) Colour management always been big can of worms.
    To OP, all purpose of the Colour management system is to make print to match the screen, short is WYSIWYG or to make image look the same on different displays.
    To make it work, for starters you need good quality monitor , monitor calibration device with software, and colour profiles for your printer/paper combination.
    Depend on your needs pick one that fit into your budget , no miracles here, as usual, you got what you pay for.
    After that, some tweaking in Lightroom and printer driver will get you in the ballpark.
     
  3. So I've got a Pro-10, and I'm printing from Lightroom. I have calibrated my display - I've got a BenQ SW2700.

    Scanning through the thread, I didn't see if you were using Windows or MacOS - I've got Windows at home. At least in Windows, the Canon drivers include default printing options that work really poorly with both Lightroom and Photoshop if you're doing color management in the applications. In the "Printing Properties" tab, there's a "Color/Intensity" section. Set that to "Manual". Click "Set" and then go to the "Color Matching" tab at set it to "None". Until I did both, I was getting weird color shifts.

    If you're using MacOS, this may not be an issue - I've only seen the PRO-1000 drivers on a Mac, and they're a bit different and I didn't see a similar set of options there. Not sure if that's a difference because of the platform or because of the printer model.

    Also, even with a profiled display, I find that I have to up the "brightness" slider in Lightroom's Print module, especially on glossy or semi-gloss paper, even with the right paper profile selected, etc. It's not really an issue with matte. I'd recommend using the Soft Proofing feature, especially if you're going to print the same image on more than one type of paper. If you save the settings, it'll make it easier to go back and reprint later.
     
  4. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    IF you have to up something in LR's print module so a print matches the display, that display isn't ideally calibrated.
     
    conrad_hoffman likes this.
  5. Thank you Nick

    I didn't realize that this thread was still going on. I haven't checked it for a couple of weeks. A question, is it enough to shoot a Passport sized gray or white card to do accurate calibration?

    Are the Passport sized color squares too small to read on a computer screen. And if they are too small, I see a real problem w/ carrying an 8 X 10 target.

    Thanks again
     
  6. They are as large as you wish them to be. Besides, it's not how they look on the screen as long as you bracket the chart so the Passport software knows where to look in the image file.
     
  7. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    The Passport colored target is a MacBeth 24 patch from long past, used to build .DCP camera profiles and more recently ICC camera profiles. Depends on the raw converter and your needs (I frankly don't find ICC camera profiles that useful or effective). The patches are not too small for the task. They are not necessarily 'calibrating' anything. They are used to profile device behavior.
    White target is for white balancing raw data, gray target for gray balancing JPEGs (or non raw data) after capture.
    All the patch colors can be sampled for values on a computer screen. But that's hardly necessary.
     
  8. We talking about different calibration, white or gray card used for white balance settings in camera or in post-processing. I was talking about computer monitor calibration, which is absolutely necessary, if you want avoid surprises when you printing pictures.
     
  9. In the firmware for all of 3 of the Canon printers I have used, the step you describe is how you tell the printer firmware not to try to manage colors. It's the other half of telling Lightroom not to let the printer manage colors. that is, you need both steps to stop the printer from managing color.

    I generally set both the brightness and contrast sliders in the Lightroom print module to +10. I don't think this has anything to do with the profile.
     
  10. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    It doesn't have anything to do with the profile and, if the display and output matched properly, no such settings would be necessary. Now you've got one application that prints differently using color management than all others, thanks to the sliders which IMHO, are hacks.
     
  11. I don't know what you mean by "hacks". And what do you mean by matching the display and output "properly"? One can never precisely mirror on screen what a printed image will look like, even if all colors are in gamut on both devices and everything is properly profiled. There are aspects of this that have nothing to do with color matching, e.g., contrast, which necessarily appears differently on an illuminated screen than on a reflective print. That's one reason why softproofing is approximate and good printers rely on test prints in addition to softproofing. If adding a bit more contrast at the output stage produces better output than simply estimating this on screen, I think that is a big plus.

    BTW, for what it is worth, I use a color-critical monitor and appropriate ICCs for every paper I use.
     
  12. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    I'll explain why it's a massive hack:

    You're moving sliders that affect data you can't see!
    You've got the same kinds of sliders in Develop that affect data you can see! While soft proofing.
    You've presumably got output that doesn't match what you see on the display so instead of fixing that issue, one blindly moves sliders in Print module rather than strive for WYSIWYG in Develop while soft proofing.
    You've provided a means of printing a pile of RGB values that will never match in any other application including all of Adobe's because the Print sliders only show up (thankfully) in LR.

    You say you have a color critical display and so do I. Why not calibrate and profile for it so the print matches what you see in any color managed application when soft proofing with the print profiles and rendering intent? I can and do. Further, this has nothing to do with color gamut. That's all taken care of with the output profiles when converting to the output color space with the selected (hopefully per image) rendering intent that produces the most desired rendering from working space to output color space. Here's a video to explain how to ideally and properly get a match without resorting to hacks in LR's Print module:

    Why are my prints too dark?
    A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013
    In this 24 minute video, I'll cover:

    Are your prints really too dark?
    Display calibration and WYSIWYG
    Proper print viewing conditions
    Trouble shooting to get a match
    Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem

    High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4
    Low resolution:
     
    Ed_Ingold and conrad_hoffman like this.
  13. thanks; I'll take a look










    i'll take a look
     
  14. Took a break to watch the video. Excellent. Thanks.

    I've calibrated my monitors for years, but I am about to use the (much more complicated) Spectraview software for the first time (a new NEC monitor), so the screen shot of your calibrations was a bonus.
     
  15. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    The settings that work for me may not work for you; YMMV.
     
  16. I know, but your brief explanation of the interface was helpful.
     
  17. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    Good luck, it's trial and error but once you nail it, you can forget those sliders in Print.
    Plus there's a huge number of options for calibration in SpectraView, don't forget Contrast Ratio!
     

Share This Page