Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: ozphoto on August 17, 2010, 10:32:32 am

Title: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: ozphoto on August 17, 2010, 10:32:32 am
Just curious to how people are still doing soft proofing? I wonder if people using LR3 still go into PS to soft proof or are folks just not doing the soft proofing, we've all waited for eons for this to be included as it was one of the most wanted features.

Conspiracy theorists say it won't be as Adobe wants PS included in the LR workflow?

All I know its a dissappointment for sure!!!! I have heard Adobe wants to do it right and lots of folks have given their thoughts into how it might work but I am still very concerned.

I am not a programmer so I don't know how easy or hard it might be to code this feature?

Anyway until Adobe decides it will or will not include soft proofing is there a way to at least automate the steps from LR3 to PS to bring up the 2 windows showing the before and after profile applied. I currently do everything manually tiling the windows horizontally etc etc.

Cheers


Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: john beardsworth on August 17, 2010, 01:33:50 pm
It's one of the most wanted features for those who want it - but it's not on the radar for many others. After all, lots of photographers would pay lip service to soft proofing's value, but just don't bother with it in their daily work. That, plus the amount of coding to make a good UI that would encourage everyone to use it, probably explains why it's not made the feature set.

As for automation, you could probably write a script to do the tiling, then put the script into a droplet. Then in LR you'd set up the droplet as an external editor, select the image and Edit With the droplet.

John
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Photo Op on August 17, 2010, 06:33:29 pm
Here's my take on the situation. It's my understanding that Jeff Schewe still uses/advocates soft proofing by using the LR to PS workflow. If I'm wrong, I'm sure he will respond. :) If I'm right, than I think there is hope that LR may contain soft proofing, someday. He does mention it in passing in one of the new LR3 LuLa tutorials (I forget which one). As for me, I somewhat ascribe (80-20) to the conspiracy theory that keeping it out of LR does benefit Adobe financially by having "some" folks decide to keep upgrading to PSx. 20% of me wants to think that it's really hard to put SP into LR, but you would think that a package developed primarily for photographers would have had IT by now (6 years after the development began)! Yes, I know it's a small team. And yes there were 'other' priorities, but geez Louise it must be moving up the list.

 
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: feppe on August 17, 2010, 07:48:01 pm
It's one of the most wanted features for those who want it - but it's not on the radar for many others. After all, lots of photographers would pay lip service to soft proofing's value, but just don't bother with it in their daily work. That, plus the amount of coding to make a good UI that would encourage everyone to use it, probably explains why it's not made the feature set.

I think you're right on the money with this: just like MLU button soft proofing is a feature "needed" by a tiny but very loud minority. I've dabbled with PS softproofing and it's a poor substitute for printing proofs. YMMV.

While I'm sure LR cannibalizing PS sales is keeping Adobe execs awake at night, I would imagine soft proofing is (again) a minor feature of PS, and probably not a significant help in driving PS sales alone.

Now where's my damn MLU button?
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Schewe on August 17, 2010, 08:37:15 pm
As for me, I somewhat ascribe (80-20) to the conspiracy theory that keeping it out of LR does benefit Adobe financially by having "some" folks decide to keep upgrading to PSx. 20% of me wants to think that it's really hard to put SP into LR...

Then the 20% is the more intelligent part of you. Soft proofing just simply didn't get done for LR 3. A lot of things that were on the spec for 3 didn't get done. It's called 'feature triage', some stuff can't get engineered in enough time to include it in the final release. Course, I can't really tell you all the stuff they WANTED to put in to 3 that got cut...but soft roofing was the most personally painful one for me.

Seriously, you all need to move on from the 'ain't gonna put it in Lightroom to save the market for Photoshop' theory. Photographers are less than 10% of the Photoshop/Creative Suite marketplace. You all simply aren't all that important that the execs would be sitting around factoring in cannibalization of Photoshop sales by Lightroom. Better Lightroom than an application not made by Adobe, ya know? If Photoshop were so insecure in their dominance–you do know what the Photoshop market share is, right–the BIGGEST competitor to Photoshop CS5 is CS4 and CS3, not Lightroom. Lightroom is a pimple on Photoshop's butt compared to the difficulty convincing earlier Photoshop users to upgrade.

Lightroom is the Adobe 'Un-Photoshop'. The original founding engineer, Mark Hamburg was the #2 engineer on Photoshop and wanted to do his own application to come up with an imaging application that wasn't Photoshop. That ended up being Lightroom and yes, it almost didn't happen except Apple releasing Aperture breathed life into Adobe's decision to develop and release Lightroom. Once Adobe circled the wagons and released Lightroom the die was cast. Lightroom had a life of its own largely independent of Photoshop–but joined at the hips with Camera Raw.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: RFPhotography on August 17, 2010, 09:01:41 pm
You all simply aren't all that important .....

You mean we, right Jeff?  ;)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Schewe on August 17, 2010, 09:22:01 pm
I mean 'photographers', yes...I don't necessarily mean me. I kinda have an 'in' than makes what I think maybe just a bit more important than most photographers (and yes, I strongly wanted soft proofing in LR 3 and didn't get it).

Even though Photo is in Photoshop's name, photographers have never been the most important market segment for Photoshop. Over the years, 'we photographers' (and I count myself in this group) have had great influence on the DEVELOPMENT of Photoshop but the bean counters (the suits) have never been much impressed with our market because it's so relatively small in the overall importance of Photoshop and the entire Creative Suite.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Alan Goldhammer on August 17, 2010, 09:50:51 pm
If Photoshop were so insecure in their dominance–you do know what the Photoshop market share is, right–the BIGGEST competitor to Photoshop CS5 is CS4 and CS3, not Lightroom. Lightroom is a pimple on Photoshop's butt compared to the difficulty convincing earlier Photoshop users to upgrade.

I think Jeff's right on target.  I have CS4 and the number of times I move from LR to PS to do something is really quite small.  I find that I really don't need to soft proof glossy papers as I've not seen much difference in the soft proof versus the final print.  Matte papers are a different story and soft proofing is quite useful there.  There are times where I need to do some editing to get some junk out of an image and the PS tools are great for that.  I don't see any need to move on up to CS5 as the features don't add anything to what I need.  I do have a number of friends who are graphic artists and they do things with PS that I find quite amazing.  It's likely that Adobe's principal focus is on them in regards to PS capabilities.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Schewe on August 17, 2010, 10:30:23 pm
I do have a number of friends who are graphic artists and they do things with PS that I find quite amazing.  It's likely that Adobe's principal focus is on them in regards to PS capabilities.

Correct...Photoshop has always had "graphic artists" (which is a big and very loose term) be it's major market share. Photoshop added to its overall market by adding the Extended version for video, 3D and industrial/scientific markets. They also added Fireworks for the web side (although most web devs use Photoshop a ton as well).

Adobe literally owns the pro market space between Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. What small impact Lightroom might have in Photoshop sales and upgrades Adobe still grabs by having Lightroom be its own product devoted to photographers. But development of Lightroom does not really have much impact on Photoshop itself (other than to push the Photoshop engineers towards doing things in a more Lightroom sort of way-consider the non-modal Adjustment panels in CS4 as an example).

What does and doesn't end up in Lightroom is really defined by what the Lightroom engineering team can and can't do in a given development period.

Personally, I keep Lightroom and Camera Raw (Bridge and Photoshop) in lock-step so I can use the tool I need to use when I need to use it. As much as I use Lightroom (a lot) I also use Camera Raw, Bridge and Photoshop. Which tool I use is more dictated by which tool set I need and when. I do still prefer to print out of Lightroom due to all the advanced stuff in the Lightroom Print module, but any serious prints will always go through Photoshop for soft proofing and real retouching-which I still find myself needing even if the majority of image correction is done in Lightroom/ACR.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Photo Op on August 17, 2010, 11:36:14 pm
...but any serious prints will always go through Photoshop for soft proofing....

Good enough for you, good enough for me! ;)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: ozphoto on August 19, 2010, 11:37:03 am
Good discussions, until Adobe decides on this issue is there a way to automate softproofing from LR to PS to LR, there were some pointers a few replies ago about using a script and droplet method, but not being a PS guru I would find this very time consuming for me and I may not get it working right.

Suggestion: Perhaps Adobe or a PS guru could post a tool, script, or whatever that people could download and install to make soft proofing easier for photographers in the round trip from LR>PS>LR ??
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: feppe on August 19, 2010, 12:10:00 pm
Seriously, you all need to move on from the 'ain't gonna put it in Lightroom to save the market for Photoshop' theory. Photographers are less than 10% of the Photoshop/Creative Suite marketplace. You all simply aren't all that important that the execs would be sitting around factoring in cannibalization of Photoshop sales by Lightroom. Better Lightroom than an application not made by Adobe, ya know? If Photoshop were so insecure in their dominance–you do know what the Photoshop market share is, right–the BIGGEST competitor to Photoshop CS5 is CS4 and CS3, not Lightroom. Lightroom is a pimple on Photoshop's butt compared to the difficulty convincing earlier Photoshop users to upgrade.

Lightroom is the Adobe 'Un-Photoshop'. The original founding engineer, Mark Hamburg was the #2 engineer on Photoshop and wanted to do his own application to come up with an imaging application that wasn't Photoshop. That ended up being Lightroom and yes, it almost didn't happen except Apple releasing Aperture breathed life into Adobe's decision to develop and release Lightroom. Once Adobe circled the wagons and released Lightroom the die was cast. Lightroom had a life of its own largely independent of Photoshop–but joined at the hips with Camera Raw.

Thanks for the good insight! 10% is indeed a small portion of PS users, so even if there's some cannibalization it probably won't keep anyone up at night :)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: ozphoto on August 25, 2010, 11:34:20 am
I have searched for some automation tips on the trip from LR to PS for soft proofing back to LR to no avail. Perhaps LuLa can address this somehow that would make it somewhat easier to soft proof???

Also I found this blog from Scott Kelby on what he would like in LR 4, soft proofing of course! , honestly it needed to be in LR 2 and it better be in some revision of LR 3 or I think it might be time to abandon LR.

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/11824
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: john beardsworth on August 25, 2010, 11:56:47 am
However, this is how he phrased it...

Quote
I’m not a soft proofing guy on any level, but I hear from many photographers out there who would put this at the top of their wish list, so it would have to be included in the list of the biggies, even if it’s a feature I personally will never use.
.

Have you tried Configurator (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/configurator/)? If you don't know how to script or create a droplet, it may allow you to figure things out. It's very easy to use - you just drag menu commands (such as duplicate image, arrange horizontally) onto a palette, export the panel, and restart PS. It's then available as a PS palette.

John
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: peterurban on August 26, 2010, 12:27:00 am

What does and doesn't end up in Lightroom is really defined by what the Lightroom engineering team can and can't do in a given development period.


It is a pity that SP didn't make it into LR this time around. I believe that for a lot of people the lack of SP is often the only reason for the round trip to Photoshop and back before printing - I often can do without the highly advanced editing features in PS but I can't do without seeing what I'll get before printing. It's a regular annoyance and I could have done without *any* new features bar soft proofing for the new release.

Obviously the dev team's priorities where somewhere else which probably means my needs are not that representative after all ;-)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Mark D Segal on August 27, 2010, 11:11:47 pm
It is a pity that SP didn't make it into LR this time around. I believe that for a lot of people the lack of SP is often the only reason for the round trip to Photoshop and back before printing - I often can do without the highly advanced editing features in PS but I can't do without seeing what I'll get before printing. It's a regular annoyance and I could have done without *any* new features bar soft proofing for the new release.

Obviously the dev team's priorities where somewhere else which probably means my needs are not that representative after all ;-)

Peter, all kinds of things are priorities, because many people are always asking for many different features and options. The development team needs to evaluate what deserves to be worked-on, assign tasks to sub-groups and different tasks will take different periods of time to be developed (both the math and the GUI), quality-controlled and tested. It could well be that soft-proofing got assigned at the same time as a lot of other stuff which ended-up in V3, but as Jeff said, simply couldn't be finished within the available time period given the resources they had. Inevitably, all such processes are resource-constrained so inevitably there will be trade-offs, and unless we have a complete picture of what they were faced with, it would be hard to conclude that their priorities are somewhere else. They know SP is important to many of us. And I do agree with you on the workflow point - lack of SP is a key reason I still go into Photoshop - but there are others too, so there you go!
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: jgbowerman on August 28, 2010, 10:31:06 am
Just curious to how people are still doing soft proofing? I wonder if people using LR3 still go into PS to soft proof or are folks just not doing the soft proofing, we've all waited for eons for this to be included as it was one of the most wanted features.

Conspiracy theorists say it won't be as Adobe wants PS included in the LR workflow?

All I know its a dissappointment for sure!!!! I have heard Adobe wants to do it right and lots of folks have given their thoughts into how it might work but I am still very concerned.

I am not a programmer so I don't know how easy or hard it might be to code this feature?

Anyway until Adobe decides it will or will not include soft proofing is there a way to at least automate the steps from LR3 to PS to bring up the 2 windows showing the before and after profile applied. I currently do everything manually tiling the windows horizontally etc etc.

Cheers




It seems the modular design of LR is ideal for the inevitable addition of soft proofing. However, will it be configured primarily with Epson printers in mind? I'm not clear on this myself, but on the surface, it looks to me PS, LR, and Epson are somewhat intertwined. I assume this is because those photographers with the greatest influence on Adobe's design team use Epson printers.

I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist on this observation, but being a Canon user with Canon's iPF printer plugin, even if LR comes up with a soft-proofing module, will it be compatible with Canon's print plugin? This is only one angle on the complexity  behind the scenes when considering the question of a LR soft-proofing module. Without having the capacity to integrate Canon's printer plugin, a soft proofing module in LR would be of no benefit for those of us who print from the iPF Canon plugin; we would still need to open PS to get the job done.

On the question of using soft proofing in the first place, I only use it for determining rendering intent. I do not find soft proofing to be helpful otherwise, but I do print primarily on glossy and semi-glossy paper. I found Goldhammer's take on matte paper of interest. As goes rendering intent, the choice for glossy and semi-glossy paper will be Relative 95% of the time, but with matte paper, I understand it to be closer to 50/50.

I appreciate the likes of Jeff Schewe who find soft proofing to be of greater value and I mean no criticism when expressing my preference, but I'd wager many of us share Goldhammer's opinion on the overall futility of soft proofing.

A bit off the subject, but my primary frustration with LR/PS workflow is not about soft proofing, it is the fact most plugins for CS5 remain 32 bit (including Canon's iPF printer plugin... so currently, I go from LR3, then to CS5, and FINALLY to CS4!). From my perspective, it is not about how far LR3 should or could have gone on this question of soft proofing, it is the reality that many software developers have yet to fully catch up with LR3/CS5 and 64 bit technology.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Schewe on August 28, 2010, 11:39:36 am
I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist on this observation, but being a Canon user with Canon's iPF printer plugin, even if LR comes up with a soft-proofing module, will it be compatible with Canon's print plugin? This is only one angle on the complexity  behind the scenes when considering the question of a LR soft-proofing module. Without having the capacity to integrate Canon's printer plugin, a soft proofing module in LR would be of no benefit for those of us who print from the iPF Canon plugin; we would still need to open PS to get the job done.

If you are referring to Canon's Photoshop plug-in for printing to Canon printers, then you'll need to look to Canon to develop software that will work in Lightroom, not the other way around...Lightroom is designed to use the OS level print pipeline, not some proprietary plug-in technology. Canon isn't known for making great software...but they do develop OS level printer support. That would be the support you could expect Lightroom to allow soft proofing for when it happens.

I also wouldn't read too much into Adobe and Epson's relationship. Adobe has a healthy relationship with the three main print manufacturers. Adobe, Apple, MSFT, Epson, Canon and HP all work together on a project aimed at providing a best print experience. Ironically, the one entity that does the worst in providing a stable print pipeline is Apple. Where ColorSync used to be thought of as a plus, it now seems to cause far more problems than it solves.

In my experience, people who don't know HOW to use soft proofing tend to discount it's usefulness. Soft proofing in Photoshop works very well if (and only if) you have a well profiled display, a well profiled printer and the knowledge of how to use the soft proofing setup to predict not only the final color but also dynamic range of the print.

To the extent that soft proofing can predict color, today's printers can often print colors outside of the gamut of a display (the Epson 79/9900 printers can easily print colors outside of Adobe RGB let alone sRGB). So, determining the rendering intent and then predicting the impact of the dynamic range of the final print is where soft proofing becomes useful. Actually seeing the full gamut of the print isn't as successful because of the limited gamut of the displays particularly if your working space is Pro Photo RGB...but if you wish to extract the optimal results from your images when printed to paper, you really only have two choices; trial and error and constant fiddling to get a final print or soft proof to reduce the numbers of shots you take at getting the optimal print. Even with soft proofing there still needs to be real proofs made to confirm the prediction of the soft proof and finesse the final print appearance for the substrate and ink. Soft proofing just cuts the workload at arriving at an optimal result.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: ozphoto on August 28, 2010, 12:36:14 pm
Until LR gets soft proofing if ever, what we (I) need is a step by step instruction (video) more than what LR2 LuLa provided with tips and tricks to automate some functions from LR to PS to LR would certainly help a lot of us.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: PeterAit on August 28, 2010, 12:40:20 pm
For critical work, I always go into Photoshop, not just for the soft proofing but also for the additional image control it provides over LR. In LR, my "soft proofing" occurs in my head. My experience is that getting the print to match the screen image (assuming your color calibration is set up properly) almost always involves 2 things: a little more contrast and a little more brightness. The resulting print may not be a 100% precise match, but it's almost always close enough as to not make any meaningful difference.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: ozphoto on August 28, 2010, 12:47:37 pm
yes of course the 2 monitors I have are set up with data colors studio calibration and match functions.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: jgbowerman on August 28, 2010, 01:47:12 pm
If you are referring to Canon's Photoshop plug-in for printing to Canon printers, then you'll need to look to Canon to develop software that will work in Lightroom, not the other way around...Lightroom is designed to use the OS level print pipeline, not some proprietary plug-in technology. Canon isn't known for making great software...but they do develop OS level printer support. That would be the support you could expect Lightroom to allow soft proofing for when it happens.

I also wouldn't read too much into Adobe and Epson's relationship. Adobe has a healthy relationship with the three main print manufacturers. Adobe, Apple, MSFT, Epson, Canon and HP all work together on a project aimed at providing a best print experience. Ironically, the one entity that does the worst in providing a stable print pipeline is Apple. Where ColorSync used to be thought of as a plus, it now seems to cause far more problems than it solves.

In my experience, people who don't know HOW to use soft proofing tend to discount it's usefulness. Soft proofing in Photoshop works very well if (and only if) you have a well profiled display, a well profiled printer and the knowledge of how to use the soft proofing setup to predict not only the final color but also dynamic range of the print.

To the extent that soft proofing can predict color, today's printers can often print colors outside of the gamut of a display (the Epson 79/9900 printers can easily print colors outside of Adobe RGB let alone sRGB). So, determining the rendering intent and then predicting the impact of the dynamic range of the final print is where soft proofing becomes useful. Actually seeing the full gamut of the print isn't as successful because of the limited gamut of the displays particularly if your working space is Pro Photo RGB...but if you wish to extract the optimal results from your images when printed to paper, you really only have two choices; trial and error and constant fiddling to get a final print or soft proof to reduce the numbers of shots you take at getting the optimal print. Even with soft proofing there still needs to be real proofs made to confirm the prediction of the soft proof and finesse the final print appearance for the substrate and ink. Soft proofing just cuts the workload at arriving at an optimal result.

Thank you, Jeff, for the well thought out reply. You provided me a more complete perspective in the scheme of things as goes software development and third-party plugins.

I do have a well profiled display and printer, no doubt it is an issue of user skill. That said, I am very happy with what I get when printing and I'd say it is well within 95% or better of what I see on the display. It is predictable, and that seems the key... predicability. Along the lines of predictability, I am in agreement with PeterAit:


Quote
In LR, my "soft proofing" occurs in my head. My experience is that getting the print to match the screen image (assuming your color calibration is set up properly) almost always involves 2 things: a little more contrast and a little more brightness. The resulting print may not be a 100% precise match, but it's almost always close enough as to not make any meaningful difference.

I, too, almost subconsciously add extra contrast and brightness, and the final print appearance is otherwise primarily limited by the inevitable differences between display and printer gamuts, these differences being of minor if any significance, IMO.

Edit: I should add, this inevitable difference between printer/display gamuts is minimized in its effect by choosing the correct rendering intent. I use soft proofing for rendering intent determination inside the Photoshop-Canon Print Plugin, my last step prior to clicking the print command.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: digitaldog on August 28, 2010, 01:49:16 pm
In my experience, people who don't know HOW to use soft proofing tend to discount it's usefulness.

So true! One of us really needs to sit down with this fellow and how him the path!

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/11824

See #4...
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on August 28, 2010, 02:54:50 pm
So true! One of us really needs to sit down with this fellow and how him the path!

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/11824

See #4...
That would be the second #4, not the first #4. Kelby may be a great teacher of photoshop but he seems to have a problem with counting!

Jeremy
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Mark D Segal on August 28, 2010, 03:33:07 pm
So true! One of us really needs to sit down with this fellow and how him the path!

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/11824

See #4...

Not really Andrew. I'm a firm SP-user - wouldn't think of printing without it, which is why I print from Photoshop after doing everything I need from LR that it is particularly good for. That said, two qualifications: (1) there are respectable photographers who make very fine prints straight from LR without any softproofing, and (2) using a paper such as Ilford Gold Fibre Silk (and I would assume the same for other similarly large gamutm high DR papers) in my Epson 3800, the difference between the image view with versus without SP is not anywhere as large as it is when using matte media, hence one COULD almost take a stab at slightly over-compensating contrast and saturation in LR and get the print one wants - but that's where the fear factor sets-in, and mine tells me to soft-proof. Others are hardier. What's really interesting about Scott's list is (a) he's hearing about a lot of other priorities on peoples' minds quite apart from SP, and (b) he's objective enough to report it all, regardless of his own personal feelings about the importance of this or that item on other peoples' wish-list. I respect him for this.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Mark D Segal on August 28, 2010, 05:41:48 pm

Ironically, the one entity that does the worst in providing a stable print pipeline is Apple. Where ColorSync used to be thought of as a plus, it now seems to cause far more problems than it solves.


Jeff, as a person about to order a MacPro, I would appreciate if you could elaborate on specifically what problems you have in mind here and what the workarounds are - aside from using CS4 and Windows for printing (not because there's anything wrong with that, but because I know about it already!).
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: dgberg on August 29, 2010, 06:38:26 am
Until LR gets soft proofing if ever, what we (I) need is a step by step instruction (video) more than what LR2 LuLa provided with tips and tricks to automate some functions from LR to PS to LR would certainly help a lot of us.

Ozphoto
No video because it takes 2 seconds and is 2 clicks.
In LR r click to selelect edit in PS.
When done close PS and click save and your image is right back in LR where you started.
Or are you trying to do something else?
Explain a little more if it is another issue.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Schewe on August 29, 2010, 07:35:19 am
Jeff, as a person about to order a MacPro, I would appreciate if you could elaborate on specifically what problems you have in mind here and what the workarounds are - aside from using CS4 and Windows for printing (not because there's anything wrong with that, but because I know about it already!).

The main problems with Snow Leopard and printing relate to the difficulties in actually printing a proper profile target...you CAN'T print out such a target from Lightroom...you CAN print out the target from Photoshop CS5 _IF_ you use the assign profile Eric Chan workaround. The other issue with printing from either Lightroom or Photoshop CS5 is it uses Apple's new print pipeline which requires the most recent print driver updates. Since I know you print on an Epson 3800, making sure you've got the most recent driver loaded (and not the generic CUPS driver installed by the OS) will eliminate the printing issues.

The bottom line is that the Mac OS is constantly evolving and changes are forced on users and developers alike. When Apple rev's the OS things can sometime get broken (such as the update from 10.6.3 to 10.6.4). Since Adobe must now use Apple's new print pipeline (unlike LR 2. and CS4) some users with older printers got caught because the older drivers couldn't cope with the new pipeline and required updated drivers which Epson was slow to get out. The 2200/76/9600 printer users had to wait till the OS bugs and new driver were released...this sort of start/stop/wait makes users nuts because what was working quit working because of app or OS changes. The tendency is to blame the application (Photoshop CS5 or LR 3) rather than the OS or print drivers. As a result, Adobe gets a lot of blame for the shortcomings of the others...this scenario doesn't happen nearly as much with Windows users as it relates to the print pipeline but they have their own set of other hardware/software issues :~)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: jgbowerman on August 29, 2010, 08:56:59 am
The main problems with Snow Leopard and printing relate to the difficulties in actually printing a proper profile target...you CAN'T print out such a target from Lightroom...you CAN print out the target from Photoshop CS5 _IF_ you use the assign profile Eric Chan workaround. The other issue with printing from either Lightroom or Photoshop CS5 is it uses Apple's new print pipeline which requires the most recent print driver updates. Since I know you print on an Epson 3800, making sure you've got the most recent driver loaded (and not the generic CUPS driver installed by the OS) will eliminate the printing issues.

The bottom line is that the Mac OS is constantly evolving and changes are forced on users and developers alike. When Apple rev's the OS things can sometime get broken (such as the update from 10.6.3 to 10.6.4). Since Adobe must now use Apple's new print pipeline (unlike LR 2. and CS4) some users with older printers got caught because the older drivers couldn't cope with the new pipeline and required updated drivers which Epson was slow to get out. The 2200/76/9600 printer users had to wait till the OS bugs and new driver were released...this sort of start/stop/wait makes users nuts because what was working quit working because of app or OS changes. The tendency is to blame the application (Photoshop CS5 or LR 3) rather than the OS or print drivers. As a result, Adobe gets a lot of blame for the shortcomings of the others...this scenario doesn't happen nearly as much with Windows users as it relates to the print pipeline but they have their own set of other hardware/software issues :~)

So true, this issue with OS, CS5, print drivers and third-party plugins. Perhaps the biggest incentive upgrading to CS5 for Mac users is the ability to edit in 64-bit mode. However, most third-party plugins for Mac users remain 32 bit! I understand it might not be until November before Canon's Photoshop Print Plugin will be available in 64 bit. Until that time, CS5 remains in "beta" mode for many Mac users. Regardless, it is a minor workaround to print out of CS4 while otherwise editing in CS5... very well worth the upgrade. One can print out of CS5, with Canon's plugin, if they first change to 32-bit mode, but that is more of a hassle than simply closing in CS5, and reopening in CS4. One interesting thing when printing out of CS4 is a conflict if CS5 remains open; printing gets disabled. Took me awhile the first time around before figuring out I had to quit CS5 before printing out of CS4.

Once a Mac user experiences operating PS in 64-bit mode, they'll never want to go back. Reminds me of the internet dialup days! (Are we getting spoiled?)
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Mark D Segal on August 31, 2010, 03:46:38 pm
The main problems with Snow Leopard and printing relate to the difficulties in actually printing a proper profile target...you CAN'T print out such a target from Lightroom...you CAN print out the target from Photoshop CS5 _IF_ you use the assign profile Eric Chan workaround. The other issue with printing from either Lightroom or Photoshop CS5 is it uses Apple's new print pipeline which requires the most recent print driver updates. Since I know you print on an Epson 3800, making sure you've got the most recent driver loaded (and not the generic CUPS driver installed by the OS) will eliminate the printing issues.

The bottom line is that the Mac OS is constantly evolving and changes are forced on users and developers alike. When Apple rev's the OS things can sometime get broken (such as the update from 10.6.3 to 10.6.4). Since Adobe must now use Apple's new print pipeline (unlike LR 2. and CS4) some users with older printers got caught because the older drivers couldn't cope with the new pipeline and required updated drivers which Epson was slow to get out. The 2200/76/9600 printer users had to wait till the OS bugs and new driver were released...this sort of start/stop/wait makes users nuts because what was working quit working because of app or OS changes. The tendency is to blame the application (Photoshop CS5 or LR 3) rather than the OS or print drivers. As a result, Adobe gets a lot of blame for the shortcomings of the others...this scenario doesn't happen nearly as much with Windows users as it relates to the print pipeline but they have their own set of other hardware/software issues :~)

Thanks Jeff - late seeing this because for some reason I don't know I didn't get emailed by the Board - will check my Board Prefs and/or contact the powers-to-be as needed. Yes, the target-printing business has been an on-going saga for a while and for now we have Eric's workaround. Here's hoping that Adobe is soon to release their app for printing with no colour management. Of course, when the new Mac comes I shall download the latest 3800 drivers for Mac from the Epson site and install them, as I now have for PC on the XP computer. I'm wondering whether I would need to create a new printer profile for the Mac if I'll be using the same paper - is it safe to assume the latest Epson drivers for Mac and PC would work the same way?
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Alan Goldhammer on August 31, 2010, 04:43:24 pm
Thanks Jeff - late seeing this because for some reason I don't know I didn't get emailed by the Board - will check my Board Prefs and/or contact the powers-to-be as needed. Yes, the target-printing business has been an on-going saga for a while and for now we have Eric's workaround. Here's hoping that Adobe is soon to release their app for printing with no colour management. Of course, when the new Mac comes I shall download the latest 3800 drivers for Mac from the Epson site and install them, as I now have for PC on the XP computer. I'm wondering whether I would need to create a new printer profile for the Mac if I'll be using the same paper - is it safe to assume the latest Epson drivers for Mac and PC would work the same way?
Mark, I know Epson lists two separate downloads for profiles on their website depending on whether you are using a Mac or PC.  The operating systems are different and hence the drivers have to be coded differently as well.  It's hard to tell whether the profiles are the same or not as they come in compressed files and you need to uncompress to install.  As you know I'm a PC person so you can take this with a grain of salt until someone with experience with both systems can weigh in.

Alan
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Mark D Segal on August 31, 2010, 04:48:36 pm
Mark, I know Epson lists two separate downloads for profiles on their website depending on whether you are using a Mac or PC.  The operating systems are different and hence the drivers have to be coded differently as well.  It's hard to tell whether the profiles are the same or not as they come in compressed files and you need to uncompress to install.  As you know I'm a PC person so you can take this with a grain of salt until someone with experience with both systems can weigh in.

Alan

Hi Alan -  I don't use Epson papers so their profiles are not the issue for me. I normally use Ilford GFS and roll my own profiles for it using my XRite Pulse Elite. I did that last time I up-dated the Epson driver and firmware for the PC, so I'm just wondering whether the same generation driver for the Mac would make the printer behave any differently. If it doesn't, I needn't reprofile and I needn't worry about workarounds to the "no colour management" issue. If it does, well then I shall have to trudge through another exercise.
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: hsmeets on September 08, 2010, 04:05:37 am
A short story on softproofing:

When I started to make inkjetprints I also bought a printprofiling kit. Figured out the best mediasetting, I printed the target, measured it and let the software create the profile, easy as that. Prints made with the profile where a little bit darker then on-screen and also had a small colorshift. The softproof in PS showed that effect too. So I always added an adjustment layer the correct for that. I was a happy camper. As that shift in color/brightness was constant I saved the curves as a preset.

Recently I decided to create a new profile as new ink was in the printer, printer had aged, etc etc and most important: I finaly had taken time to read the manual from the profiling kit and realised the impact of a certain chapter in that manual describing some functionality of the software: ability to tweak the profile to be created.

The software allows to change the colorbalance, contrast, brightness of the profile that is created. So what I did in a few iterative steps was change brightness and colorbalance settings so that I no longer need adjustments to bring back a softproof to the original.

I still have some small differences in color renderings between the original and the softproof/print but I have no problem with that as they only are visible next to each other and it does not harm the 'quality' of the print and also often fall in the realm of where screen and printer gamut do not match.

So since a few weeks I often print without doing a softproof, only with certain type of images I still experiment with the rendering intent to see what gives me the best results to my likings.

If you had asked me a year ago about Lightroom and Softproofing I would have said that the lack of softproofing would have been a serious shortcoming. Asked that same question again today my answer is different.

Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: dreed on September 21, 2010, 04:55:45 am
In my experience, people who don't know HOW to use soft proofing tend to discount it's usefulness. Soft proofing in Photoshop works very well if (and only if) you have a well profiled display, a well profiled printer and the knowledge of how to use the soft proofing setup to predict not only the final color but also dynamic range of the print.

To the extent that soft proofing can predict color, today's printers can often print colors outside of the gamut of a display (the Epson 79/9900 printers can easily print colors outside of Adobe RGB let alone sRGB). So, determining the rendering intent and then predicting the impact of the dynamic range of the final print is where soft proofing becomes useful. Actually seeing the full gamut of the print isn't as successful because of the limited gamut of the displays particularly if your working space is Pro Photo RGB...but if you wish to extract the optimal results from your images when printed to paper, you really only have two choices; trial and error and constant fiddling to get a final print or soft proof to reduce the numbers of shots you take at getting the optimal print. Even with soft proofing there still needs to be real proofs made to confirm the prediction of the soft proof and finesse the final print appearance for the substrate and ink. Soft proofing just cuts the workload at arriving at an optimal result.

Hmm, there are a bunch of "consumer" monitors that claim to do > 100% of Adobe RGB. Should these be placed high up the shopping list for their ability to aid in soft proofing?
Title: Re: What Happened to Soft Proofing?
Post by: Nick Rains on October 02, 2010, 11:48:43 pm
After reading the above comments about printing issues with Macs I'm pleased that I currently print from 64bit W7 machine but do my PSCS5 work on a Mac. I'd not have the patience to wrestle with those OS printing issues!

I'm an egalitarian, I loath PCs and Macs equally!