philfx

<p>Yes, talk to the press operator regarding profiles.<br /> There are different print methods. Offset press printing jobs are "normally" done in CMYK color space, and if the printer is careful and manages his/her color accurately, they will likely have a profile for you to use. Many large press operations I see use a standard CMYK SWOP (coated/uncoated) v2 standard. Which works OK for most jobs.But I rather check and ask for a profile when available.<br /> If your colors have specific saturation in certain blue - purples, and so on..generally those high saturations are limited in CMYK from the inks and likely the combo of the papers used.<br /> As far as file formats, many prefer a PDF X1a file that follows their specifications, specially magazines. Many take JPEG, and TIF. <br /> Nevertheless... Always talk to the press you deal with. Look over their specification guidelines.<br /> And since this post is for monitors and although I trust mine, when printing, I regularly run a contract proof print and see the print sample before sending the job. You can also send this to the press for them to use as a guide. The more you cover on your side the less chance of error, and when it does happen, you have the contract proof to work from. This has been my experience</p>

<p>Good point EJ,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Your monitor might be great, but the monitor the viewer has -- not so much? We all see with different color perception.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thats what I use the Shimian and another Samsung TV/Monitor for, making sure the sRGB's look write on more than just one screen. <br>

And Adrew is totally on point about getting LED's vs any other lighting tech.<br>

Makes me wonder....I'm not sure if this would be true, but since LED's are diode based with little heat, I want to think that your calibration should last a very long time, or even once set, that maybe all you need. Anyone know more about how the backlight to the panel and how color shift occurs for LED's ?</p>

 

<p>Hahah Eric...Indeed, The first I think was the Matrox G something Dual vga card that I used.<br>

Thats an important point you mention. To help in that, I have been incorporating a Logitech gaming mouse G500 (It even has weights you can add to balance. Part gimick, part nice to have the heft). This mouse like some others has a 300dpi to 1500 dpi button with increments. What you say is surely a great point. I try and use this mouse to aid in this. When I do spot editing, I lower it to the 3-400 dpi setting etc..</p>

<p>Eric, A single 30 over 24" is a bit more comfort, but not like being able to setup your desktop with all the PS tools on one screen with Navigation view, and history, ALL your tools go on the second screen opening up the space for much more viewing of your image. It is also indispensable when managing or multitasking. I often have to wait for files to either Write or Open or wake up a server and these are the times I que up what I need on the second screen, or I check on the jobs coming in. Remote Desktop into email computer, or message with another worker to get up to speed on a job...etc etc.<br>

But I also love it(would love it more with a few improvements) for having the Library view on one side of LightRoom and having the Loupe view on the main screen. Once/if they make this more of a useful feature by letting the 2 work independently so its not always changed when going into Dev mode, it would be even more useful. CaptureOne allows you to customize your desktop and helps with tether shooting, and all the other tools are dock-able. <br>

Also purchasing a couple deskmount arms takes the screens off the table and makes them easy to position how ever you like, including one Horizontal view, and the second vertical (software adjusts the screen orientation, came free with an NEC I had).<br>

I have heard nothing but good things about the new Dell's, but not read much about them head to head with other design/color/image specific monitors.</p>

<p>I think you should try and get the largest you can afford 2 of. Having 2x30" is a dream for any image editing or design work. THere is no way I could go back. Having 2 x27 for me would be much better than 1x30". </p>

<p>Other options in case you want to take a look....<br>

I like IDImager a lot/ As well as it "revision" PhotoSupreme.<br>

If I wasn't so used to ACDSee I would likely use PhotoSupreme.<br>

I also have MS ExpressionMedia which was bought out by PhaseOne. They unfortunately have not made much improvements. I think it too has potential. But now that CaptureOne is initself a DAM with a Raw developer, I don't see them making any investment in that direction. I as well as many users of CaptureOne don't find the interface user friendly. Its like learning to ride a bike all over again, just because you switched a bike brand. But I like the Raw results on certain subject more than LR, so I use this tool as well. But I try to not get involved in it as much as possible. It doesn't even read the directory in a normal fashion as it stores a "Session" you have to initialize to get started. Sorry got into that, but, its hard not to :-)<br>

PhotoMechanic I have used in the past. Not sure where they are these days. But I do remember it being pretty fast, like ACDSee.<br>

ACDSee has 2 versions that I would consider. There is the Manager and there is the Pro.<br />Pro can process RAW files, and does a pretty good job with some limitations, but the pro also Manages and does a great job with many great Edit/Export options. The Manager has these features as well. They both do all sorts of Metadata edits and batch processes. Best of all it can be a Database driven app as well as behave as a simple browser. The Manager is a great app for the price, and the Pro is overpriced unless you get a great deal/coupon/email sale.<br>

I use LR5, but I still have to launch ACDSee to see what are in my folders since I use Photoshop and create other file formats that require LR to re-synchronize to include in its database. And PDF's that LR doesn't include. For production work I have to use it with ACDSee. (In raw processing, since LR offers such options with ease, I have to use it as well along CaptureOne).<br>

I think Google too has a nice free "solution"(depends on a few things) like Microsoft called Picasa. Maybe worth a look. Good luck and let us know how you like the MS Live Essentials</p>

 

<p>ahh, it happens... You'll remeber to check there first next time :-)</p>

<p>As AR asks...<br>

If you view in Develop mode it will tap into the actual file instead of the preview... when you zoom in you can compare the difference between LR and PS. <br /><br />Also in PS, Control+Y will give you a prof preview, just be sure that isn't somehow enabled.</p>

<p>In this case the title of the forum applies rather accurately! :-)<br>

Btw, once the image is accurate/consistent in the DDroom from print to screen, will the file/image or print serve another purpose?<br />Maybe something to consider?<br>

Also, how do you go about printing it(application, hardware etc)?</p>

 

<p>Unless you're using a viewing booth and complete controlled light expect some variations.<br>

If you sell a print expect people to have varying sources of light. You might want to consider and recommend a light source for others to use with your prints, or maybe aim for something in the common areas? <br>

I don't know what folks do, but I plan to print some posters for the living room/Kitchen/dining area . I have outdoor light from windows(glass is LowE uv treated-slight green), I have 3200K Halogens, and I have 5500K LED light sources for task vs "mood" light in the livingroom/kitchen. Can you imagine the nightmare I would face if I try and make a "perfect" match? I like the yucky yellow 2700-3200K lights at night for a warm moody feel. But much prefer the 5000-6000K for everything else. They both dim low, and the warm color looks great dimmed down and easy on the eyes for watching movies.<br>

What I will likely do is see what I like best on my Wide gamut LED monitor, then test that on a normal accurate monitor, then see a print in the viewing booth which I think is 5200-5500K. Make sure the print looks good there, and hope to live with the results.<br>

If there are suggestions that would help improve such a situation, please advise! :-) </p>

<p>Lets say you plugged in the external drive via USB or Firewire, or Esata..</p>

<p>you should have a new drive icon letter show up in the folders/Finder window. From here you should be able to copy and move.</p>

<p>The important thing with the entire process in using the Mac is to not think.<br />Let the Mac do the thinking for you, you should just do as it says. <br />Not much more to it. Rather straight forward, no brainer way of computing. Enjoy!<br>

Once you "let go", its a smoother process.</p>

<p>Not sure what you are talking about.<br>

Are you talking about Raw, a Tif a jpeg?<br>

Are you talking about developing it in each app?<br>

Are looking at the same image in one of the file types and you see it look different in one vs the other without any adjustments? <br>

Most common issue is that you made adjustments on any filetype in LR and when opening that file independently, those adjustments are not visible.</p>

<p><br /><br /></p>

 

<p>I don't see anything particular. nothing interesting, or a "look" to explain.</p>

<p>Derek, the 50mm/1.4 from Sigma is faster and very sharp. They range around $400. The Canon version I have used and is slow/er to focus. There is no substitute for forcing yourself a prime lens and then forcing your position to get the right shot. In my experience I always get better shots vs. having a zoom that keeps me at distance.<br>

Besides great execution, her image have also got a winning formula...<br />Children under glowing lights often in snow and winter cloths and with animals.<br>

She may have started to pick up a digicam in 2012, but I think she's been painting for some time.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yup, saw these pix as well. Nice work. As others mention, this is beyond the camera. She is an artist. It looks to me like the initial images are well taken photos, while the final products are well prepared "made" images.<br>

In her Flickr page, you see she uses mostly a 50mm sometimes at 1.2F and a 135mm on a 5D2. Often shot in low light conditions or with low light with surrounding light. Makes you want to leave the house with just one lens to take a long walk. Well the foggy and snowy weather play a BIG role in some of her images.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>unless</em> again, they want to send an RGB document to some shop that isn't up to speed on color management and who will do some CMYK conversion.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ok then. Back to business as usual :-)</p>

<p>Thanks for this Andrew.<br>

I always was careful never to save my "source" file as CMYK, as I might print on much wider gamut printer than CMYK. But now you saying you can convert back is really intereting news.<br>

I'm surprised and revealed in some way to know you can go from CYMK back to RGB and have all the colors being as they were. This is not my experience in practice, as I had tried before and had none of the information back when taking a CYMK back to RGB., but if Andrew's method is suchthen I will certainly give it a try.<br>

So if I understand the way to do this...<br>

Take a RGB file that one has simply converted to CYMK. Then convert to sRGB, then you can go to RGB colors again. right? This will not crunch the colors?</p>

<p>Once you go CMYK, file is limited to that color gamut. The RGB info is dumped(CMYK is a smaller gamut).<br /> For whats its worth, and likely hit or miss depending on the press you use....<br /> From my experience, and I have printed files in over 100 magazines, SWOP and Fogra/EU (while there are overlaps with media companies, I found that Coated Swop v2 was rather good(consistent) for the most part. I had a few issues, but relatively speaking these large magazine presses did their cleanings and calibrations to meet the SWOP pretty well. I had 90+% satisfaction rate. After all advertisers expect their pages to come out looking decent when they spend $5K-40K per page. Plubishers depend on printers to deliver such. Again..from my experience. Luck may have some value here :-)</p>

<p>And as far as the conversion...It's not just converting. Some colors need optimization.</p>

<p>Yes, the log it has as metadata or text, but convert to a Action or Automate....Perhaps in the future.<br>

With 64bit and advancements in speed, maybe there is a way to record and translate pixel level adjustments to x/y coordinates from a defined/fixed parameter. Reading from the OS resolution and mouse movement to the program document it effects and knowing the selected tool....maybe...All for the sake of a few images to automate :-)</p>

<p>Can you take the History log and convert it into an Action?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Yeah, I know... I My only wish is that before exporting to PS, I'd be done with any further changes in LR, but sometimes that's not always the case.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I know what you mean. You know the tools in PS and how the work with the image, and want to get the desired look and LR doesn't remake the look in the way you want and need to go back and forth. Many of my images even after I process and then go to PS, I look over it and see it can use some things LR does well.<br /> Sometimes we know what we want to do with an image before we work with it, and often the direction changes from looking and revealing the photo as we work with it. Sometimes a minor tweak, or a more drastic one. The bottom line is the tools you are familiar with in PS get you the results, and other tools in LR get you different results. Sometimes you just need both.</p>

<p>Perhaps next versions of Photoshop can have a log file of all the different pixel changes you did in a instruction log. Maybe one would be the pixel level changes, another would be the layer adjustments. Maybe PS already has such a log? But it would be great to take that and reapply to other images in some kind of Action. (I know, its a lot of heavy lifting just doing the commands, let alone logging them, but..Its a thought.</p>

<p>One thing I might recommend is giving up use of PSD files. I know it maybe not as obvious from telling the flat TIF's vs the layered TIF's at a glance, but it makes it easier/faster for me, as when I launch the image from LR to Edit(vs Export) in PS, my default Preferences are to open in Photoshop as a TIF (as I often simply need a 1 layer edit such as spot removal)....So when you save back in PSD, the new file is not in LR....you have to Sync the folder for the file to show up. There is a long and painful thread about this in the forum :-) <br>

It sounds like you know most basics of the formats and how they work, so I wont bother with things already mentioned, and I haven't used Virtual copies, but I don't think it makes a full TIF duplicate. (I'm certain Andrew would know and chime in).</p>

<p>Both pretty nice. I think I would go with Phil's version, and add color tone as need be. Andrew, your sample shows a lot of color saturation or tone. Perhaps that's part of the plugin options/settings default?</p>

<p>I have a workstation with the setup you describe with Win7-64bit, but with Gtx 460 card. The profiles with Spyder3 work fine. I disabled my notifications. Maybe a Windows update? Check the vid card driver version. Also check if all drivers are loading on Startup. Check if Spyder is loading on Startup. It may even be a Virus protection sw running that perhaps changed your system? Let us know.</p>

<p>With Windows Full OS tablets and fast processors, Why bother with the Ipad version? The tablets are around $300-450, and with the second seat license of LR add the savings for a tablet.</p>