Help. Over saturated colours

[william_palmer1]

<p>Hello all. Please can somebody help me as I have struggled with this for a long time now.<br>

I have a colour calibrated Sony Vaio LCD. Calibrated to 6000K and a luminance of 100 gamma 2.2. <br>

My camera is capturing in aRGB. I am working on the RAW files in Lightroom and Adobe PS CS4 in an aRGB colour space (set up as described by Eric Chan <a href="http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/printworkflow.html">http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/printworkflow.html</a>). <br>

The files I am outputting are 16 bit aRGB files. My problem is that viewed online, viewed in non-colour managed software and, most importantly, when printed my images are spectacularly over-saturated compared to the same file opened in either adobe PS or lightroom.<br>

I understand from various online information that (very briefly) working in AdobeRGB can cause issues with de-saturating colours when viewed in un-colour managed software, or if the image is not tagged with the colour space. I am finding the opposite.<br>

Whether I print at home or from proffessional printers the oranges in sunrise photographs are very over-saturated and the whole image is a lot darker than on screen.<br>

I do take care that colour management is not being carried out twice in printer and computer so I have ruled this problem out of the equation.<br>

So, viewed in PS and LR I have light pastelly shades, anywhere else dark over-saturated. Can anybody help? </p>

<p>Thanks in advance!<br>

Will.</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>You need to convert to SRGB for posting to the internet. If you're sending to an average lab they'll assume the data is in SRGB unless you confirm in advance they accept AdobeRGB files.</p>

<p>I don't see why you'd have any problems printing at home. How did you calibrate your monitor? What settings are you using and are you printing from a color managed application like Lightroom?<br>

Are you using a Mac? (I hear there are serious printing issues with recent versions of the operating system).</p>

[william_palmer1]

<p>Hi Roger,<br>

thanks for coming back. I've recently been converting to sRGB for the web as I understand that most browsers aren't colour managed and the difference between an sRGB and an aRGB when viewed in a non-colour managed browser is the aRGB file looks washed out and de-saturated.<br>

I am finding mine look over saturated when compared to the PS and LR file.<br>

I am printing from Adobe PS, using PS handles colours, the ICC profile for the paper i'm using and relative with black point compensation. Have spent a long time experimenting and always oversaturated reds/oranges.<br>

I'm using windows 7 and previousy Vista. Colour calibrated with eye-one 2. I am using the same monitor to view files in PS/LR vs anything else and am happy with the pastelly colours in PS/LR only.</p>

 

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>My camera is capturing in aRGB. I am working on the RAW files </p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />First things first, if you capture in raw, its immaterial what you set on the camera. Your raw converter (LR) will produce a working space based on what you select. What did you select in the converter? If Adobe RGB (1998), that’s fine. You need to convert to sRGB for web posting, but unless you use an ICC aware browser, the previews you see will not exactly match what you saw in the converter or Photoshop (or other ICC aware application) and neither will others. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Whether I print at home or from proffessional printers the oranges in sunrise photographs are very over-saturated and the whole image is a lot darker than on screen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The prints are too dark no matter where you view them or darker than the display? That is an important distinction to make and how you view the prints by the display will play a role in a match (see http://digitaldog.net/files/Print_to_Screen_Matching.jpg)</p>

[brad_smith8]

<blockquote>

<p>My camera is capturing in aRGB. I am working on the RAW</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As far as I know RAW files are not given a colospace until converted by the RAW editor. Make sure the editor isn't selecting Prophoto, etc. The aRGB camera setting is for JPG's.</p>

[william_palmer1]

<p>Ahh now this is interesting.<br /> I am capturing in RAW and converting to HDR in photomatix. Perhaps this is where I am going wrong as I don't know what photomatix is converting the files to. Good point and one I hadn't considered as I thought that my capture in camera set to adobeRGB was where the profile was being set.<br /> So if photomatix is applying a sRGB profile to the TIFF and I am then viewing and editing the files in PS/LR which is an aRGB working colour space this could be the problem?<br /> I do have the setting in PS that prompts if the file is in a different colourspace to the working one and this isn't prompting me. but I need to investigate this further. Thank you.</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>I agree with Andrew that you may need to recalibrate your monitor at a lower luminance setting (my Eye One defaults to too bright as well).</p>

<p>Secondly, what printer and paper are you using? When you soft-proof in Photoshop are there may colors that are out of gamut (as there may be in a sunset?)</p>

[william_palmer1]

<p>It's an Epson all in one and the premium glossy. I realise these aren't the best set-up but it does look remarkably similar to the professional prints i'm getting. <br>

I started calibrating at luminance 120 and have dropped it to 100 to try and avoid this issue in printing. I can visually see differences on the same monitor though, between PS/LR and everything else. I can't set the brightnes any lower on my LCD it's as low as it will go. I will have a look at photomatix and do some experimenting. Thanks to all for your help!</p>

[brad_smith8]

<blockquote>

<p>I am capturing in RAW and converting to HDR in photomatix</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Photomatrix will work fine if you first open it in a RAW editor as an aRGB, save it with that profile in PS as a .psd or .tif, then process in Photomatrix.</p>

<p>With cameras, software and printers all capable of higher color bit depths (monitors unfortunately are lower), I use ProPhoto RGB for all my color. When you compare colorspaces you see that many 'real' colors get dithered to something very close and acceptable, but not that actual color.</p>

<p>Larger gamuts get closer, and I notice if I process a RAW file as ProPhotRGB, the prints seem to retain more vibrance in the occaisional odd colors that buildings are painted, or in the color of a bird's eye, etc. Using lower gamuts seems to require that all colors get increased vibrance just to make the 'real' vibrant ones stand out.</p>

<p>With an Epson printer it's easy to see what's beyond aRGB, because the Epson print preview will show garish versions of these higher gamut colors (only the preview can't handle these colors), but the prints look great with rich, deep, vibrant colors where they belong.</p>

<p>The colorspace setting in Photomatrix is of course for the output, but I don't know how it handles RAW input.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Setting your incamera color space to aRGB will only write the JPEG preview numbers in that space but not embed a profile for other apps like Photomatix to read. The color space is written in EXIF data (thanks Andrew for that tip reminder) and only renders a proper JPEG preview if the app knows to assign AdobeRGB automatically <strong>BUT</strong> the preview of Raw images is determined by the input profile and default settings of the Raw converter OR general Raw image viewer where the two previews between a viewer and converter may vary.</p>

<p>Try first opening your Raw file straight from your camera in both Lightroom and Photomatix and see if they produce the same preview with regards to saturation levels.</p>

[r_johnston]

<p>If you havent tried Firefox, try a copy, there is a color management add on you can add, to see what they look like with it. But, Id switch to sRBG for the Internet, to cover a majority of those looking at them.</p>