Using Profiles and Color Management

[dwdallam]

Using the Dry Creek profile instructions has me somewhat confused. Here are the points from the Dry Creek instructions that I have issues with. Any help understanding my problems would be appreciated:

8. Simulation options:

* It is easiest to perform any major color and tonal adjustments without Simulate Paper Color (Photoshop CS2) or Paper White (Photoshop 6.0 through CS) or Ink Black checked.

Why? You would think that you want to see exactly how you are changing the image as it will look printed.

16. Finally, convert the image to the appropriate profile, using your chosen rendering intent. In Photoshop

CS2 the command is Edit->Convert to Profile. Earlier Photoshop versions use Image->Mode->Convert to Profile. Frontier and Noritsu printers do not read embedded profiles, so the image data must be converted. This changes the data in the file to compensate for how your lab's machine actually prints colors.

This sounds, in practice, like a contradiction. When I use "convert to profile" and then try to reopen the image, Adobe gives me the message that "The document xxx has an embedded color profile that does not match. . . ."  I've tried "assigning" the profile also, but adobe CS2 still reports that the profile is embedded.  

But then later on perhaps we have a solution:

17. Do not embed the profile in the saved file. Frontier, Noritsu, and Agfa printers ignore embedded profiles, so you are only using up disk space. Additionally, many versions of the Fuji Frontier PIC driver crash when given files with profiles embedded. In the File->Save As dialog box, uncheck the "ICC Profile:" box in the Color settings area.

So it seems that we are told to convert to profile, which seemingly embeds it, which the printer cannot use, and then to discard the ICC profile? I don't get it. When I use that exact method, and then reopen the image--sure enough, I DO NOT get the embedded profile message, but the image looks HORRIBLE. Almost the entire image is out of gamut in both RGB1998 and the Noritsu profile.


And by the way, what exactly is the difference between converting and assigning a profile: The Adobe help files are cryptic on this point.

Thanks again.

[dlashier]

No contradictions at all, do as Ethan says, convert to profile and when saving uncheck the embed profile box. Once you do this there's no point in opening in PS again or things will look screwy.

In PS, convert versus assign is actually what it says. Normally the only use for "assign" is if opening an image that has no profile embedded. IWO if you wanted to open one of the above images you'd saved without embedding profile, you could make it look right by telling PS to assign the printer profile that you converted to earlier.

- DL

[dwdallam]

OK so what PS is doing if you don't uncheck ICC profile is converting the image to the specified profile and embedding the profile? So leaving it embedded will not hurt things, except for the Frontier printers which he says sometimes crash.

Thanks a lot for clearing that up for me. What about my other concern?

8. Simulation options:

* It is easiest to perform any major color and tonal adjustments without Simulate Paper Color (Photoshop CS2) or Paper White (Photoshop 6.0 through CS) or Ink Black checked.

Why? You would think that you want to see exactly how you are changing the image as it will look printed.

Thanks.

No contradictions at all, do as Ethan says, convert to profile and when saving uncheck the embed profile box. Once you do this there's no point in opening in PS again or things will look screwy.

In PS, convert versus assign is actually what it says. Normally the only use for "assign" is if opening an image that has no profile embedded. IWO if you wanted to open one of the above images you'd saved without embedding profile, you could make it look right by telling PS to assign the printer profile that you converted to earlier.

- DL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67959\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[bruce fraser]

* It is easiest to perform any major color and tonal adjustments without Simulate Paper Color (Photoshop CS2) or Paper White (Photoshop 6.0 through CS) or Ink Black checked.

Why? You would think that you want to see exactly how you are changing the image as it will look printed.

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68022\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The first thing you tend to see when you turn on Simulate Paper White and Ink Black is that the image dies before your eyes due to massive dynamic range compression.

To show you the paper white, Photoshop has to render white on the display as something less than Monitor RGB 255,255,255. This works if, and only if, you hide all the white UI elements on the screen. If you don't, your eye adapts to the UI white, and quite sensibly asks your brain why there's colored crud all over your highlights.

The second problem is that just about every monitor profile on the planet records monitor black as LAB 0,0,0. The only thing that emits no light whatsoever is the event horizon of a black hole, and you don't want one of those on your desktop! In practice, the blackest black the display can display is more typically around LAB 8,0,0 to LAB 12,0,0. But Photoshop can't tell that from the monitor profile, so turning on Ink Black tends to wash out the shadows more than they will in print.

If you're working with a very low dynamic range print process like newsprint or uncoated rag paper on inkjet, it's worth going through the gyrations required to master soft-proofing with the Simulate options on. With the Noritsu and Fuji printers it's just going to scare you to no particularly good end.

[dwdallam]

Bruce,

Thanks much on that.

Also, can someone answer my question about leaving chekced ICC profile? Will this cause print degradation, or just be extra information in the image? I really hate driving all the way to Costco, having to wait around for an hour, and then get the picture back just to have to do it again. Total waste of time! So at least I can get the setting right the first time. I guess I could buy one of those new Noritsu printers for my own use. How much are they, about 2 or 3 thousand (cough cough)? And yes I know they are about 180,000 US.

The first thing you tend to see when you turn on Simulate Paper White and Ink Black is that the image dies before your eyes due to massive dynamic range compression.

snip
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68031\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[dlashier]

Also, can someone answer my question about leaving chekced ICC profile? Will this cause print degradation, or just be extra information in the image?

All the checkbox does is determine whether or not the profile is embedded in the saved image file. It will not alter the actual image data.

- DL

[Ray]

The first thing you tend to see when you turn on Simulate Paper White and Ink Black is that the image dies before your eyes due to massive dynamic range compression.

Bruce,
I generally find that turning on 'ink black' has only a very subtle effect on the monitor appearance of the image. It's the 'paper color' that seems to throw a veil over general clarity and punch. But often this is not the case with 'absolute colorimetric' rendering intent which seems to me to be the best option for some landscapes. The drawback seems to be a tendency towards out of gamut colors and blocked shadows.

On the issue of image adjustment prior to turning on 'proof colors', I find that making as many adjustments as possible in ACR prior to conversion is all that is necessary. I then like to do all further editing with 'proof colors' and 'paper white' on, but perhaps that is because I use just the one type of paper, Epson Premium Lustre on the 7600.

What worries me a little is, no matter how 'right' the final image appears after editing with proof colors on, the image usually still looks better when proof colors are turned off   .

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

What worries me a little is, no matter how 'right' the final image appears after editing with proof colors on, the image usually still looks better when proof colors are turned off   .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68127\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's always going to happen, since the monitor (transmitted light) can show a higher dynamic range than paper (reflected light). It's annoying, yes; but no paper can perfectly match the range of a monitor.

I, too, always kick myself when I turn off proof colors and see how nice the picture "could" look.  

Eric

[Ray]

That's always going to happen, since the monitor [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68132\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Eric,
I'm not sure that's the casae. I would expect, after proof colors have been turned off, the image would look hoplessly garish and oversaturated with blown highlights.

Sometimes that's the case, but not often.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Eric,
I'm not sure that's the casae. I would expect, after proof colors have been turned off, the image would look hoplessly garish and oversaturated with blown highlights.

Sometimes that's the case, but not often.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ray,

I think I understand, and I agree. I often go through the work of getting the "best" image with Proof Colors on, only to see that turning off Proof Colors shows a better version. But sometimes that additional pizzazz just can't be reproduced on paper, in my experience. At other times another go at it does make it better, and closer to the Proof-Colors-Off version (and by then, the new Proof-Colors-Off version usually does look hopelessly garish).

I wonder: is it a useful approach to keep diddling with the Proof-Colors-On version until the P-C-Off version is definitely too far out?

-Eric

[dwdallam]

I think it really matter what you are printing with. I'm leaving paper and black ink off pretty much now. It seems to me that what matters most is getting the conversion right (absolute, relative, perceptual, etc.) I was having a hell of a time with one image getting some bright oranges and reds to even print without clipping. I found the right coversion and the images are very, very close to the monitor in both saturation and brightness. Each image is different, but you start getting a feel for which one will render the best given teh contrast and colors in the image. For bright reds and oranges, Absolute and Relative look like crap.

I'm just glad I have figured out how to get the best print I can using the Costco Noritsu printer finally.

Thanks for all of your comments.