30D, to color manage or not to color manage

[tom l]

I recently purchased Adobe's LightRoom as a front end to my editing software

(Corel PP). Corel does not directly support RAW so I wanted something to try

other than DPP.

 

However, I've noticed that Lightroom requires you to work in a color managed

environment - which I had not been doing before. Frankly, I had tried color

management and it seemed like a big pain espeically when I tried printing or

sharing images with others (or on the web). As it is I've had pretty good luck

going from the camera's card, to Corel (via DPP before) to my printer with

images that matched each other fairly well. Images I posted on the web also

looked pretty much like what I had intended.

 

My only complaint was that my 30D always seemed to require an increase in

exposure of +1 otherwise everything was too dark.

 

Now under Lightroom which works in ProPhoto color space and forces a gamma of

2.2, all of a sudden I find myself not wanting to boost exposure any more -

exposure looks good in Lightroom. After turning on Color Management in Corel and

getting a profile that works, images look good in Corel too.

 

Printing is still a problem, too dark and often a color shift. (so if you've got

any suggestions on that they'd be appreciated too).

 

I'm using decent equipment (not professional but not generic stuff either), a

30D, monitor is a Lacie 19 Blue IV, and printer is an Epson R1800.

 

I guess what I'm really wondering is whether the camera's images are designed to

be viewed on a color managed system? What color space does it work on (Adobe

1998 I thought)?

 

Is the use of Lightroom and it's higher gamma what was intended for view images

out of my Canon? I know it seems more convenient right now because I'm not

changing the exposure up all the time but is that just coincidence or was it

planned to work this way?

 

If that is the plan, and the camera does expect a color managed environment,

then what are people doing with displaying on the web (which is color

unmanaged)? Do you all convert your images and adjust gamma & shift the colors

for web presentation?

 

As far as printing goes, I must still not have found the right profile or

correct settings - it worked so well before with CM that I'm amazed it is such a

struggle to get right under CM.

 

Help, please.

[m_barbu1]

Have you tried setting it all to sRGB?

[big men]

my 300D is the same ,

 

 

 

 

-----------------------------

snom.fotoyard.com

[tom l]

> M Barbu - Have you tried setting it all to sRGB?

 

unforutnately you can't in Lightroom. You are forced to have CM on and use their ProPhoto color space therefore you must convert to sRGB or AdobeRGB if you want for web or print.

 

Thanks

[roger_smith4]

Cameras and printers generally default to SRGB, not Adobe. The 20D and 30D let you choose adobe in options, but I'm not sure there is any point to this if you're shooting raw.

 

The Prophoto space is gamma 1.8, not 2.2 I believe.

 

If you select the proper printer profile when printing in Lightroom it should match what you have on the screen (assuming your screen is accurate) If you do this it doesn't matter whether the image is ProPhoto or SRGB as it will be converted to the printer profile regardless. The advantage of ProPhoto is that you don't lose colors along the way in editing.

 

Lightroom's raw conversion is different than other software so the defaults will yield different results. Compare it to out-of-the-camera jpegs to see how it differs (shoot RAW + Jpeg).

 

Remember to "export to srgb" for web.

 

Good luck!

[m_barbu1]

<a href="http://livedocs.adobe.com/en_US/Lightroom/1.0/help.html?content=WS0F7BFFFA-CE53-4ceb-B3D3-9D6256B8917D.html">This might help.</a>

[tom l]

M, thanks for the link, yes I have read that.

 

Roger, from M's link it says "Lightroom assumes a gamma value of approximately 2.2."

 

Anyways, my question really is - does Canon expect it's users to be viewing images under Color Managed applications or Un-managed applciations? What I see in having to bump my exposure up +1 most of the time in the un-managed application but don't have to change the exposure in the color managed app lends some thought whether that is just coincidence or intentional.

[m_barbu1]

I don't know what Canon expects, but if you don't use color management, how do you know what you're getting is accurate?

[tom l]

I know the folks that use color management would bulk at this, but I was getting good enough results with my unmanaged setup prior to adding Lightroom to the mix. What I saw through the camera looked like what was on the screen (with the exception of making the +1 exposure adjustment) and the printout looked just about like the display. I could give the image to a couple local shops and get prints that matched what I printed at home. What I posted on the web, looked like what I saw on my display and what was printed. That's pretty good if you ask me. I know it's not accurate as in calibrating my devices but when you get down to it, it's the end result that count.

 

I added Lighroom because my editing software (corel Photo Paint) does not support RAW images and Lightroom seemed to make my workflow a little easier for reviewing lots of photos quickly. Unfortunately, its forced color management messes up all that I had working satisfactorily before.

 

Wondering about what Canon expects of its users environment was an attempt to either rationalize that its ok to need to bump the exposure +1 in an unmanaged setup or to accept lightrooms's parameters, be happy I don't have to bump the exposure any more and then focus on try ing to get my printer recalibrated to print like I want and start worry about what results I'll get posting to the web or giving the images to other printers.

 

Thanks.

[m_barbu1]

I would need to look at your setup to be sure, but I've got to think that if you're always having to add +1 EV, there's something wrong. You should be able to take the photo and not have to make such an adjustment, and have the screen and printer look the same.

[jim_simon3]

I believe that you are mistaken. In Lightroom you can pick in the preferences or somewhere similar to have your files saved as sRGB, Adobe RGB or ProPhoto. You can also pick to save as 8 bit or 16 bit. The program recommends ProPhoto and that is the default, but as my printer doesn't have that profile built in, and I am unsure of the conversion process, I have set the default to Abobe RGB.

good hunting, sorry I'm not at my computer right now or I'd give you the menu choice to change the default.

[roger_smith4]

"does Canon expect it's users to be viewing images under Color Managed applications or Un-managed applciations? What I see in having to bump my exposure up +1 most of the time in the un-managed application but don't have to change the exposure in the color managed app lends some thought whether that is just coincidence or intentional."

 

Coincidence. If a monitor is uncalibrated it will not work predictably so there is no way Canon could or would prepare for it. SRGB is gamma 2.2 as is AdobeRGB and SRGB is the default for the 20D (can can be set to Adobe). Windows and other non-color managed programs like Internet Explorer assume the numbers they're seeing are SRGB.

 

Don't adjust your camera exposure, calibrate your monitor! Even with AdobeGamma.

[dves]

invest in a spyder or something similar

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/colorvisionmonitorspyder/

This is the single best investment in print quality I have ever made!

Use a decent CRT

use ADOBE RGB for Camera and working space for print delivery for prepress use sRGB for web and inkjet colour space for printing locally.

with a proper calibration you start to get a feel for the exposure when submitting to printer I find the CRT is 1 stop brighter than the final print so compensate accordingly

[robin_sibson1]

You can be lucky in finding that the default settings on several items of hardware and software work well enough together, but, as you have discovered, the next item added to the mix can upset all that. The point about a colour managed system is that, whatever colour spaces you choose to work with, it provides consistency where it can and (just as important) well-designed mapping where a device has a gamut that is smaller than that in the image. What's questionable is how much benefit you get from half-hearted colour management. The real deal includes the purchase of a monitor with built-in high-precision "3d" lookup table like the NEC SpectraView series, and a good-quality colorimeter for calibration/profiling. These components alone can cost considerably more than quite a decent off-the-shelf PC. If you want a spectrophotometer rather than a colorimeter, so that you can make your own printer profiles, that adds further to the expense, and in any event this all assumes that any printer to which the image is sent will itself be of pretty good quality. You may also want a D50 lighting facility for print viewing. If you do put all this together correctly, it provides an environment where results come by design rather than by chance, but it doesn't come cheap.

[tom l]

Thanks, all for the advice. Jim Simon - we may be talking about two different things. I know in lightroom you can export to jpg and specify the color space as you mentioned. What I was refering to was Lightroom's display (or perhaps internal working space?) - this is unchangeable, you can not turn it off and you can't change it - I believe they make this a selling point much to the dismay of other posters I've seen complain that they wish they could change it or turn off CM altogether in lightroom.

 

Robin, while I'll believe what you say, but it sounds seriously more expensive than my hobby ego can take right now. <g>

 

After the past couple days I am seriously considering the ColorVision PrintFix Pro suite. I hope this is not overkill, I see their other product offers just monitor calibration and/or printer software calibration but this PrintFix Pro has caught my eye as a possible solution. I'd welcome any comments pro & con from anyone that has used this product.

[robin_sibson1]

Tom, you're right, it's financially painful. I rely on manufacturer profiles on my i9950, which works pretty well and contains the cost because I don't need a spectrophotometer, but with end-of-life approaching on my CRT, I treated myself to a SpectraView 2090 and took the cheap deal on a close-out Optix XR colorimeter (actually a first-rate instrument). It's just such a good experience to look at your photos on that sort of kit once it's properly set up, and the cost is reasonable compared to what I've got tied up in Canon kit.