Working profile to work on images

Daniel Masse wrote:

Hello all !

I am a newbie at color management, and I am trying to understand…
1. I load an image, with the sRGB profile. It will be displayed in PS using my monitor profile : the colors will be displayed as well as possible (assuming my monitor is calibrated and profiled. It is). Correct ?

Absolutely.

2. From what I have read, I should work on my image in the sRGB workspace, using my monitor profile, then check the result I will obtain on my printer, using soft-profiling. This operation then involves a number of trips between the two profiles. Correct ?

Normaly I just work in sRGB, and print. The difference between the screen and the print is normally subtle, and in any case the overall brightness and shadow detail in the print is the same as that of the monitor.

3. I understand that soft profiling does not actually change my image : why not make the changes to my image directly under soft-profiling ? I would still have the advantage of the wide gamut of my workspace (sRGB). Does that make sense ?

No problem – but I suspect you have a setup issue if your print and monitor are very much different from one another. To my mind, soft profiling is good for relatively subtle issues, such as paper color, and shadow detail.

Others who use soft profiling more may have some comments as well. —

Mike Russell
www.geigy.2y.net

Mike Russell wrote:

Daniel Masse wrote:

2. From what I have read, I should work on my image in the sRGB workspace, using my monitor profile, then check the result I will obtain on my printer, using soft-profiling. This operation then involves a number of trips between the two profiles. Correct ?

Normaly I just work in sRGB, and print. The difference between the screen and the print is normally subtle, and in any case the overall brightness and shadow detail in the print is the same as that of the monitor.

Actually, I want to send my pictures to be printed in a commercial lab : I have found one lab, where I can ask them not to make any correction. They use a Frontier, and I have their profile. The first tests I have made were not very conclusive, and I am trying to find out what I did wrong…

As you say, the results I obtained could be considered as being acceptable, but the printed images were not identical to what I have on my screen. Maybe I am asking for too much…

3. I understand that soft profiling does not actually change my image

why not make the changes to my image directly under soft-profiling

? I would still have the advantage of the wide gamut of my workspace (sRGB). Does that make sense ?

No problem – but I suspect you have a setup issue if your print and monitor are very much different from one another. To my mind, soft profiling is good for relatively subtle issues, such as paper color, and shadow detail.

Hmm… Maybe I am asking for too much… But also maybe the problem comes from the fact that I am using an LCD screen – good quality, but not top.

The important thing is that you are telling me that working under soft-proofing is not stupid : I will try that !

Thanks !

Daniel Masse wrote:

Mike Russell wrote:

Daniel Masse wrote:

2. From what I have read, I should work on my image in the sRGB workspace, using my monitor profile, then check the result I will obtain on my printer, using soft-profiling. This operation then involves a number of trips between the two profiles. Correct ?

Normaly I just work in sRGB, and print. The difference between the screen and the print is normally subtle, and in any case the overall brightness and shadow detail in the print is the same as that of the monitor.

Actually, I want to send my pictures to be printed in a commercial lab : I have found one lab, where I can ask them not to make any correction. They use a Frontier, and I have their profile. The first tests I have made were not very conclusive, and I am trying to find out what I did wrong…
As you say, the results I obtained could be considered as being acceptable, but the printed images were not identical to what I have on my screen. Maybe I am asking for too much…

If you send the images to a lab and you have the profile of their printer, why work in ‘soft proof’? If you do that, you’ll still send them an image in another color space (sRGB), so the results still depend on whether their conversion is the same as what you saw when looking at ‘soft proof’. It _should_ be the same, but…

I would suggest you use "Convert to profile" to convert your image to the color space of the Frontier. Next make the corrections the way you like them and send this to the lab. Because the image is already in the Frontier color space, the lab will just print the image the way you supplied it.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

I would suggest you use "Convert to profile" to convert your image to the color space of the Frontier. Next make the corrections the way you like them and send this to the lab. Because the image is already in the Frontier color space, the lab will just print the image the way you supplied it.

Yes, this makes sense. However, I understand that it is much better to use the widest possible gamut as a working space. This is why many people recommend using Adobe98, which is wider than sRGB. If I use the color space of the Frontier as working space, it seems to me that I might be losing a lot of color information. Does that make sense ?

Daniel Masse wrote:

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

I would suggest you use "Convert to profile" to convert your image to the color space of the Frontier. Next make the corrections the way you like them and send this to the lab. Because the image is already in the Frontier color space, the lab will just print the image the way you supplied it.

Yes, this makes sense. However, I understand that it is much better to use the widest possible gamut as a working space. This is why many people recommend using Adobe98, which is wider than sRGB. If I use the color space of the Frontier as working space, it seems to me that I might be losing a lot of color information. Does that make sense ?

No, it doesn’t. We are not talking about an image in general (where indeed you should use a wide color space like AdobeRGB), we are talking about an image that is specifically destined to be printed on a Fuji Frontier. A Fuji Frontier has a certain color space, it cannot print any colors outside that space. If you work in a wider space, you’ll only end up having colors that the Frontier can’t print, so the print will be different from what you see on your screen because the colors will be remapped to the Frontier space. Whether you like it or not, the Frontier color space is the color space that can and will be printed, no matter what working space you used.

If you convert your image to the Frontier color space (and save it under a DIFFERENT name, so you keep the original in AdobeRGB as well for other purposes), you can edit and change anything, knowing that the Frontier will be able to print anything you see.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

If you convert your image to the Frontier color space (and save it under a DIFFERENT name, so you keep the original in AdobeRGB as well for other purposes), you can edit and change anything, knowing that the Frontier will be able to print anything you see.

Daniel – please forget that you’ve ever read this. Although you can get away with small edits in the destination space, as Johan is suggesting, there is one *minor* detail here. The Frontier profile may not be gray-balanced! You should NOT edit in the destination space. There really isn’t any reason to do so if you are using the soft-proofing feature.

Your image should remain in Adobe RGB or sRGB (whichever you have it in) while you edit. You should turn on the soft-proofing feature, using the Frontier profile that you’ve been provided. You may want to choose between perceptual or relative colorimetric rendering intent – whichever looks better to you. Once the soft-proof is ‘on’, THEN you may safely edit your image knowing that the colors you see on screen are printable by the Frontier. When you are happy, use the convert to profile feature to move into the Frontier space and deliver that file to your lab.

Don’t edit in the destination space! If you’d like to test this, make a new document, fill it with any shade of gray. Convert to the Frontier profile (or most any other for those of you following along – SWOP will prove this also). Now that you’re in ‘destination space’, boost the saturation all the way up. Do you still see gray? Probably not.

A little off topic question, but here it goes.

After editing in AdobeRGB, there are *significant* differences when soft proofing with different media profiles. Questions:

1. Should this happen?
2. If no, what can be the cause?
3. If yes, which image should be "tweaked" before printing – the one before soft proof, or the one being soft proofed?

Many books suggested creating a "master image" which can then be used for different purposes, i.e. web, different media, etc. But the above problem seems to imply there may need to be significant "tweaking" for each media. Yes?

Scott Southerland wrote:

If you convert your image to the Frontier color space (and save it under a DIFFERENT name, so you keep the original in AdobeRGB as well for other purposes), you can edit and change anything, knowing that the Frontier will be able to print anything you see.

Daniel – please forget that you’ve ever read this. Although you can get away with small edits in the destination space, as Johan is suggesting, there is one *minor* detail here. The Frontier profile may not be gray-balanced! You should NOT edit in the destination space. There really isn’t any reason to do so if you are using the soft-proofing feature.

Your image should remain in Adobe RGB or sRGB (whichever you have it in) while you edit. You should turn on the soft-proofing feature, using the Frontier profile that you’ve been provided. You may want to choose between perceptual or relative colorimetric rendering intent – whichever looks better to you. Once the soft-proof is ‘on’, THEN you may safely edit your image knowing that the colors you see on screen are printable by the Frontier. When you are happy, use the convert to profile feature to move into the Frontier space and deliver that file to your lab.

Don’t edit in the destination space! If you’d like to test this, make a new document, fill it with any shade of gray. Convert to the Frontier profile (or most any other for those of you following along – SWOP will prove this also). Now that you’re in ‘destination space’, boost the saturation all the way up. Do you still see gray? Probably not.

From:

After editing in AdobeRGB, there are *significant* differences when soft proofing with different media profiles. Questions:

1. Should this happen?

Yes, it can easily happen even with different papers on the same printer, like on the Epson 2200.

3. If yes, which image should be "tweaked" before printing – the one before soft proof, or the one being soft proofed?

If you’ll be outputting to different devices then my preferred way is to create a layer set for each device and put all the tweaks for that soft-proof in adjustment layers, storing the adjustment layers in one layer set. Name the set for the paper, for example Epson2200_VFA or LightJet_glosssy.

Then just make the right layer set active when ready to output or turn them all off to see the original image.

Many books suggested creating a "master image" which can then be used for different purposes, i.e. web, different media, etc. But the above problem seems to imply there may need to be significant "tweaking" for each media. Yes?

Yes, but put the tweaks on adjustment layers and store in separate layer sets and you’ve got it.

Bill

1. Should this happen?

It wouldn’t be too surprising. Every paper has a different white point. Each is going to absorb a different amount of ink and reflect a certain amount of light. All of these factors play into how your eye sees the colors. Those factors are taken into account in the profile as best as possible.

2. If no, what can be the cause?

The quality of the soft-proof depends on the quality of the profile. Each printer is slightly different. There is the possibility that your printer makes color slightly differently than another – which would make a difference in your printed colors.

3. If yes, which image should be "tweaked" before printing – the one before soft proof, or the one being soft proofed?

I’m not sure I understand. When you edit an image with soft-proof turned on, you’re still changing the numbers of the ‘before’ image. The difference is that Photoshop is showing you the results based on the output profile you’ve chosen. After you tweak the look using a soft-proof, you still need to convert your image to the profile you were using to soft-proof. You can do this using Image > Mode > Convert to Profile or do it from the print with preview dialog. Bill had good suggestions about creating different layers for different papers. In that case, it would be best to use the Print w/ Preview dialog and select the profile there.

Many books suggested creating a "master image" which can then be used for different purposes, i.e. web, different media, etc. But the above problem seems to imply there may need to be significant "tweaking" for each media. Yes?

Yes. Each media has characteristics that affects how our eyes see color. The goal is to characterize each of these, create profiles to describe those differences, and then use the profiles to make the color look the same on each type of output. It may not always be a ‘significant’ tweak. There are many factors involved.

Thanks Bill and Scott. You both confirmed my suspicion. Bill’s suggestion to create different layer sets for different "tweaks" is a great solution.

Scott Southerland wrote:

1. Should this happen?

It wouldn’t be too surprising. Every paper has a different white point. Each is going to absorb a different amount of ink and reflect a certain amount of light. All of these factors play into how your eye sees the colors. Those factors are taken into account in the profile as best as possible.

2. If no, what can be the cause?

The quality of the soft-proof depends on the quality of the profile. Each printer is slightly different. There is the possibility that your printer makes color slightly differently than another – which would make a difference in your printed colors.

3. If yes, which image should be "tweaked" before printing – the one before soft proof, or the one being soft proofed?

I’m not sure I understand. When you edit an image with soft-proof turned on, you’re still changing the numbers of the ‘before’ image. The difference is that Photoshop is showing you the results based on the output profile you’ve chosen. After you tweak the look using a soft-proof, you still need to convert your image to the profile you were using to soft-proof. You can do this using Image > Mode > Convert to Profile or do it from the print with preview dialog. Bill had good suggestions about creating different layers for different papers. In that case, it would be best to use the Print w/ Preview dialog and select the profile there.

Many books suggested creating a "master image" which can then be used for different purposes, i.e. web, different media, etc. But the above problem seems to imply there may need to be significant "tweaking" for each media. Yes?

Yes. Each media has characteristics that affects how our eyes see color. The goal is to characterize each of these, create profiles to describe those differences, and then use the profiles to make the color look the same on each type of output. It may not always be a ‘significant’ tweak. There are many factors involved.

"significant" is very subjective. I have been using Epson Enhanced Matte on a 1280. Both the soft proof and prints match the monitor quite well, and only needs tweaking once a while. But when I try to soft proof with a third party’s matte and profile, it looks so different that I have to make major curve moves to match the monitor.

Is there any way to alleviate this during the editing workflow? For example, does it make sense to periodically soft proof to different profiles during the editing workflow, and try to shoot for a "middle ground" in the edits? The goal is to come up with a final master image that will only need "minor" tweaks for the different media later on.

Scott Southerland wrote:

Daniel – please forget that you’ve ever read this. Although you can get away with small edits in the destination space, as Johan is suggesting, there is one *minor* detail here. The Frontier profile may not be gray-balanced! You should NOT edit in the destination space. There really isn’t any reason to do so if you are using the soft-proofing feature.

Scott, I apologize : I realize that I have not thanked you for your advice !

Point well taken : I should definitely work on my image in sRGB or Adobe 98.

Your image should remain in Adobe RGB or sRGB (whichever you have it in) while you edit. You should turn on the soft-proofing feature, using the Frontier profile that you’ve been provided. You may want to choose between perceptual or relative colorimetric rendering intent – whichever looks better to you. Once the soft-proof is ‘on’, THEN you may safely edit your image knowing that the colors you see on screen are printable by the Frontier. When you are happy, use the convert to profile feature to move into the Frontier space and deliver that file to your lab.

Your advice is also very clear : I have had discussions with several people, who always told me to work in the monitor space, and check the results by soft-proofing (the image being in sRGB or Adobe RGB). I always thought that it would be a lot easier to work directly with the soft-proofing turned on. Thank you for your confirmation !

Thanks again !

Dan

But when I try to soft proof with
a third party’s matte and profile, it looks so different that I have to make major curve moves to match the monitor.

Unless that profile was created custom for *your* printer and paper then it is very possible.

The goal is to come up with a final master image
that will only need "minor" tweaks for the different media later on.

Exactly, and this is depedent on the quality of your profiles. If your soft proof is showing you one thing and your printer does another, then there is either a problem with your printer (either hardware or driver) or a problem with the profile not being a good match for your printer.

Scott, I apologize : I realize that I have not thanked you for your advice !

No need to apologize! I’m glad to help.

Scott Southerland wrote:

No need to apologize! I’m glad to help.

(I do not see the previous messages of this thread on my OE, so I will post here…)

I have spent hours trying to match the colors of my images on he screen with the Frontier prints I obtained (no adjustment, manual or automatic, was made on my files : I should get exactly what I sent, and I have the profile of the Frontier which was used). I eventually started everything over again, starting with profiling the monitor. I will get the results in a couple of days.

In the meantime, I started to wonder : could it be that the EyeOne Display probe I used gave me a wrong profile ? Has anyone compared results obtained with the different probes available ob the market ?