Running Photoshop CS3 intel mac leopard. I made a .psd file with spot PMS 307 chosen from the PMS picker, not as a separate channel. I made another file at home on a imac running 10.4.11 CS2 with PMS 307 chosen the same way. Both are RGB files, both have color management off. The colors did not match. Anyone know why? Thanks
Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.
And which Pantone color book did you select from? They all have different definitions, even for the same PMS number.
Color management does matter, and the color mode of your document matters — Photoshop may have to convert the Pantone values to your document mode and color space.
You need to find a more capable printer. Without color management, you never know what you’re going to get printed, and can’t even be sure what other users might see for the same document.
"RGB settings follow the monitor" — that’s your mistake. Never, ever do that.
By printer I mean the professional printer who prints large jobs on press. Newspapers printing from PDFs also prefer to manage the color themselves.
None of this answers why the color of a pantone solid color pick varies from computer to computer. It should not.
I’ve been working in this business for 40 years, in Photoshop since 1993 and I am getting authoritative unexplained statements from two people better geared to some kid in school.
The classic real-world example is the old-school print shop’s clueless "color expert" who ignores our embedded profile, because he says, he has turned "color management off" and "doesn’t use profiles."
He tells us our file is bad because his print is bad, and he will try to correct our bad color and print another round of proofs.
Does this sound familiar?
What the cave man actually did was strip our embedded file of its profile, and/or he Applied-Assumed-Assigned his own working space to our file then he takes a sledgehammer and beats our color up into his closed workflow (and he is probably working on an uncalibrated monitor and unprofiled printer to boot).
I was explaining why color management was turned off. I am not complaining about a print job. Professional printers print the files I send them accurately.
I’m talking about an RGB job for the web and instead of getting an answer to my question I am getting a series of political diatribes that have nothing to do with anything I am asking.
I’ve been working in this business for 40 years, in Photoshop since 1993 and I am getting authoritative unexplained statements from two people better geared to some kid in school.
Could that be because you are behaving like a rather truculent "Kid in School" and showing that despite your claim of "40 years in the business" you don’t have a clue about how Color Management works?
You might want to look at Photoshop’s Splash screen sometime; and notice exactly who just spent his valuable time trying to help you.
None of this answers why the color of a pantone solid color pick varies from computer to computer. It should not. Obviously none of you know the answer.
Really?
If you had a clue about what Color management does, you would understand why your Color Mismanagement is affecting the results.
Neither do I think that you understand the difference between one can of a Pantone Spot Color Ink and colors created from four separate cans of Process Color Inks.
However, you now tell us that you are not actually printing this job at all but are outputting for the Web. Without converting to the sRGB color space?
But after another 40 years, you might possibly get the picture?!
Are both of your computers using "Monitor RGB" as your RGB working space? That’s what it sort of sounded like in one of your earlier posts.
The reason that your color setting do make a difference is that when you choose your Pantone color, 307 in your case, the Pantone L*a*b spec has to be translated back to either CMYK or in your case, RGB. That conversion from L*a*b to your working space is governed by the specific color settings you have, and if you’re using your monitor profile as your RGB color space, that alone would cause you to have different results on different computers.
Your RGB files for the web need to be in sRGB color. That’s the defacto web standard. It also never hurts to embed your working space profile in your images for anyone who might be using a color managed browser – y’know, all those folks using Firefox and Safari.
While there might be times when you deliver untagged CMYK for commercial offset, that doesn’t mean you need to turn off color management while you’re working on your images. There’s absolutely no advantage to doing that. And that you’re doing RGB work for the web only underscores that.
So, if you have both computers set to sRGB as your working RGB, and choose the same Pantone color from the same library on both machine, you will actually get identical results. I guarantee it.
I am not yet outputting anything. This is not an output question.
I’m just at this point working on a computer. If it’s a web job, when ready, I save for the web powered by ImageReady as either a gif or a jpg. I assume that corrects the color. Perhaps I am wrong.
I fail to see why you, Ann, keep harping on Pantone vs CMYK colors. CMYK printing is a mix of four colors, each runs on a separate plate and the color shows a dot pattern which is a mix of the colors. The pantone color runs on one plate, on a press with five or more colors or as the color of a one or two color job. If I was making a pshop job with a spot color for commercial printing I would put that spot color on a separate channel.
All of a sudden the color does not match on two different computers. It always did in the past using the method I described in my original question.
Stephanie – no, this is not weirdness or a bug. It just sounds like you failed to understand why you need color management, how color management affects the conversion of color values in your documents, and how color management affects the appearance of color on your displays.
If you have an RGB document, then your choice of working space will affect the values of colors converted into that document. If you set your RGB working space to match your display, then your color values (and results) will differ on every single computer. Choosing a standard working space (sRGB, AdobeRGB, etc.) helps.
Again, this sounds like it is the source of the problem you described with Pantone colors. Pantone solid colors specify an appearance in LAB (pretty darn unambiguous) – that appearance has to be converted into the numbers needed by your document’s colorspace. If 2 documents have different colorspaces, they will get different values needed to match the appearance in those different colorspaces. If those documents don’t keep the color profile with the document – then all you have are random numbers that aren’t associated with any particular appearance. The color profile is what associates the numbers with the color appearance.
Your printer does not want color management, because without it he won’t have to accept responsibility for color mistakes. (as already pointed out) Less scrupulous printers will even charge you extra for "fixing" your color problems, because without color management they have no idea what your document should look like. With color management, the printer has to accept responsibility to match what you give them — because there is no ambiguity about how it should look. Without color management, you’re shooting in the dark. With color management, everyone should agree on the appearance.
As I have explained over and over I am not accusing the various printers I use of making color mistakes. They don’t. The jobs come out fine. Why are you harping on this?
The jobs are looking ok by good luck, not good management… Sorry to butt in, but all these knowledgeable and patient people are trying to say that you got lucky. Now the reality of colour management is making itself known to you.
There is no such thing as ‘turning off colour management’ it is always there, it is like saying ‘I didn’t crash the car, I was not even holding the steering wheel’. Even though you were sitting in the driver’s seat.
It just so happens that the car tends to run pretty straight on its own, but then a corner appears, that is where you are!
When you spec a 50% dot in a print file you dont necessarily get a 50% dot on paper, rarely in fact. So your printers are letting the dots fall as they will by outputting your jobs ‘uncalibrated’ one might say and they might be pretty good at doing that but quality printers will not accept that scenario. We *used* to, about ten years ago when colour management did not work very well in a real world environment, now the printing is much better and all colour managed in current technology shops.
Because it is of VITALl importance that you take the trouble to learn basic principles if you are to have any hope of success with digital imaging and Photoshop.
It’s no good flying into a childish rage.
Peter and Chris have taken endless trouble to help you understand.
If you are too lazy to read, or lack the intelligence to comprehend, what they wrote; then there is no point in trying to help you.
It is not your Printers who have "made mistakes" they must have worked overtime to clean-up the mess that you sent them and the extra cost was almost certainly included in your bill !
Design for commercial printing, your desktop inkjet, or for the Web is affected by color management or the lack thereof.
One of our regular contributors, Gary "G" Ballard has put together a number of Web pages on different aspects of color management. It is recommended reading.
After re-reading this entire thread, one thing that was never asked is exactly how the two versions were different. I’m still trying to get a handle on exactly how you went about creating these files. Is it possible to post a very low res version with layers or both versions? It might make more sense in terms of troubleshooting to actually see the files.
I am trying to also understand why you are building your file for offset press as an RGB file, and when and where it’s being converted to CMYK.
Posting screenshots of your actual Color Settings would help in diagnostics as well.
To others in this thread. It’s of no help at all to call people clueless or other things. There’s far too much of that in the Adobe Forums and only succeeds in making the name caller feel better about themselves and alienating the original poster. Let’s try and remember when "we" didn’t know all the ins ands outs and try explaining things rather than name calling. This is exactly why this place has such a negative reputation in so many places. Let’s try and be more constructive and less critical.
As far as printers are concerned, most of them are not color managed anyway. And it really doesn’t matter unless you’re asking them to convert your RGB files for their presses. The printer’s job is really to output your CMYK numbers as they get them, and they really don’t need to be color managed to do that. Some of the best printers I’ve ever used have been fully non color managed. I just never ask them to do something that might need that capability. And most of the time you pretty much HAVE to use whatever printer the client dictates and these days, it’s usually price driven.
Of course there are printers who are savvy about profiles and such, and when you can find them they can make your life easier, but it does not guarantee they can lay ink down better than the next guy.
"The printer’s job is really to output your CMYK numbers as they get them, and they really don’t need to be color managed to do that. Some of the best printers I’ve ever used have been fully non color managed. I just never ask them to do something that might need that capability"
As a commercial printer, that describes the worst kind of nightmare I can receive. And It happens all the time. Files are converted to CMYK values before I get them that have nothing to do with the way my presses/ink/paper print.
Yet "designers" and everyone else in the chain, all experts about everything, convert RGB files into CMYK numbers ignoring the requirements of that conversion process for the only place where it matters – where ink actually hits paper.
Why is it that "designers" claim that printers don’t want color managed files and don’t supply press profiles while printers can’t get anyone in the job creation process to use the profiles that they BEG them to take before converting to CMYK under every stupid willy-nilly conversion process under the sun?
It is not your Printers who have "made mistakes" they must have worked overtime to clean-up the mess that you sent them and the extra cost was almost certainly included in your bill !
You just made all of this up.
For the rest of you, I’m outputting for print through InDesign. And before you all say this is the first time I’ve heard this my question was never an output question. You have all made it one.
I am trying to also understand why you are building your file for offset press as an RGB file, and when and where it’s being converted to CMYK.
I am not. This was an RGB question that has been blow all out of proportion and I thank you for pointing that out. The CMYK only comes in because of the pantone picker, used to match a logo color.
When I use the pantone (solid coated) picker the CMYK value numbers never match the Pantone CMYK breakdown. If I sample the color from the pshop doc and open the Pantone picker I never get the same pantone color. Is this because of the LAB conversion? For the sake of argument I turned RGB, CMYK and gray to convert to working and made a CMYK file.
Please understand that the folks here are trying to understand what you are seeing and what you are trying to do. In your posts #3 and #5, you clearly refer to commercial printing and unmanaged color. And CMYK and Pantone are not Web color associations. And we can’t be sure you don’t have your monitors properly calibrated (the most important first step to color management). And you seem to be assigning your (unique) monitor profiles to your work. I can’t say for sure that I follow your workflow.
So, let me ask a few questions: 1. Are your monitors hardware calibrated to 6500°K with a 2.2 gamma? 2. How are the images in question going to be used? Commercial offset, desktop printer, Website, etc.? 3. What color space are you assigning or embedding or… with your images? Is it sRGB? 4. Which Pantone color are you using (and is it for coated, uncoated, or matte paper)? And if you are going for Web, why are you working with Pantone colors instead of RGB or hexadecimal? 5. Have you read G Ballard’s excellent color management basics? Do you have any questions? 6. Can you post a link to a screen shot of your color setup if you are preparing art for print? 7. Can you post a link to a screenshot of the mismatched images and describe how you arrived at the colors?
You can go to the free <http://.www.pixentral.com> to upload the images in question, and copy the link (per pixentral’s instructions) back here.
Please understand that the folks here are trying to understand what you are seeing and what you are trying to do. In your posts #3, #5 and #26, you clearly refer to commercial printing and unmanaged color. And CMYK and Pantone are not Web color associations. So I’m confused as to what it is exactly that you want to do with the images, in other words, how they are going to be used.
And we can’t be sure you don’t have your monitors properly calibrated (the most important first step to color management). And you seem to be assigning your (unique) monitor profiles to your work. I can’t say for sure that I follow your workflow.
So, let me ask a few questions: 1. Are your monitors hardware calibrated to 6500°K with a 2.2 gamma? 2. How are the images in question going to be used? Commercial offset, desktop printer, Website, etc.? 3. What color space are you assigning or embedding or… with your images? Is it sRGB? 4. Which Pantone color are you using (and is it for coated, uncoated, or matte paper)? And if you are going for Web, why are you working with Pantone colors instead of RGB or hexadecimal? 5. Have you read G Ballard’s excellent color management basics? Do you have any questions? 6. Can you post a link to a screen shot of your color setup if you are preparing art for print? 7. Can you post a link to a screenshot of the mismatched images and describe how you arrived at the colors?
You can go to the free <http://.www.pixentral.com> to upload the images in question, and copy the link (per pixentral’s instructions) back here.
I am trying to also understand why you are building your file for offset press as an RGB file, and when and where it’s being converted to CMYK.
Below is a diagram of the color gamuts of SWOP (CMYK) and ProPhotoRGB. The RGB colorspace is the ghosted wireframe, SWOP is filled out in color. In which colorspace would you want your working files to reside?
I second Neil’s suggestion to read gballard’s site for a quick lesson in color management. It will literally blow your mind.
Running Photoshop CS3 intel mac leopard. I made a .psd file with spot PMS 307 chosen from the PMS picker, not as a separate channel. I made another file at home on a imac running 10.4.11 CS2 with PMS 307 chosen the same way. Both are RGB files, both have color management off. The colors did not match. Anyone know why? Thanks
Here is the question. One of you managed to answer it at #10. I find most of the responses incredibly rude, especially Ann Shelbourne. I have moved on. Stephanie
I save for the web powered by ImageReady as either a gif or a jpg. I assume that corrects the color. Perhaps I am wrong.
What do you mean by correcting color when saving a file? In what manner is it being corrected? How was it previously wrong?
There is often more harm done to color when saving to a web graphic file format than any sort of color correction you perceive. Even if you follow the same process of creating the image in CS2 and CS3, settings in the save for web dialog can vary the output from these two installations – – especially when ImageReady is not in CS3. You are clearly not following the same steps on both systems.
If you think this matter was answered with post #10 then you now apparently realize that this is a color management issue after all.
If all one can do is ask a question and then be critical of everyone’s voluntary aid, then maybe it is best that one moves on.
I want an apology from Ann and the rest. The answer was #10. If they could read they’d know that.
I used Pantone spot 287 from the Pantone Solid Coated picker. I made a file with sRGB and color off and filled it with 287. I did the same thing for the next file but turned all color on to working. I made a third file with color management on to working and a different monitor file. This first two were the same, the next was different.
Now that you all know that maybe you could answer the question politely the first time. Stephanie
I made a file with sRGB and color off and filled it with 287. I did
the same thing for the next file but turned all color on to working. I made a third file with color management on to working and a different monitor file…Now that you all know…
When I fill an sRGB document with Pantone 307 I get R 0 G 115 B 179. In Adobe RGB I get 0,115,175. Is this what you’re seeing? Loading my monitor profile as working space gives me the same numbers as sRGB because my monitor is so close to sRGB. Could you explain exactly what the difference is that you are seeing? You can use pixentral.com to post images and screen shots with a link them here.
Please understand that you have not answered any of the questions I took the time to consider and post in #27. Or other critical questions raised by a number of the other folks here. Please come back with some answers we can decipher exactly what you are doing, or we are all just wasting our time.
Please understand that you have not answered any of the questions I took the time to consider and post in #27. Or other critical questions raised by a number of the other folks here. Please come back with some answers so we can decipher exactly what you are doing, or we are all just wasting our time.
The fact the freaking forum moderator was part of this very thread only exemplifies the hospitality here. Unbelievable, only that it happens over and over on a daily basis. Tom is right on the money.
He certainly is. I sincerely hope some Adobe overlord is reading this as they already know there is a problem on this site and encourages the comedians to seek other venues.
Peter you were just as responsible by actually talking sense to her. She just didn’t want to hear any of it. Everyone could be falling all over themselves to be nice but if the OP doesn’t want to listen or take time to learn how to do it correctly then whats the point to carry on with them?
Why is it that the same helpful replies to another person will educate them? Its because they want to learn. Things start going downhill when the OP doesn’t want to learn and argues about correct procedure.
Nobody ran her out of town, she ran herself out because she didn’t want to hear the truth.
That’s complete bullshit and you all know it. Regardless of how receptive some is or isn’t is no excuse for name calling and general rudeness. Maybe you can’t see it because it’s become the order of the day around here and you’re numb to it, but it’s just plain rude and drives people away. You’re trying blame your actions on her not being able to understand your explanations, as if that could ever be an excuse. It’s like we’re on a sixth grade playground.
This forum helps very many people. For people like myself who need occasional help from real experts it is a god send. The fact that these people are willing to offer their advice freely is also remarkable to me, however it may be worth pointing out that sometimes these questions are answered in a fashion that appears condiscending and strays off point. In this instance the OP got bent out of shape because of this. Eventually very little was about the original question. For the people who regularly respond to peoples questions it might be worth reflecting upon how you phrase your responses. For people like me, be grateful for any advice you get and satisfy yourself that most of them are weirdy beardy’s. PS A congratulation to pfigen for sanity through the thread minus #59 where he also lost his rag. Maybe you can see a pattern Ann
I asked a question on this forum because I have used other product forums and they have been excellent for giving an answer to the question. I was completely astonished that these people jumped down my throat without answering the question, which I got at number 10. Maybe this forum could do that and have a comedian section somewhere else.
Someone comes in here and asks a question. Others then give their time and experience to help the OP.
Then, in some cases (and the behaviour of Stephanie is a text-book example), instead of thanking people for their input, you get someone who flies into a temper because they didn’t get the answer that they wanted to hear!
Many experienced people tried to help her but she is either too stubborn, or too stupid, to understand that her "No Color Management" set-up, tied to uncalibrated and unprofiled monitors on two disparate Systems, can NEVER give her the matching results for which she is looking.
Instead of trying to learn from what she was being told, she flew into a petulant rage and went on blindly repeating her original question (to which she had already received copious and detailed replies!) but refused to answer the basic questions asked by the Forum Host about her set-up and the proposed destination of her files.
Originally, because of the use of PMS colors, we were led to believe that this was for Print output; then she started talking about the Web (www we assume?); then we hear that she is using InDesign (where she could have specified color swatches in the first place!
She hasn’t a clue what she is doing and refuses to admit it; and she asks for help and refuses to accept what she is told.
There is absolutely no point in trying to reason with, or teach, the Stubbornly Stupid.
Instead of trying to learn from what she was being told, she flew into a petulant rage and went on blindly repeating her original question (to which she had already received copious and detailed replies!) but refused to
….and when the shoe is on the other foot the guidelines mysteriously change. Interesting!
If you are snidely referring to a previous thread Macman, I would remind you that I did not request help with iPhoto: I merely gave my opinion of its "value" (none!) to someone who already owns CS4 while answering his question regarding trying to use iPhoto in connection with CS4.
The advice that I gave (to access the iPhoto files via Bridge CS4 and open them in Photoshop from Bridge) IS correct and was re-iterated by one of the Adobe engineers in another thread.
But that matter has nothing to do with this thread and discussions about the use and merits (or otherwise!) of Apple’s software belong in Apple Discussions and NOT in the Adobe Photoshop Forum.
Some people are more interested in arguing than learning. One things that never fails to be proven again and again is that the more virulent the rant, the greater the likelihood of PEBCAK.
If you all agree, why don’t we all take a short break from this discussion.
If Stephanie wants to provide additional background information about the software problem she’s having, let’s just give her some room to do so, and we can then just respond appropriately to that.
Ann You cannot open images from iPhoto in Bridge as Bridge is blind to the iPhoto Library (has been like that for some versions already). If you want to do that you first have to either export the images out of iPhoto or – at least it is possible in Bridge CS4 and iPhoto ’09 – drag en entire iPhoto-event, or single images, into a folder in Bridge and have them copied out that way. Which is not necessary to begin with as you can set default in iPhoto to always edit in Photoshop.
Your scron of iPhoto is uncalled for.
Wanted to tell you that already in the previous thread, but never managed to to do that as thread got closed before I had an opportunity to.
I also feel that inter-action questions between Photoshop and iPhoto are perfectly IN place in this forum. As are other inter-application questions where Photoshop is one of the participants in the interaction between the applications.
Thank you, no. I already got the answer at #10. The reason I keep saying that was this was the first time anybody mentioned an actual setting, sRGB. I got information on what not to use, RGB, but not what to use. Thanks again for the brilliant conversation.
the first time anybody mentioned an actual setting, sRGB. I got information
on what not to use, RGB
sRGB is a Profile (or color space) used on the Internet (and in unmanaged applications)
"RGB" like "CMYK" has many variations like ProPhotoRGB, AdobeRGB, ColormatchRGB, US Web Coated (SWOP) v2, US Sheetfed Coated v2, Euroscale Coated v2
if crossing over from a CMYK world to publish RGB on the Internet, Convert to sRGB (profile) first, and then move forward
I say this so this thread doesn’t confuse anyone trying to grasp this basic point
One question that was not asked nor answered is if both computers in questions were running the same version of Photoshop. To complicate this matter, different versions of Ps used different Pantone Libraries to reference the Lab values. Pantone updates their libraries periodically and that can be another factor in the discrepancy.
CS2 (home) and CS3. The colors were fine when I changed the monitor. Pantone is annoying that way. The CMYK equivalents are always drabber than the Pantone solid colors.
"The CMYK equivalents are always drabber than the Pantone solid colors"
If the Pantone color is within the gamut of the CMYK process in question, then there should be little difference. Any Pantone color that is outside of the CMYK offset process will, by definition, have to be limited to the nearest equivalent mix of CMYK. How "drab" that appears is really dependent on just how far out of gamut the Pantone color was.
Your Pantone 307 example, would be particularly difficult in CMYK. Blues always are a problem, although you can sometimes tweak the CMYK equivalents to produce a color that feels closer to what you were after in the first place.
The CMYK equivalents are always drabber than the Pantone solid colors.
That is because they are showing you the closest that you can come to matching a named Pantone Formula (a formula, or pigment-mixing recipe is all that a Pantone Color is) when printing with Process inks.
The Pantone "Solid" color represents what you can hope to get when printing with a fifth named Pantone Spot Color but the final result will still depend on the stock that you choose, and press-conditions at the time.
Also, as Peter indicated, Pantone do change their formulae from time to time and the version of Photoshop which you are using will be employing the LUTs which were current and authorised by the Pantone Corporation when that particular version of Photoshop was created.
To choose colors for Web site or on screen presentations, choose from Adobe’s Color Picker while working in an sRGB working space and save your chosen color as a swatch.
Although it is amazing how many colors you can generate from just four process inks (CMYK), the process can accurately mimic perhaps 50% of the standard Pantone palette and only a fraction of RGB.
If you do not already have it, one of the most valuable color comparison references is the Pantone Color Bridge color swatch set, which provides closest matches of Pantone spot colors to CMYK, RGB and HTML. It comes in both coated and uncoated versions.
Although it is amazing how many colors you can generate from just four process inks (CMYK), the process can accurately mimic perhaps 50% of the standard Pantone palette and some fraction of RGB. Also be aware that the various gamuts to not overlap each other evenly.
If you do not already have it, one of the most valuable color comparison references is the Pantone Color Bridge color swatch set, which provides closest matches of Pantone spot colors to CMYK, RGB and HTML. It comes in both coated and uncoated versions.
The last time I checked, and this may have changed, Pantone’s RGB values for their colors did not have a Photoshop working space as a reference, making them virtually unusable. Even when I tried to go backwards and figure out what space they might have been using, the numbers didn’t make sense.
To add to that confusion, the CMYK breakdowns they give for their Solid to Process are based on a VERY specific press run, with an unknown black generation, so the numbers you generate from your own profile setup in Ps will invariably be different – and usually better…
That pretty much coincides with my attempts to determine just how Pantone specifies their colors.
As far as I can tell, Pantone has absolutely no standards for color specs. It seems they have had relationships with certain pigment suppliers and ink labs which had their proprietary recipes for certain inks that they could rely on as being "stringent.". THAT’s Pantones "standards."
I once made a concerted effort to get colorimetric information. I eventually got through to someone who identified himself as "chief scientist" in their color lab. I asked him for a CIE Lab chart of their swatches, or any other reference I might be able to use. He said they hade none. His reason? "There’s more to color than just measurements."
I asked him how they determined if a particular manufacturer’s "Pantone colors" are up to spec. He said, "We eye ball them."
Pantone "colors" are whatever a particular printer’s Pantone swatchbook shows them to be, with any deviations in the production process from whatever master swatches Pantone keeps on file, with whatever changes have happened to the colorants over the many years the printer has had the book (or several books, all with their own variations), and with whatever degree of diligence he wants to try to match those colors on press by whatever color "management" he wants to use.
The printing industry is the least technologically accurate technology among major industries on the planet.
Any attempt to standardise colour will meet metamerism (of stocks etc) and human subjectivity.
That’s why LAB is a good standard, gives you plenty of values and smooth graduation I guess.
Reverting a chosen Pantone Spot back to cmyk is a recipe for disaster for about 50% of all Pantone Spots… Designers, if you are printing cmyk, choose cmyk and a colour managed print shop then colour management will work.
Printing is DE-volving, it is getting ‘simpler’ and cheaper and quality control/expectation is declining to save money. It is a case of what you can get rather than what you want.
I asked him how they determined if a particular manufacturer’s "Pantone colors" are up to spec. He said, "We eye ball them."
I’m not doubting what you were told. But, honest, I find that hard to believe from Pantone — especially considering that there is colorimetric hardware.
choose cmyk and a colour managed print shop then colour management will
work.
if [I] am choosing the CMYK [I] would want an "old school" shop who will just send the "numbers" through and not dink around with my file if they actually know how to that that is
ideally, I would prefer handing over my wider-gamut RGB color in the AdobeRGB space to a color-managed shop and let them do the conversion to their CMYK, but that is very risky (even for the ones who say they know what they are doing because I’ve found they usually don’t)
I suppose if you were really bored and wanted a project, you (or I) could break out a spectro and measure all the swatches in a Pantone book and construct our own database of Pantone L*a*b numbers. It would only be "good" for that book, but hell, it’s probably as valid as anything else.
Stephanie if you are going to be printing files on opress what you might want to use for your RGB color space is Color Match, but this is something your printer should be able to tell you. The other thing you should seriously consider is to simply load your printers custom profile. No sense for you to try to guess at what the right profile is unless of course they want to keep this a secret and charge you for color correction.
They should also have a way for you to claibrate your monitor so that it might more closely match theirs.
You cannot open images from iPhoto in Bridge as Bridge is blind to the iPhoto Library (has been like that for some versions already). If you want to do that you first have to either export the images out of iPhoto or – at least it is possible in Bridge CS4 and iPhoto ’09 – drag en entire iPhoto-event, or single images, into a folder in Bridge and have them copied out that way. Which is not necessary to begin with as you can set default in iPhoto to always edit in Photoshop.
That is nonsense.
Do you actually HAVE bridge CS4?
If you do, just navigate in Bridge to the default Mac folder called "Pictures". Inside that folder, in numerous subfolders, you should find all of the photographs which you have imported into your computer using iPhoto.
Having found your photographs, you could now open them in either Photoshop or, even better, in ACR 5.3. (ACR will open Tiffs, JPRGs and RAW files.)
(And I still think that anyone who owns CS4 must be out of their little tiny mind to want to mess with iPhoto at all!)
Homann’s "Digital Color Management" has a couple of pages of test images showing that it really doesn’t make any difference what color space or gamma you use when printed. Most printing is too dark, contrasty, and just plain garish anyway. I love it when MO says that everyone in the world is wrong but him.
Ann, Yes I have Bridge CS4. Have probably had it equally as long as you.
And no Ann, you are wrong. Bridge IS blind to the iPhoto library and does NOT see it’s content.
And no, current version of iPhoto 8 in ilife ’09 (and the previous one in iLife ’08) and also a couple of earlier versions do not show multiple folders for iPhoto to the user either in the Finder OR to Bridge – those folders are hidden within the iPhoto Library application package – which you cannot open from within Bridge but only from the Finder if you know how to. You cannot do that from within Bridge CS4 (or CS3 for that matter). You are probably referring to antiquated versions of iPhoto.
Ann, you are not a user of either Leopard or a current version of iPhoto so actually you have no idea what a current version of iPhoto can or cannot do.
I use Bridge CS4, but I actually find iPhoto more versatile and convenient most of the time when it comse to sorting, organizing and such stuff (and slideshows). I never edit anything in iPhoto though, only in Photoshop.
So do I. Where then is there ANY colorimetric data about Pantone colors? Have you EVER been able to get any specifications?
In all my years in the printing business, the ONLY "references" I have ever seen are the printed Pantone books themselves. And they vary a LOT. To say nothing of the fact that thousands are in use that have faded or have so much press room grime on them that they are useless. Yet I have seen pressman "control" 4-Color jobs by "eyeballing" Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Process Black swatches against the color bars on the press sheet.
Try to get Pantone to tell you the spectrophotometric reference they use to quality control printing of their swatch books. No dice. Think about it, since Pantone is such an "industry standard" shouldn’t there be something like an ISO standard specification?
Note to stephanie p: When I logged into the forum and saw the topic "color question" with 92 replies this morning, before I even clicked on it I knew that it would be another example of an ignorant poster refusing to follow the essential colour management advice they were being given. It happens often. Sometimes those people take the advice and come back to thank people for showing them proper colour management. Other people have stuck their head in the sand after happening upon some happy coincidence that has "solved" their problem and berated the posters who tried to offer the only proper answer. You’ll be one of the two, and in the future you will either have far fewer problems dealing with colour, or you’ll be confounded time and again when things keep getting messed up for seemingly "no reason."
I thank you all on the discussion of Pantone colors.
I see that Ann has learned that #2 As you are not using a spot channel, that needs to be a "Pantone Solid to Process" Library. is not the appropriate answer.
And #4 Chris Cox "RGB settings follow the monitor" — that’s your mistake. Never, ever do that. has perhaps learned to give the correct monitor profile.
I see from #78 that Ann has learned that the working space is sRGB so it was not all in vain. If she knew that at #2 this would have been a much shorter discussion.
I will add that I checked the work computers and they are all North American General Purpose 2 and I will change my home computer to that setting to match the work computer. Thanks again
Thanks for that Peter. I thought this thread was finally going to roll over and die, but you seem to have breathed new life into it. ‘War and Peace’ was shorter than this and that included war AND peace.
I see that Ann has learned that #2 "As you are not using a spot channel, that needs to be a "Pantone Solid to Process" Library" is not the appropriate answer.
It remains the appropriate answer for someone who is talking about specifying colors from the Pantone libraries in the same breath that they are talking about their Printers/Press operators getting their colors "right".
—–
And #4 Chris Cox "RGB settings follow the monitor" — that’s your mistake. Never, ever do that. has perhaps learned to give the correct monitor profile.
Do you have any idea exactly who Chris Cox is and what he does for a living?
—–
I see from #78 that Ann has learned that the working space is sRGB so it was not all in vain. If she knew that at #2 this would have been a much shorter discussion.
Wrong again! I gave you the correct answer in mesage #1:
Why is your Color Management turned "Off"? You need to have it turned on; and your RGB and CMYK working spaces need to be the same on both machines.
That meant that turning Color Management OFF, and working from your obviously hosed color monitor space, was the cause of your problems.
I was the first person to mention SRGB in this thread because you obviously hadn’t a clue what you were doing (as exemplified by such foolish statements such as : "the RGB setting follow the monitor")!
You then continued in your arrogant and extremely rude manner to respond to the highly experienced people who had been trying to drum some sense into an extremely thick head by writing:
Obviously none of you know the answer.
After few more of your discourteous posts, I responded with Message #9 as follows:
—— Ann Shelbourne – 5:46pm Feb 26, 09 PST (#9 of 97) Edited: 26-Feb-2009 at 05:47pm
None of this answers why the color of a pantone solid color pick varies from computer to computer. It should not. Obviously none of you know the answer.
Really? If you had a clue about what Color management does, you would understand why your Color Mismanagement is affecting the results.
Neither do I think that you understand the difference between one can of a Pantone Spot Color Ink and colors created from four separate cans of Process Color Inks.
However, you now tell us that you are not actually printing this job at all but are outputting for the Web. Without converting to the sRGB color space?
But after another 40 years, you might possibly get the picture?! ——
THAT was the first mention of sRGB in this thread because only after eight posts were we any closer to understanding the depths of your lack of knowledge or ability.
NOW you come back here, attempting to twist the reality of the sequence of events and denigrate the efforts of the people who did their level best to help you.
You are an ungrateful, incompetent and thoroughly unpleasant individual and I suggest that you might want to change your Screen Name in these Forums if you are to have the slightest hope of receiving help here in the future.
I just called a "professional color printer" (in business since 1979) who sent me a flyer because he advertised the Zerox 19′ laser my client needs for a job.
TYPICAL conversation.
What CMYK do you want? — no clue there was any difference in CMYK.
But he touted his software could print different RGB correctly.
Good, what profile are you setting up the software to convert to? — no clue, it’s proprietary, he said, but he added a bunch of meaningless "buzz" words to substantiate his claim.
You design in Adobe iLL and Ps, what is your CMYK set to? — no clue.
I would love to let this thread die from Troll poison (10 x d20 HP), but I must say that the even the most ignorant shops today have some form of ‘reverse’ colour management where they set their RIP or press densities to bring the incoming file around to expected appearance.
Having said that, gballard’s understandably jaded opinion should not be taken as indicating an industry-wide failure. His second paragraph quoted below is very agreeable but relies on the designer to have a clue, so the job is always in jeopardy.
Any printer reading this who ‘DINKS’ around with the files should be ashamed and take it from me that colour management IS possible, DOES work and SHOULD be supported, so get off your butts and learn how to do it!
Same for designers, get off your butts and learn it properly, it is not easy but it does work, stop blaming the printers, stop blaming adobe and learn. Then find a good print shop and you will be in good shape.
You see the hammering that the original poster here copped for being above it all, the people doing the hammering are highly respected industry professionals who are basically saying the same thing….it works, IF you do it properly.
Phil Taz:
choose cmyk and a colour managed print shop then colour management will work.
gballard: if [I] am choosing the CMYK [I] would want an "old school" shop who will just send the "numbers" through and not dink around with my file if they actually know how to that that is
ideally, I would prefer handing over my wider-gamut RGB color in the AdobeRGB space to a color-managed shop and let them do the conversion to their CMYK, but that is very risky (even for the ones who say they know what they are doing because I’ve found they usually don’t)
I have used this product since Photoshop 3. I have never posted a question on this forum because I didn’t need to so I guess I can survive in the future without all of your sage advice.
Photoshop is an artwork product that I love for it’s fluidity and beauty. That stands in stark contrast to the nastiness and name calling I have encountered on this thread.
The entire printing sidebar was an invention of you all, including how awful my mythical files looked when printed. I repeatedly told you all it was not a printing problem.
I will comment on the iPhoto sidebar: some programs such as Keynote require its use.
I will end with a comment to Ann appropriate to her maturity level: sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me. Adieu.
I have used this product since Photoshop 3. I have never posted a question on this forum because I didn’t need to so I guess I can survive in the future without all of your sage advice.
It’s amazing how someone can use a piece of software for 15 years without really learning anything. Hey, if head in the sand works fine for you, so be it. In my time with Photoshop (since version 2.5, since we’re keeping track now) I’ve asked many questions, taken classes, visited forums, etc. I’ve been happily sand-free for many years now.
