Soft proofing question

[J_Fulks]

With help from a few members here at LL I've finally got my LCD calibrated. I'm now wanting to set up soft proofing in PS, but I'm a little confused about the process. Any help on this would be much appreciated.

I send my images out to a lab. The lab specifically states "our printers output in sRGB color space". I have my PS working space set to sRGB and I have my Canon DSLR shooting in sRGB....this is where I get confused...since their printers output in sRGB and since my working space in PS is sRGB, how will soft proofing help me in any way? Isn't what I'm seeing on my screen while retouching in PS going to be close to what I'll receive back from the lab since they output in sRGB and since I'm editing in sRGB? Or, will I need their printer's specific ICC profile and set that up in PS for soft proofing?

If the later is true, will I send my images to them tagged with sRGB or convert the images to their printer's ICC profile before sending them out? What is throwing me off is where they say their printers output in the sRGB color space.

This also brings up another question. Would I be better served to shoot in AdobeRGB and have my PS workspace set to AdobeRGB, then convert the images to sRGB (or the lab's printer profile if need be) before sending them out to print? AdobeRGB, as I understand, is a larger color space than sRGB and I'm thinking about the future when I can move on to a better lab that outputs in AdobeRGB.


J

[bjanes]

With help from a few members here at LL I've finally got my LCD calibrated. I'm now wanting to set up soft proofing in PS, but I'm a little confused about the process. Any help on this would be much appreciated.

I send my images out to a lab. The lab specifically states "our printers output in sRGB color space". I have my PS working space set to sRGB and I have my Canon DSLR shooting in sRGB....this is where I get confused...since their printers output in sRGB and since my working space in PS is sRGB, how will soft proofing help me in any way? Isn't what I'm seeing on my screen while retouching in PS going to be close to what I'll receive back from the lab since they output in sRGB and since I'm editing in sRGB? Or, will I need their printer's specific ICC profile and set that up in PS for soft proofing?

If the later is true, will I send my images to them tagged with sRGB or convert the images to their printer's ICC profile before sending them out? What is throwing me off is where they say their printers output in the sRGB color space.

This also brings up another question. Would I be better served to shoot in AdobeRGB and have my PS workspace set to AdobeRGB, then convert the images to sRGB (or the lab's printer profile if need be) before sending them out to print? AdobeRGB, as I understand, is a larger color space than sRGB and I'm thinking about the future when I can move on to a better lab that outputs in AdobeRGB.
J
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This issue has been analyzed by the Digital Dog (Andrew Rodney) online and in his color management book. There is no digital printer whose native space is sRGB. Many consumer labs (such as Walgreen's with the Fuji Frontiers) expect the input to be in sRGB and then convert this to their native working space. Adobe RGB or even ProPhotoRGB are better choices for a working space for editing. You then convert this to the printer space or have the lab do it for you (For example, [a href=\"http://www.calypsoinc.com/]Calypso[/url])



Most pro labs will supply you with a profile for their pinter. The only consumer level labs that I have dealt with that do this are Costco's. You can download profiles for their machines, mostly Noritsus with Fuji Crystal Archive paper.

Bill

[jackbingham]

" What is throwing me off is where they say their printers output in the sRGB color space. "

And so it should because it generally is not true. It is all well and good if you are looking for a simple kinda works solution. If you want to be critical about this either get them to supply you a real profile for their printer or find another lab.You are correct that if your working space is srgb you really don't need to do anything additional to softproof. Soft proofing would come into play if your working space was srgb or adobe rgb and the printer gave you a custom printer profile. Then you would want to preview the conversion before making it

[J_Fulks]

If you want to be critical about this either get them to supply you a real profile for their printer or find another lab.You are correct that if your working space is srgb you really don't need to do anything additional to softproof.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102796\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The lab in question is Mpix.com (which is a division of Millers Lab). I just received an e-mail from them that includes two of their icc profiles: one for their matte finish printers and one for their printers that print on metallic paper. They also sent instructions on how to use the profiles, in which they say "to simplify the variables used in our workflow we suggest using sRGB as the working color space"....which, indeed I do use sRGB as the working space in PS. They go on to say-

"The output profiles that we are providing are only intended to be used in conjunction with PhotoShop and its soft proofing feature. Converting an image to one of these profiles and submitting the image for production will result in the image being incorrectly printed. All files received must continue to be submitted in sRGB color space, no exceptions."

Soft proofing would come into play if your working space was srgb or adobe rgb and the printer gave you a custom printer profile. Then you would want to preview the conversion before making it[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102796\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If their printer profiles, when viewed during soft proofing, do not resemble what I see when retouching the file in the sRGB work space, and they dont' want me to convert my files to their printers ICC profiles, what good is it going to do me to have their printer profiles? I am assuming, based on their instructions, I would be constantly referencing the changes I make to my image (in the sRGB workspace) vs. what it will appear like (using CTRL + Y to view the soft proof) under their ICC profiles.....using curves, Hue/Saturation, and etc. in PS to try to get my image in the sRGB workspace to match my image when soft proofed using their ICC printer profiles? It sounds like a hit or miss type of thing where there might be some color correction going on on their end before printing.
 
Is this lab right about this or should I be sending my images elsewhere?

Lastly, the lab also states they use 5000K as their set point. My monitor (LCD calibrated with Eye-One Display 2) is calibrated to a white-point of 6500K....should I recalibrate my monitor to their spec. of 5000K?

Thanks. Any suggestions and help will be much appreciated.

[bjanes]

"The output profiles that we are providing are only intended to be used in conjunction with PhotoShop and its soft proofing feature. Converting an image to one of these profiles and submitting the image for production will result in the image being incorrectly printed. All files received must continue to be submitted in sRGB color space, no exceptions."
 
Is this lab right about this or should I be sending my images elsewhere?

Lastly, the lab also states they use 5000K as their set point. My monitor (LCD calibrated with Eye-One Display 2) is calibrated to a white-point of 6500K....should I recalibrate my monitor to their spec. of 5000K?

Thanks. Any suggestions and help will be much appreciated.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you use sRGB as your working space, you can use the Mpix profiles for softproofing and get good results, but many color geeks recommend a wider space for editing. Working spaces are discussed by [a href=\"http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_colspace.pdf]Digidog[/url] in a white paper on the Adobe site.

Have you tried Costco? They have profiles for their printers and you can work in any space you want and then convert to the printer profile and tell them to print without any corrections. Like most labs, they assume sRGB unless otherwise specified.

Since you have Bruce Fraser's color management book on order, you might wish to postpone setting your monitor to 5000K until you read Bruce's book (page 216). He suggests matching the brightness of the monitor to the light box (viewing environment) rather than matching the color temperatures, with 5000K the standard viewing condition. He leaves his monitor at 6500K.

[J_Fulks]

Have you tried Costco? They have profiles for their printers and you can work in any space you want and then convert to the printer profile and tell them to print without any corrections. Like most labs, they assume sRGB unless otherwise specified.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102834\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for your input, Bill. I will give Costco a try as they sound more flexible than Mpix does. On my next order I'll use Mpix again too (using their recommendations) and compare their results to Costco's.

Since you have Bruce Fraser's color management book on order, you might wish to postpone setting your monitor to 5000K until you read Bruce's book (page 216). He suggests matching the brightness of the monitor to the light box (viewing environment) rather than matching the color temperatures, with 5000K the standard viewing condition. He leaves his monitor at 6500K.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102834\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can't wait to get the book, and unfortunately there is a 3-6 week delay in shipping from all the major book e-tailers. I'm not sure if the book is now out of publication or if they're publishing a new edition of it. I'll also be picking up a copy of Andrew Rodney's book. In the meantime, I've read at dpreview and a couple of other sources where it's recommended to use a Solux 4700 light to view prints under if you have your monitor calibrated to 6500K. I'll have to research this some more, but what do you think about this? Is Fraser, in his book, recommending viewing prints under a 5000K light if the monitor is set at 6500K, or is he recommending the viewing environment light be 6500K?

Regards,

J

[Tim Lookingbill]

I've tried calibrating my display to 5000K both LCD and CRT and it really isn't necessary. My take on it is strictly from a visual standpoint dealing with eyeball and hardware calibrators. Depending on your calibration package the adjustments to CM previews in regards to hue/saturation performed by PS in relation to how the calibration package writes the 5000K XYZ chromatic adaptation transform compensation into the profile can sometimes cause color errors/inaccuracies with certain colors in a wide range of images.

You may not see it in a color target used for screen to print matching, and some images may look correct, but some may contain colors mainly blue's that may show these blues as dull or purplish. Your calibration package may not do this, but from what I've seen it isn't worth the risk.

You'll just have to test for yourself on several images, but it can be a pain.

[Tim Lookingbill]

And I forgot to add, there is no 6500K lighting that is accurate enough to view prints under. Their color accuracy as measured by ISO standards are way off compared to Solux 4700-5000K.

[bjanes]

In the meantime, I've read at dpreview and a couple of other sources where it's recommended to use a Solux 4700 light to view prints under if you have your monitor calibrated to 6500K. I'll have to research this some more, but what do you think about this? Is Fraser, in his book, recommending viewing prints under a 5000K light if the monitor is set at 6500K, or is he recommending the viewing environment light be 6500K?

[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bruce recommended leaving the monitor at 6500K and using 5000K for viewing the prints with the light box. He did suggest that the print view and monitor should not be in the same field of view. As I mentioned before, he suggested matching the brightness of the monitor and viewing so that a sheet of white paper would have a similar luminance to the monitor.

See this thread for my observations on the [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14929]Solux[/url]

Bill

[J_Fulks]

Bruce recommended leaving the monitor at 6500K and using 5000K for viewing the prints with the light box. He did suggest that the print view and monitor should not be in the same field of view. As I mentioned before, he suggested matching the brightness of the monitor and viewing so that a sheet of white paper would have a similar luminance to the monitor.

See this thread for my observations on the Solux

Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102861\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And I forgot to add, there is no 6500K lighting that is accurate enough to view prints under. Their color accuracy as measured by ISO standards are way off compared to Solux 4700-5000K.

Thanks Bill and Bill. I've got a lot to learn!

[J_Fulks]

I had a chance to set up soft proofing in PS with the Mpix profiles, and I edited a few images using it. I have a better idea of how it works now, but I couldn't find much on the internet detailing how to incorporate soft proofing into one's workflow.....most everything out there simply told you how to set it up or troubleshoot it. I probably make it more complicated than it should be... can someone offer input/suggestions on my soft proofing workflow?

First, I retouch my images in the sRGB work space until they look right (the images are also shot in sRGB...after ready some of Andrew Rodney's tutorials I will be shooting in RAW from now on), then when I soft proof them in Photoshop with the Mpix printer profiles some of the images look right and some of them look a little off. For the ones that look off it might take only a minor Hue/Saturation adjustment or minor Curves adjustment to get them to look right. Before I make any of the necessary adjustments, I'll duplicate the image and save the original as a backup. I make all the necessary adjustments on the soft proofed copy of the original. I'll keep both the original image (showing in the sRGB works space under my monitor's profile) and the soft proofed image (showing under one of the Mpix printer profiles) open, side by side on my desktop. I'll then start editing the soft proofed image using Hue/Saturation, Curves, Levels, and etc. until I have it as close as possible to the original edit. I'll then turn soft proofing off for the image I just edited and at this point both of the images are shown in the sRGB workspace under my monitor's profile. The soft proofed image that I just edited might look too saturated or too bright compared to the original, but I'll toggle soft proofing on again and it looks identical to the original. At this point I'll save the changes I made to the soft proofed image, and since I do all my editing in the sRGB work space (and since the images are shot in sRGB) I don't have to convert the image to sRGB before sending it out to Mpix to print. Hopefully the images I send to Mpix will be returned in some resemblance to the original.

Please note I have Simulate Paper White/ Ink Black, and Black Point Compensation all checked in the PS proofing settings. I also have the Intent set to Perceptual.

Am I using soft proofing correctly?


Regards,

J

[Ed Foster, Jr.]

Am I using soft proofing correctly?
J
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103001\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

J,

By golly - you got it!  Of course now, the excercise is to see what the lab returns to you.  If they maintain good linearization and calibration you should be in good shape and be able to work from there.
Regards,
Ed

[Tim Lookingbill]

I don't know where you got that workflow, but if the prints match to the original sRGB file with Soft Proof turned on then that's the one you use. What I don't understand is why you have to do so much editing even when the file is in sRGB with Soft Proofing turned on. You must have some very saturated colors in your images.

I don't trust any photolab printer that requires you to not convert to their profile. I use DryCreekPhoto free downloadable profiles of Noristu minilabs across the nation that print to Kodak Royal Glossy Digital Paper and I get spot on matches without turning on Paper White, Ink Black and Perceptual Intent when Soft Proofing. If my images have sunlit flowers and automobiles with cherry red Pearl Lustre paint jobs, I usually have to edit to prevent posterization and flattening of detail in these colors with Soft Proof set to Relative Intent, no Paper White and Ink Black. However, if your display is one of those overly bright LCD's and is brigther than the lights you view prints under then these two may have to be checked.

Here's my workflow:

I have a 4x6 print made from the minilab of a correct looking sRGB test file containing a wide range of differently colored objects including 255 combo's of RGBCMY color patches and a grayramp. I compare the print to the original file and assign (temporarily) different profiles including several DryCreekPhoto and a new free generic profile I downloaded off the web called AveragePhotoPrinterRGB. The one that makes the image look like the print is the one I'll convert my finished images to from my original working space of choice using Relative Intent.

But before converting my images I Soft Proof with Relative Intent and edit for any clipping of saturated colors mentioned above and then convert. Most of the pro images I see on the web in sRGB space rarely clip or need editing when I Soft Proof them with my Noritsu profile so I don't understand why you have to. Most DSLR's and even P&S jpgs print fine without any editing.

[J_Fulks]

I don't trust any photolab printer that requires you to not convert to their profile.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103088\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bill thanks for sharing your workflow. Here's what Mpix says about their profiles and soft proofing-

"To simplify the variables used in our workflow, we suggest using sRGB as the working color space for your files. This is not the place to argue color spaces, suffice it to say that the majority of our imaging equipment is designed around sRGB as the dominant color space hence our choice..........The output profiles that we are providing are only intended to be used in conjunction with PhotoShop and its soft proofing feature. Converting an image to one of these profiles and submitting the image for production will result in the image being incorrectly printed. All files received must continue to be submitted in sRGB color space, no exceptions"

I think the part where they state "To simplifiy the variables used in our workflow, we suggest...." is key. I don't know what their workflow is, but if they recommend that I proof my images using their printer profiles while in the sRGB work space, and send my files to them in sRGB and not converted to their profiles, then I reckon I'll I give it a try before jumping ship with them. I am guessing the images are converted from sRGB to their profiles on their side, after they receive the images from me.

What I don't understand is why you have to do so much editing even when the file is in sRGB with Soft Proofing turned on. You must have some very saturated colors in your images.

The landscapes that I do are very close when comparing against the soft proof and the sRGB work space rendition of the images. The difference comes when I am soft proofing portraits...the flesh tones are a little flat when soft proofed with the Mpix profiles...and the overall image appears a little darker. To compensate, I will bump up the saturation on the flesh tones a little (while in proofing mode) to match the original in the sRGB work space, and also make a small curves adjustment. I'm not so sure at this point whether I should be making a final curves adjustment on the image, and that will only be determined when I have prints in my hand to compare.

I plan on sending different variations of the same images (with and without saturation adjustments , with and without curves adjustments, with and without Simulate Paper White/Ink Black enabled) and I'll see which ones end up being closest to my expectations...if any at all.

Thanks,

J

[J_Fulks]

J,

By golly - you got it!  Of course now, the excercise is to see what the lab returns to you.  If they maintain good linearization and calibration you should be in good shape and be able to work from there.
Regards,
Ed
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103009\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ed, thanks for your input. At least I know I'm in the ballpark now. I'll have images sent to them before the evening is over and then I'll hurry up and wait to receive the finished product back from them. I'll know where I stand then.

Nice photography work on your website....hope you don't mind me browsing!


Regards,

J

[J_Fulks]

I don't know where you got that workflow.....[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just found a workflow at the "Understanding Series" link on the Luminous Landscape home page that is very similar to the one I used earlier-

[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml]Understanding Soft Proofing[/url]


Regards,

J