Soft Proofing with Perceptual and Relative Intents, No Change?

[stockjock]

A few weeks ago I bought a new computer and monitor and installed Lightroom and Photoshop on it and profiled with i1DisplayPro.  I copied all of my paper profiles, including my Canson papers, into the Windows/System32/Spool/Drivers/Colors directory.  My old computer was Windows 7 and my new computer is Windows 10.  I didn't go through the process of "installing" all the icc profiles because I didn't think it made any difference.  I also copied all of my Lightroom printing templates over from the old computer to the appropriate directory on the new computer.  Those templates remember the paper size etc. but I need to reassociate the paper profile and that Lightroom manages colors with each template before I use it.

So that is some background and I have been happy with the prints I have been getting on my Canon iPF8400.  But the "problem", if you can call it that, is that when I soft proof an image I have been working on I no longer see any difference when I choose between Perceptual and Relative rendering intents.  On my old computer there was always an easily discernable difference in the image when you switched between the two intents.  But on the new computer switching between the two intents makes no difference in how the image is rendered when you soft proof.  It feels like I must have done something wrong but I don't know what it could have been.  Any suggestions?

[Mark D Segal]

For photos where all the colours are in gamut, there should be no difference between the two Rendering Intents, as these RIs are different recipes for handling out of gamut colours. There would be some kind of discrepancy only if on your previous computer the same photo using the same paper and printer profile did show a difference between the two RIs. I assume also you checked whether the same profile is in use in the Develop Module for softproofing on the new system as it was on the old.

[digitaldog]

Check if you see a difference with this reference image:


http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Gamut_Test_File_Flat.tif

[Pete Berry]

Check if you see a difference with this reference image:


http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Gamut_Test_File_Flat.tif

Just changed over to Win-10 from 7, printing with iPF 5100, and see marked differences among the rendering intents with this image filled with OOG colors.

Pete

[LenR]

Check if you see a difference with this reference image:


http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Gamut_Test_File_Flat.tif

Now THERE'S as reference file!!!!!

[digitaldog]

Now THERE'S as reference file!!!!!

These are even better (but not free!): http://www.roman16.com/en/
Another free one is this: http://www.digitaldog.net/files/2014PrinterTestFileFlat.tif.zip

[stockjock]

Check if you see a difference with this reference image:


http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Gamut_Test_File_Flat.tif

Thanks for pointing me to that image.  When I first imported it I didn't see any changes in the soft proofing rendering intent for my Canson Platine profile but when I switched to Canson Baryta I did see the changes and after switching back to the Canson Platine profile it started working correctly.  I have no idea why simply switching between profiles caused Lightroom to start working correctly but the problem seems fixed now.

[Ernst Dinkla]

For photos where all the colours are in gamut, there should be no difference between the two Rendering Intents, as these RIs are different recipes for handling out of gamut colours. There would be some kind of discrepancy only if on your previous computer the same photo using the same paper and printer profile did show a difference between the two RIs. I assume also you checked whether the same profile is in use in the Develop Module for softproofing on the new system as it was on the old.

Mark, as I understand it, it is not the gamut of the image content that is fitted within the printer profile gamut boundaries, in a perceptual or relative color metric compression, but the assigned color space gamut is fitted within the printer profile gamut boundaries, in a perceptual or relative color metric compression and with that the image content. Which should still deliver differences in the printed images whether the content is in gamut or not in gamut. It may be a subtle difference though.


Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Mark D Segal]

Mark, as I understand it, it is not the gamut of the image content that is fitted within the printer profile gamut boundaries, in a perceptual or relative color metric compression, but the assigned color space gamut is fitted within the printer profile gamut boundaries, in a perceptual or relative color metric compression and with that the image content. Which should still deliver differences in the printed images whether the content is in gamut or not in gamut. It may be a subtle difference though.


Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2016 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Yes it's space to space conversions through the PCS, but there needs to be pixels with image content for the choice of RI to have a visible impact on the photograph. Pages 97 and 519 of "Real World Color Management" 2nd Edition by Fraser, Murphy and Bunting explains how it works. The end result boils down to pretty much what I suggested in respect of impacts.

[Mark D Segal]

BTW, I should add that the box at the bottom of page 519 also explains one somewhat arcane reason why one may not see any difference between selection of rendering intents, dealing with the content and structure of the profiles and/or characteristics of the user interface.