Another Color Management Question

[GovtLawyer]

I recently bought a monitor calibrator, and I am quite satisfied that what I see on the monitor is the way I should be seeing it. I've printed a few prints with my Canon Pixma 4000, and the prints are almost exactly the same as what I see on the monitor. So, as far as using my printer, I am pretty satisfied with the workflow/color management.

As a test, I sent a photo to Adorama, and I chose to use no ICC profile or color correction. I just picked up the print from them, and it is noticeably different from my other prints and the monitor. Basically, it appears to be darker, which of course renders the colors slightly different shades and the saturation different than what I started with. It is a nice print, but not true to my original.

So, I assume the missing ingredient was the ICC Profiles I could have downloaded from them; a different one for each of their paper choices. Please help me understand when I embed this profile in my workflow, and how it works.

Does it get embeded early in the process, in which case what I see on the screen is different than if I didn't use a profile; or, is it embeded in the end of the process, and only used as a set of instructions for their printer?
I think I'm oh so close to understanding this process.

[tim]

As I understand it, you calibrate your monitor and work within the sRgb or aRgb space, depending on what Adorama supports. The only time you use their profile is to soft proof your work, AFAIK you never assign your image to their color profile. This site (http://www.queensberry.com/qps/resource_pages.html) on the Queensberry Prints website gives good, no-nonsence information about color.

I have to read that massive book on color I got about six months ago, but dang it's pretty heavy going. Color isn't simple.

[DocFrankenstein]

I have to read that massive book on color I got about six months ago, but dang it's pretty heavy going. Color isn't simple.
Did it arrive in the box with the softbox? :lol: ;)

GovtLawyer:
You don't touch your monitor calibration.

Go to:
View->Proof Setup->Custom->Device to Simulate

Choose the adorama profile and you should see what the print is going to look like printed. Then you just send it to print.

[tim]

Did it arrive in the box with the softbox? :lol: ;)

I got that thing working the other day - I think it's a bit big but it works well! :)

[lekke]

remember to always embed ICC profiles in your photos! Adorama or whoever will be printing your photo just the way you wanted it unless they purposely ignore the embedded profile and skip converting it to their own.

[Tsmith]

Just on a side note I tried Adorama some time back and wasn't pleased with the results. ICC Profiles were added and the option to not Color Correct the images was selected ... needless to say the prints were alright but not what I had edited.

However using Mpix and the same options the results are just as I ordered. I even chose on a separate order their option for Color Correcting and the results were actually better than what I was using _ from a color corrected print I adjusted my monitor to reflect what I was seeing under the same lighting.

[tim]

I'm about to order prints from Adorama today - I guess i'll use the "correct the color" option even though i've set everything up perfectly. Any more Adorama suggestions are welcome.

[GovtLawyer]

I'm about to order prints from Adorama today - I guess i'll use the "correct the color" option even though i've set everything up perfectly. Any more Adorama suggestions are welcome.

I think you'll be happy with the results. However, I had a conversation with one of the technicians and found out a bit about the option to let them correct it. Suppose, you processed a file in which you intentionally wanted a slight color cast, or a darker than usual photo; well, they would "correct" it for you. So, I guess you can let them correct it, if it is hard to imagine how they could go wrong with it.

[tim]

I've let them correct it since the prints are all pretty standard. If I have a large or complex order to do i'll call in advance. Thanks for the info.

[GovtLawyer]

I just got my prints back from Adorama. They are darker than the originals from my printer and as seen on my screen. However, they are within an acceptable range.

When I used PSP 9 to softproof the print using the lab's color profile, it showed no difference with or without the profile. So, using the profile made no sense to me. I did ensure that the color space was sRGB, same as the lab's and my monitor. The first photo, which was much further from what I wanted, apparently did not send the lab instructions that my print was prepared in sRGB.

Seems to me that using a lab's color profile is only of value if it is used to softproof and tweak the print. Simply adding it to the file should have no effect. As I understand it.

So, unless I can figure out a way to use the profile with my current processing software, not Photoshop, I must prepapre my prints with the expectation that Adorama will darken it. Or, I can try other labs.

[tim]

When I soft proof against the Adorama Lustre profile the images gets a little bit lighter. Not much, you'd never notice if you weren't looking. Is your color management set up right? Do other profiles show a change?

[GovtLawyer]

I haven't tried other profiles, but your result confirms my experience. The softproof I used in PSE9 was not easy to use and showed almost tthe same as no softproof. If it showed anything, it would be a little bit lighter. The second set of prints I sent them had the sRGB space, whereas the first print somehow was "uncalibrated" as tocolor space. The new prints were much closer, a bit darker. So, if I softproofed and lightened it a bit, it would have been right on.

I'm learning a lot here.

[In2Photos]

I had a similar experience this past weekend with Costco. I have a calibrated monitor and worked in aRGB with the calibrated profile to correct my image. I then saved it as a TIFF so that I could now adjust that same image for different printers. I downloaded the profiles from Dry Creek for Costco and added them to my proof setup list. I adjusted the image for their profile and saved again. I uploaded the image to their site and selected no color correction. However when I picked up my shots they were far from what was on screen. As a test I selected the profile for my home printer and adjusted again, this time getting a more accurate color representation, but of course the inkjet just wasn't as good quality wise as Costco. Any ideas on what I might have done wrong? I plan to figure it out but thought I might see if anyone has an idea before I dive into hours of research.:)

[tim]

Does costco support aRgb or just sRgb?

[In2Photos]

Does costco support aRgb or just sRgb?

Good question Tim. I thought I read that they suported aRGB but now I can't find that so I am going to call them tomorrow and double check.

[DocFrankenstein]

Does costco support aRgb or just sRgb?
Costco doesn't suppord anything.

That's the whole point of profiles. You are sending in just the file itself without the profile attached. The values in that file are going to be printed directly without any conversions.

If you're seding a file with an embedded profile then the machine has to do a conversion... and it'll have to choose the rendering intent for you... and you're not getting predictable results at all.

So if you're sending a calibrated file to the lab, the lab should just ignore the imbedded color profile and print without conversions.

Otherwise the system breaks down.

[tim]

Costco doesn't suppord anything.

That's the whole point of profiles. You are sending in just the file itself without the profile attached. The values in that file are going to be printed directly without any conversions.

If you're seding a file with an embedded profile then the machine has to do a conversion... and it'll have to choose the rendering intent for you... and you're not getting predictable results at all.

So if you're sending a calibrated file to the lab, the lab should just ignore the imbedded color profile and print without conversions.

Otherwise the system breaks down.

Maybe I should've been more clear. Some print firms assume the image is in sRgb, so if you send an Adobe RGB image it will look terrible. Anything without a profile is generally assumed to be sRgb AFAIK. Some low end firms (like ones around here) might ignore embedded profiles completely and print them as if they were aRgb, which is just terrible - and that's why I use a professional lab.

I'm reading the Bruce Fraser color management book right now, and it's really interesting, though in places a little tough going. I have a much better idea of how the profile system works now, and i'm just starting on the application specific chapters. I think i'll have to go back and read a couple of chapters again to get it 100% clear, but things are making a lot more sense now than they used to.

[DocFrankenstein]

I've read real world color management.

The printer isn't converting anything. All it does is prints the values you're giving it. Both sRGB and AdobeRGB are working spaces, not printer profiles.

The "professional" labs should especially ignore the color profiles. If they did any conversions, you'd never be able to get consistent results. You're sending in the file with channel intensity values knowing beforehand what it's going to look like because you have the printer profile.

The attached profile doesn't affect the result in any way, because the printer has to ignore it and go to the luminosity values for individual channels directly.

Makes sense?

[tim]

Im still trying to get to grips on things, but as I understand it at some point there has to be a conversion from the generic working spaces to the printers working space. Rendering intents come into it, but as I understand it that's a more of a tweak than the profiles. The attached profile tells it what the source data means - if you don't know what the number represents you can't really do a conversion.

Or am I way off?

[René Damkot]

I convert from AdobeRGB to the printer profile before sending the file in. It doesn't matter if I include the profile because a) the printer ignores it anyway, b) if the printer doesn't ignore it, he doesn't need to convert it. In either case the 'numbers go straight in'

[tim]

I'm not far enough on in that book to say yet, but i've never read any advice anywhere that says to convert to the printer profile. How do the prints look?

[René Damkot]

I did mean the 'printer' the lab is using, not my printer obviously. Find out what the lab is using, and download that profile. When I did it that way, it was a big improvement.

[tim]

I understood what you meant!

How do you figure it works better to convert to the printer profile at your end, rather than attaching your profile and letting the printer/RIP do it itself? If you embed/attach your profile the printer/RIP can do the job just as well as you can.

I assume you're working in a common color space (sRgb, aRgb) up until the last step of your workflow, otherwise you'll have problems if you want to print to a different printer later. The early/late binding chapter in the color management book would seem to be relevant, even if just academically.

[René Damkot]

How do you figure it works better to convert to the printer profile at your end, rather than attaching your profile and letting the printer/RIP do it itself? If you embed/attach your profile the printer/RIP can do the job just as well as you can.

Well, my lab ignores the profile. Apart from that, when converting to a more limited color space I like to determine what rendering intent to use, and if I loose colors, how to adjust for that.

[In2Photos]

I convert from AdobeRGB to the printer profile before sending the file in. It doesn't matter if I include the profile because a) the printer ignores it anyway, b) if the printer doesn't ignore it, he doesn't need to convert it. In either case the 'numbers go straight in'

I'm confused now. I thought aRGB was a working space and that I would have both a working space AND a profile. So how can I convert the color space to a profile? OR are you saying that you work in AdobeRGB color space and profile and then switch to the printer's profile right before printing? The last makes more sense except that you are now not working in a calibrated environment because you have not selected the calibrated profile for your monitor.

[tim]

Let me qualify the following statements with the fact that i'm NOT an expert, I haven't finished this color book, and color is very, very complicated!

In general, I wouldn't choose to convert an image to a particular printers color space, even if I was sure that was the printer that'd be used. I'm happy to leave the choice of rendering intent to the people who know the equipment best, and i'm not sure i'd be able to tell the difference anyway.

Mike, I believe the best general workflow is to work in a well known and well understood color space, and make sure the profile is embedded (or assigned, or whatever other word you'd like to use) before it's sent to the lab. Make sure the lab supports the color profile you want to use. eg some labs only accept sRgb images. Based on the information in your image, and the profile/color space that's assigned, the lab/printer/rip will do whatever work is necessary to print the image properly. If any lab ignores profiles, don't use the lab.

For example, Elco (http://www.elcocolor.com/hot_internet_only_specials.htm) does cheap large prints, and supports any rgb color space - aRgb, sRgb, profoto rgb, etc, so long as you embed the profile (read their FAQ). I'm sure such a large, high volume lab uses a RIP that's optimised for their printer, so no matter what printer they choose to use, because they've calibrated the machine you know that the colors will come out as you intended. If you'd converted to a specific printer profile (eg the imaginary Kodak SuperDuper2000 printer as used by Elco, with Kodak Lustre paper) and they decided to use a different machine because that one broke down, then you'd be in trouble. Also, if they changed their paper stocks and didn't update their website yet, if you were using the profile for the old printer/paper your colors would look wrong. If you were using a standard color space they would do the conversion at printing time, and it would look right.

Remember my disclaimer at the top of this post - i'm not an expert, or experienced, but what i've said all seems to make sense to me so far.

René, are you sure they ignore profiles, or do they just assume the profile is sRgb?

[René Damkot]

I've had quite a lengthly and heated discussion with them, because I think they should not ignore the profile. But they do. Bad :evil:
I agree with you that 'if any lab ignores profiles, don't use the lab', but unfortunately it's the only pro lab in the region. (Yes, pro lab. No. I don't get it either)

In2Photos: ARGB is my working space, so the files have a ARGB color profile imbedded, up untill the moment I send them to the lab. At that point I convert to the labs printer profile. And yes, I'm still working color calibrated then, because PS recognises the profile, and displays color correctly (''translates' from file to monitor' you could say)
The only place to use the monitor profile is in the OS. Not in photoshop. PS needs to know it to display colors correctly. That is done by the OS. It is not a working space for PS. Ever.

edit: Tim: Just to clarify (I think you know it, just used the wrong word); Assigning a profile is something completely different. Then you in fact ignore the proper profile for the file, and tell the software to replace the existing profile with a different one. Note 'replace' instead of 'convert'
If you do this to a ARGB file, and assign a sRGB profile, you get whased out, flat colors. And color management just left the building ;)

[René Damkot]

and i'm not sure i'd be able to tell the difference anyway.

Depending on the image, I think you would.
I did a quick search, and found this image. No post processing done.
It's not a great image, but it's not too extreme in colors, yet shows the differences.

Not your typical wedding situation, but I could imagine the same might show up in a red dress....

I converted to the profile the lab used a year or so back. Agfa DLab endura glossy.
Not sure if they still use the same printer. Another photographer and I made quite a fuss, so it might even be they are color managed now....
The printer was quite limited in the more saturated tones.

Original, resized and sharpened, converted from ARGB to sRGB, saved for web:

http://www.moonglade.net/~rene/POTN/original_ARGB.jpg

Original, resized and sharpened, converted from ARGB to Agfa dLab profile, using perceptual, converted to sRGB, saved for web: The drummer lost his face!

http://www.moonglade.net/~rene/POTN/perceptual.jpg

Original, resized and sharpened, converted from ARGB to Agfa dLab profile, using relative colorimetric, converted to sRGB, saved for web:

http://www.moonglade.net/~rene/POTN/relative_colorimetric.jpg

I would want to correct the above image before getting a print on paper. I also wouldn't like it if 'perceptual' rendering was used....

[In2Photos]

In2Photos: ARGB is my working space, so the files have a ARGB color profile imbedded, up untill the moment I send them to the lab. At that point I convert to the labs printer profile. And yes, I'm still working color calibrated then, because PS recognises the profile, and displays color correctly (''translates' from file to monitor' you could say)
The only place to use the monitor profile is in the OS. Not in photoshop. PS needs to know it to display colors correctly. That is done by the OS. It is not a working space for PS. Ever.

Right, OK now I see what you meant before. I work in AdobeRGB colorspace and select my calibrated profile under View > Proof Setup > My monitor profile. I adjust my photo and save. Then if I decide to print I change the profile to the particular printer/paper combo I am going to use and make any last minute changes and save as something else like photocostco8x10. I then upload that file or take in a CD and have them print it with no color correction. Is this correct?

[René Damkot]

Correct, except the 'View > Proof Setup > My monitor profile' part.
If you do that, you are looking at how the image would look in a not colormanaged application on your computer.
The beauty of color management is, that every file, whatever the profile, is displayed correctly *without you needing to do something*.
From PS Help:
"color display on a computer monitor varies with the operating system used by the computer. For example, an image appears darker on a Windows system than on a Mac OS computer (because the standard RGB color space is darker in Windows than in Mac OS). The Preview commands in ImageReady let you compensate for cross-platform differences in RGB color display during image preview. In Photoshop, you can simulate cross-platform differences by using the Macintosh RGB, Windows RGB, and Monitor RGB commands in the View > Proof Setup menu.
RGB color display can also vary between Photoshop and ImageReady. In Photoshop, you can select from several RGB color spaces when editing images. As a result, images created in Photoshop may use an RGB color space that differs from the monitor RGB color space used by ImageReady. You can adjust the RGB color display during image preview to compensate for differences between Photoshop and ImageReady."

[UncleDoug]

Mike,
Rene beat me to the "my monitor profile" issue but past that......
You "could" be correct. I say could because this really depends upon the lab you deal with.
As is evident with the multitudes of posts regarding labs and how they deal with images.
If the lab you use will accept "native" files, meaning files with the printer profile imbedded, you are good to go.
However, if the techies at the lab don't totally have it together, you could be in for a fun ride.
Some RIPs may allow you to "send" a file with the native(printer) profile imbedded, but it is what is going on inside the RIP that matters.
Check with the lab to see if the RIP they use will recognise the imbedded native(printer) profile. Allot of the time the RIP will take the file you have prepped and convert it back to RGB and then throught the standard RGB-to-LAB-to-native(printer)profile. If this happens things will not work out right.

If you really want to figure out what is up, print three versions of the same image with them.
1. sRGB
2. Converted to printer profile
3. No profile, un-color managed.
This will tell you what is going on inside the RIP.
If #1 is the "best" then the RIP or the techies can't handle native files.
If #'s 1 and 2 are near spot-on then there is good color management going on in the RIP
If #2 is the winner, then sRGB is not the default RGB color space for the RIP.
If #3 is the winner, go to another lab.


All-in-all your procedure is good. Just the final conversion to the printer space is what may be in question.


When I hear the term ASSIGN PROFILE being tossed around in Digital Photography circles, red flags go off all over the place.
It stinks but truly understanding these terms and what they do is essential. Assign, convert and imbed are totally different things.

Assign profile - the act of giving color numbers meaning.
Convert to profile - the act of changing the color meaning of a set of color numbers by a set of rules, rendering intents.
Imbed profile - the act of saving a file with the profile information imbedded into the image file itself, not as a separate file.

Here is a warning about assigning profiles.

ASSIGN PROFILE
This should only happen when you first open and convert a camera RAW file, or scan a piece of film.
In the case of a camera RAW file, it would appear that you are assigning a WORKING SPACE in the RAW conversion dialogue,. However, in the background the RGB data is temporarily ASSIGNED a "generic profile" for the given camera to facilitate reasonable results, and then CONVERTED to your chosen working space in the camera RAW dialogue.
In the case of scanned film, depending upon software and degree of color management, the scanned image is assigned the profile for the scanner used and then CONVERTED to your working space.

In general, do not ASSIGN profiles to images unless you really know what you are doing( can resite chapter and verse from RWCM!)

[In2Photos]

Yikes! Just when I think I am getting the hang of this stuff I realize there is sooooo much more to know. I am just starting to do some printing which is why I am trying to get it all straight. So far everything I have learned has been from here, drycreek, and some stuff from Scott Kelby's book for CS2. Sounds like I need another book, Real World Color Management by Fraser, correct? I think I will also get his Real World Camera Raw book for even more reading, lol.

Thanks Rene, Tim, and Doug. I'll keep plugging away. I have been looking for other labs in my area besides Costco. It turns out the studio where we get my daughter's formal shots taken uses a lab that is near my work. Perhaps I will pop in and say hello and try to see if they will work with the "occasionally printing amateur."

Just to clarify under View > Proof Setup I should have Adobe RGB selected?

[René Damkot]

You don't have to select anything, since you don't need to softproof. At least, not while working on the ARGB image. You could softproof in the last step, before sending it off to the lab, to see if things go wrong when printing. In that case you'ld select the printer profile under Proof Setup.

[In2Photos]

You don't have to select anything, since you don't need to softproof. At least, not while working on the ARGB image. You could softproof in the last step, before sending it off to the lab, to see if things go wrong when printing. In that case you'ld select the printer profile under Proof Setup.

Thanks Rene. I went home at lunch and pulled up CS2 to check out some stuff and I think I know why I felt like I had to select the monitor profile. I was under the assumption that whatever profile you had used last was remembered and used when you open up CS2 each time. However this appears to not be the case. I also thought that you had to select it if you softproofed and then needed to edit another shot so that you weren't in the proofing stage still. I never saw the "Proof Colors" with the checkmark next to it for turning it off and on. I don't know if any of this made sense but I understand now.

Thanks again to everyone for their help. Now to find out what the lab does using Doug's method.

[tim]

Sorry, I should've been more precise and not used "assign profile", it was about 1am when I wrote that I think! I do know the difference between assign and embed.

Rene, I read some more of the color management book last night, and Bruce et al say that for book production they often work in the printers native color space from the start of their workflow. Converting to the printer profile is a reasonable thing to do under some circumstances, it seems, though Uncle Doug makes so excellent points.

Color definitely isn't easy! After reading that book though I understand far more about it. As bedtime reading it was great! ;)

[UncleDoug]

I read some more of the color management book last night, and Bruce et al say that for book production they often work in the printers native color space from the start of their workflow. Converting to the printer profile is a reasonable thing to do under some circumstances

You are totally right.
Welcome to the grey area of color management, if that makes any sense:lol:

The one thing about adjusting images in printer-native color space is that the grey axis is not uniform so the edits you do need to be very mild to say the least. That is why working spaces are so good for color adjustment, including LAB, a uniform straight grey axis.