Full Color Management is a must…but my psd’s are now Untagged RGB

It’s a matter of preference Barbara. I have all of my images tagged adobeRGB by choice. If you want to change them all to sRGB you could take your archived photos and get them to someone with full Photoshop if you do not have it. As for as which is better you will get 101 different opinions. Good luck.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

For the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why my prints, especially

the black & white, on my Epson were printing with a terrible green cast. Today, I found out from Epson that ‘Full Color Management’ really is essential for the best printing results in Photoshop Elements: Photoshop Elements–>Color Settings–>Full Color Management- optimized for print. Epson also said, in the ‘Print Preview’ dialog box with the ‘Show More Options’ box checked, ‘Source Space’ should never be an ‘Untagged RGB’. In the past, I had read that a good majority on this forum use ‘No Color Management’ in Elements, so I did so also. Unfortunately, I now have a large number of psd’s that are ‘Untagged RGB’. I don’t see the choice to embed the original sRBG IEC61966-2.1 profile from my digital camera, as I was hoping to. I found the printing results were better with the original profile embedded, I had a few which were saved correctly prior to my switching.

1) Is there any way possible to embed the original sRGB IEC1966-2.1

profile into the now ‘Untagged RGB’ psd’s? I tried duplicating the psd and re-saving the psd file, but ‘Adobe RGB’ was the only option available.

2) Which profile is better, sRGB IEC1966-2.1 or Adobe RGB (1998)? My

thought would be the original one from my digicam, but I now have a huge dilemma because the edited psd’s are completed and Untagged, with only the option for imbedding a profile of Adobe RGB.

Hope this makes some sense. Please help me clear up this confusion,

thanks!

Barb

Hi James,

Are you saying that full Photoshop offers the ability to re-tag psd’s with any profile? I may just have to use that offer Beth posted yesterday for PS CS for $299, I figured one of these days I’d be upgrading.

I forgot to include this earlier. As soon as I put ‘Full Color Management’ back on in Elements and assigned the ‘Adobe RGB (1998)’ profile, that horrible green cast was gone! 🙂

James, thanks!

Barb

Yes and you can write an action to do them all at one time.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

Hi James,

Are you saying that full Photoshop offers the ability to re-tag psd’s

with any profile? I may just have to use that offer Beth posted yesterday for PS CS for $299, I figured one of these days I’d be upgrading.

I forgot to include this earlier. As soon as I put ‘Full Color

Management’ back on in Elements and assigned the ‘Adobe RGB (1998)’ profile, that horrible green cast was gone! 🙂

James, thanks!

Barb

An action, sounds great! Now I know why I need it…

Barbara,

AdobeRGB has a better gamut for printing. Most people use sRGB for the web. I have an Epson 2200 and get the best results with AdobeRGB and using the Epson paper profiles. Be sure to turn off management in the Epson printer dialog.

Rich

Rich,

I have the same printer and will follow your excellent advice; I’m still learning all about it. There are some new profiles for the 2200 at Epson, I’d post a link but the sessions always expire.

Thanks, much appreciated!

Barb

Barbara,

If you want to imbed sRGB in your untagged images, you don’t need to go to full Photoshop. Elements can do that in a round about way. Simply change your color management setting to "limited" instead of "full" and the save as dialog will offer sRGB instead of Adobe RGB. Full color management will offer Adobe RGB.

After you’ve retagged everything, you can switch back to full color management.

Bob

wrote in message

For the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why my prints, especially the

black & white, on my Epson were printing with a terrible green cast. Today, I found out from Epson that ‘Full Color Management’ really is essential for the best printing results in Photoshop Elements: Photoshop Elements–>Color Settings–>Full Color Management- optimized for print. Epson also said, in the ‘Print Preview’ dialog box with the ‘Show More Options’ box checked, ‘Source Space’ should never be an ‘Untagged RGB’. In the past, I had read that a good majority on this forum use ‘No Color Management’ in Elements, so I did so also. Unfortunately, I now have a large number of psd’s that are ‘Untagged RGB’. I don’t see the choice to embed the original sRBG IEC61966-2.1 profile from my digital camera, as I was hoping to. I found the printing results were better with the original profile embedded, I had a few which were saved correctly prior to my switching.

1) Is there any way possible to embed the original sRGB IEC1966-2.1

profile into the now ‘Untagged RGB’ psd’s? I tried duplicating the psd and re-saving the psd file, but ‘Adobe RGB’ was the only option available.

2) Which profile is better, sRGB IEC1966-2.1 or Adobe RGB (1998)? My

thought would be the original one from my digicam, but I now have a huge dilemma because the edited psd’s are completed and Untagged, with only the option for imbedding a profile of Adobe RGB.

Hope this makes some sense. Please help me clear up this confusion,

thanks!

Barb

Barb – I think it’s possible to do with Applescript – in the library/colorsync/scripts folder (that’s the main library not your user library) there are a whole set of example colorsync scripts including "embed a chosen profile". You chose the file, then have to chose the profile – if you know where the AdobeRGB profile is (I could locate the sRGB but not that one) then you can embed it… I’ve not tried it though…..
Susan S

Barb,
There is a lot of confusion about digicam’s and their imbedding of sRGB as a colorspace in the EXIF information. The EXIF info has only two states for colorspace, untagged or sRGB . The camera says sRGB, but the image itself is probably closer to AdobeRGB than sRGB .
I recommend using the IgnoreEXIF utility to block the EXIF color information. Then use the AdobeRGB colorspace unless you simply cannot stand the "richness" of the colors . You can always go back to limited color management and sRGB, but its not a good match for the printer’s gamut.

If you had the full Photoshop, and you’re going to print to an inkjet, I’d recommend the BruceRGB colorspace over the AdobeRGB space, since it was designed with photo inkjet output in mind.

<http://www.creativepro.com/printerfriendly/story/6541.html>

🙂

Brent

Regardless of the color management settings I use I only have the option to save the profile it was tagged with prior to opening in Elements. What am I missing here Bob?

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

Barbara,

If you want to imbed sRGB in your untagged images, you don’t need to

go to

full Photoshop. Elements can do that in a round about way. Simply

change

your color management setting to "limited" instead of "full" and the

save

as dialog will offer sRGB instead of Adobe RGB. Full color

management will

offer Adobe RGB.

After you’ve retagged everything, you can switch back to full color management.

Bob

wrote in message

For the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why my prints, especially

the

black & white, on my Epson were printing with a terrible green cast.

Today,

I found out from Epson that ‘Full Color Management’ really is

essential for

the best printing results in Photoshop Elements: Photoshop

Elements–>Color

Settings–>Full Color Management- optimized for print. Epson also

said, in

the ‘Print Preview’ dialog box with the ‘Show More Options’ box

checked,

‘Source Space’ should never be an ‘Untagged RGB’. In the past, I had

read

that a good majority on this forum use ‘No Color Management’ in

Elements, so

I did so also. Unfortunately, I now have a large number of psd’s that

are

‘Untagged RGB’. I don’t see the choice to embed the original sRBG IEC61966-2.1 profile from my digital camera, as I was hoping to. I

found the

printing results were better with the original profile embedded, I had

a few

which were saved correctly prior to my switching.

1) Is there any way possible to embed the original sRGB IEC1966-2.1

profile into the now ‘Untagged RGB’ psd’s? I tried duplicating the psd

and

re-saving the psd file, but ‘Adobe RGB’ was the only option available.

2) Which profile is better, sRGB IEC1966-2.1 or Adobe RGB (1998)? My

thought would be the original one from my digicam, but I now have a

huge

dilemma because the edited psd’s are completed and Untagged, with only

the

option for imbedding a profile of Adobe RGB.

Hope this makes some sense. Please help me clear up this confusion,

thanks!

Barb

Now I am confused Brent. My camera offers me the option of shooting in adobeRGB, does that mean my files actually contain no profile out of the camera. It’s somewhat a moot point as this is for jpeg only and I normally shoot raw and convert to adobeRGB when converting from raw to TIFF>
—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

Barb,
There is a lot of confusion about digicam’s and their imbedding of

sRGB as a colorspace in the EXIF information. The EXIF info has only two states for colorspace, untagged or sRGB .

James – once an image is tagged then you have to (I think..it’s been a while since I did it) do a save as with the color profile box unchecked. This deprofiles it. Then open it in full colour management and tick the Adobe RGB in the save as…. the downside of this is that it means you will be bringing an taggged image into AdobeRGB – and if your camera images are anything like mine it means that the reds suddenly become dayglo and the editing process has to recommence…

Thanks everybody!

Susan, I’ll look into the Applescripts, great suggestion!

Brent, thanks for clearing up the mystery of profiles for me. I’ll follow what you recommend, you are the resident color management expert here and I appreciate your help. Your link will come in handy if I do invest in the full PS. 🙂

Thankfully I now have my images, both jpeg’s shot in adobeRGB and raw files converted to adobeRGB where they look the same in all 4 of the color managed programs I use. They also match the monitors and printers used by my lab who prints all of my photos. It took forever to get my images to proof to what the labs printer will output and I wouldn’t change a thing at this point even if I found out everything I am doing is incorrect. LOL

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

James – once an image is tagged then you have to (I think..it’s been a

while since I did it) do a save as with the color profile box unchecked. This deprofiles it. Then open it in full colour management and tick the Adobe RGB in the save as…. the downside of this is that it means you will be bringing an taggged image into AdobeRGB – and if your camera images are anything like mine it means that the reds suddenly become dayglo and the editing process has to recommence…

James,

If the image was tagged, that will be the profile option in the save as dialog. If the image is untagged, the profile that will be offered is 1) the monitor profile if you are in no color management, 2) sRGB if you are in limited color management, or 3) Adobe RGB if you are in full color management.

If you are using PSD files, this works as advertised. I just tested it out and had no problems. I took an existing photo, saved it as a psd with the profile box unchecked. I could then open it and by changing the color management option, do a save as and get the profile mentioned above associated with the specific management option.

I’ve noticed that with JPG files, the original profile seems to stick around and that’s what you get offered — even if you uncheck the profile box when you save it. I’m guessing there’s something in the jpg file that retains that information besides the profile. I have some jpgs that I created in Adobe RGB that only offer that to me and others that were created in sRGB that only offer that. I haven’t tried it with tiff so I don’t know if they behave this way or not.

Bob

James, could you share what steps you had to take to get to where you are? If you’ve already posted that in another thread or even in this one, please let me know where and I’ll search. I get a blank stare on my face when reading about color management; it’s just not sinking in….

🙂

The printer and I both use Quick Gamma on our monitors and adjust it throughout the day to compensate for changes in lighting. I have embedded adobeRGB in all of my files. I have Elements set to full color management. I have Photoshop set to Custom with the conversion options set to-Engine:Adobe (ace), Intent:Relative Colormetric with both black point compensation and use dither checked. I save the TIFF file from Photoshop and send it to the printer and he handles it from there. He has many profiles depending on the printer, paper or inks I want used. He has a separate profile for images with a lot of bright yellows in it. The biggest problem we faced was getting my monitor and his to match. This was important since I sometimes have a file at his place that needs some adjustments and also so he can make sure that if a print matches what he is looking at it also matches what I have been working on.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

James, could you share what steps you had to take to get to where you

are?

If you’ve already posted that in another thread or even in this one,

please

let me know where and I’ll search. I get a blank stare on my face

when

reading about color management; it’s just not sinking in….
🙂

James, wow! You’ve really dug into this one. Thanks for sharing the learnings

I believe I can use most of what you listed….except that my printer is a ‘she’. Will that make a difference?

🙂

Chuck

James,
"Now I am confused Brent. My camera offers me the option of shooting in adobeRGB, does that mean my files actually contain no profile out of the camera. "

Not at all so, James . Some of the better cameras offer an image actually tagged with the AdobeRGB colorspace ( rather than simply "sRGB" in the EXIF info ) . The problem is with cameras EXIF info being inaccurate . When it IS inaccurate, it creates a problem with color casts, etc. When in doubt, it’s better to ignore the EXIF color info and pick the closest colorspace you can find to your image and edit from that point.

🙂

Brent

Thanks for the info Brent. I always read your post with great anticipation. I wander over to the color management forum from time to time but most of it goes right over my head.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

James,
"Now I am confused Brent. My camera offers me the option of shooting

in

adobeRGB, does that mean my files actually contain no profile out of

the

camera. "

Not at all so, James . Some of the better cameras offer an image

actually tagged with the AdobeRGB colorspace ( rather than simply "sRGB" in the EXIF info ) . The problem is with cameras EXIF info being inaccurate . When it IS inaccurate, it creates a problem with color casts, etc. When in doubt, it’s better to ignore the EXIF color info and pick the closest colorspace you can find to your image and edit from that point.

🙂

Brent

Chuck I have done a lot of digging but so have many broke miners around here. It’s working now and that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

James, wow! You’ve really dug into this one. Thanks for sharing the learnings

I believe I can use most of what you listed….except that my printer

is a

‘she’. Will that make a difference?

🙂

Chuck

Bob, thanks! Somehow I missed your earlier post, I’ll give your suggestions a try too. I’m glad I brought this up today and found such helpful replies from you all!

Barb

Thanks Bob, I missed this one yesterday.

—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview
http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/
wrote in message

James,

If the image was tagged, that will be the profile option in the save

as

dialog. If the image is untagged, the profile that will be offered

is 1)

the monitor profile if you are in no color management, 2) sRGB if you

are in

limited color management, or 3) Adobe RGB if you are in full color management.

If you are using PSD files, this works as advertised. I just tested

it out

and had no problems. I took an existing photo, saved it as a psd with

the

profile box unchecked. I could then open it and by changing the color management option, do a save as and get the profile mentioned above associated with the specific management option.

I’ve noticed that with JPG files, the original profile seems to stick

around

and that’s what you get offered — even if you uncheck the profile box

when

you save it. I’m guessing there’s something in the jpg file that

retains

that information besides the profile. I have some jpgs that I created

in

Adobe RGB that only offer that to me and others that were created in

sRGB

that only offer that. I haven’t tried it with tiff so I don’t know if

they

behave this way or not.

Bob