Soft Proofin & editing for Profile workflow

[wlemann]

I am unsure of the best workflow for the following situation:
I have worked up an image in LR5 which is satisfactory on the screen.  I now Soft Proof for a printer/paper profile and it needs work.  What do I do?
I know I want to keep the starting "finished" image but what do I work on for the specific profile?  Do I save and name the changed image for the specific profile?  How to do that?
Thanks.

[digitaldog]

Make a Proof Copy (Virtual Copy), work on that to produce a closer rendering of what you want, print from that Proof Copy.

[Robert-Peter Westphal]

Hello,

As soon as you move any slider during soft proof, Lr sends a pop up proposing to create a virtual copy of your image. If you do so, you create a second set of instructions containing all your changes without sacrificing the former development.

By doing this, the image itself will not be copied, you just create a second set of instructions which doesn't need that much space.

Best wishes

Robert

[Tim Lookingbill]

Interesting method I've been considering with the way I work.

Do you save the virtual copy along with its specific instructions or is just the instructions copied?

Another way of putting it so I can understand how this works...how would one call up the instructions specific only for the Soft Proof in the future after closing and relaunching LR? How do you save it and keep it separate from the original (non-Soft Proof based) edits?

[digitaldog]

The VC is an output specific edit on top of a profile and selected rendering intent (which IS honored in Print module, smart!). The instructions are all inclusive within that VC (XMP) data.

[john beardsworth]

You're slightly wrong there, Andrew. VC info isn't in the XMP but is stored in the catalogue. If you want it in the XMP, you'd save the VC as a snapshot.

The simple answer to your question, Tim, is that you just go back into LR and go to the virtual copy. It's shown in the catalogue as a separate thumbnail, in addition to the original version.

[PhotoEcosse]

It really is as simple as John suggests - and if you need several different virtual copies to softproof for different profiles, then there is no problem

[Rand47]

It really is as simple as John suggests - and if you need several different virtual copies to softproof for different profiles, then there is no problem

Let me ask a further question.  I realize that you'll immediately think, "Why would he want to do that?" - but leave that aside for the moment.  If I wanted to render a soft-proof VC by exporting it as a tiff, would it "work properly" if I brought that tiff back into LR and printed on the appropriate paper?  Seems like it should.

Rand

[digitaldog]

Let me ask a further question.  I realize that you'll immediately think, "Why would he want to do that?" - but leave that aside for the moment.  If I wanted to render a soft-proof VC by exporting it as a tiff, would it "work properly" if I brought that tiff back into LR and printed on the appropriate paper?  Seems like it should.

Yes it would work, you'd now have another actual file (document) of course. In an output color space (useful if you needed to send it off to an outside printer). The same as using Convert to Profile in Photoshop then saving that out as a new document. But in terms of printing, you're in the output color space and that would present a problem within LR or more modern versions of Photoshop as neither have a 'no color management' option. It's faster, easier and produces less documents to apply color management to the source color space data while printing.

[Rand47]

Andrew,

Thanks for the response.  That's always my "missing mental link" - the assigned output colorspace!  Makes my idea not practical as I envisioned it.

Rand

[digitaldog]

One of the really cool things about Proof Copies is they remember the rendering intent you used to based the edits once in the Print module. It's another example of LR making color management and printing easier on you. Depending on the output device, profile and so forth, the visual difference between RelCol and Perceptual can be significant. If you used the wrong RI, what you see isn't going to be what you get.

[wlemann]

The VC which is the soft proof would be renamed so as to know what it is, correct.  I know this is likely obvious but want to be sure.

Also, is the proper RI always Perceptual.

[digitaldog]

The VC which is the soft proof would be renamed so as to know what it is, correct.  I know this is likely obvious but want to be sure.
Also, is the proper RI always Perceptual.

On issue is, unless you have Soft Proof ON or you have the info showing the name with the overlay (and that's not visible for me in Print), it's not obvious if you've got a Proof Copy or not. With soft proof off (why?), the soft proof info in Develop doesn't show up. So it's not as intuitive or discoverable as one could desire.

Not sure what you mean by the proper RI always Perceptual. It's image specific. Now if you're saying you can select RelCol and in Print the VC shows Perceptual, that may be a bug. It shouldn’t do that, it should honor what you picked in Develop. I just noticed this morning it's not so I wonder if a bug has found it's way into this version. Anyone else see this?

[Rand47]

So it's not as intuitive or discoverable as one could desire.

This was the impetus for my export thinking - having named, "baked," ready to print paper-specific files.

Re the RI issue, I think I remember something in the LULA video tutorial about that.  I'll look later today.
Maybe Jeff will jump in here?

Rand

[digitaldog]

Re the RI issue, I think I remember something in the LULA video tutorial about that.  I'll look later today.
Maybe Jeff will jump in here?

I'm running LR 5.3 on Mavericks and can't get the RI to stick in Print, anyone else seeing this on this newer version?

[Rand47]

I'm running LR 5.3 on Mavericks and can't get the RI to stick in Print, anyone else seeing this on this newer version?

Andrew,

LR 5.3 W-7   Did a couple of test soft proofs w/ different RIs.  They didn't "stick" going across to the print module.  The print module defaulted to whatever was the last preset, or "last used settings."

ADDITION:  This may be a big "Duh!" to most, but I just discovered something that may be very useful to me.  I took a RAW file and edited to taste.  When I finished my edits I created a snapshot that I called "BASE EDITS."  Then, in soft proofing rather than have soft proof create a VC, I opted for the "Make This a Proof."  I stared from the BASE EDITS snapshot in soft proof, selected ICC, RI, made appropriate adjustments for printing and then hit the create snapshot "+" and the default name for the snapshot was the ICC profile name!  Cool.  So, I made that snapshot.  Then I selected BASE EDITS snapshot and did a different soft proof for a different paper/ICC and made another snapshot.  This methodology has some promise, creates a less cluttered filmstrip, and so far I can't think of a down side to it.  Is this a commonly known approach that I was merely ignorant about?

Rand

[MarkH2]

 This methodology has some promise, creates a less cluttered filmstrip, and so far I can't think of a down side to it.  Is this a commonly known approach that I was merely ignorant about?

Rand

Been using snapshots for proofs and other purposes for a while (see "How to Softproof with Snapshots instead of Virtual Copies" http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=70816.msg560787#msg560787 ).  Works well for my workflow; also less clutter as you indicate.  Have not found any downside so far.

Mark

[Rand47]

Been using snapshots for proofs and other purposes for a while (see "How to Softproof with Snapshots instead of Virtual Copies" http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=70816.msg560787#msg560787 ).  Works well for my workflow; also less clutter as you indicate.  Have not found any downside so far.

Mark

Mark,

Excellent!  I remember reading your post!!!   I'm a little slow.  :-)
Thanks for the feedback.

Rand

[MarkH2]

Mark,

Excellent!  I remember reading your post!!!   I'm a little slow.  :-)
Thanks for the feedback.

Rand

Haha.  Thanks!  With so many helpful and enthusiastic posts to your credit "slow" certainly does not apply!

[picturesfromthelow]

Yes it would work, you'd now have another actual file (document) of course. In an output color space (useful if you needed to send it off to an outside printer). The same as using Convert to Profile in Photoshop then saving that out as a new document. But in terms of printing, you're in the output color space and that would present a problem within LR or more modern versions of Photoshop as neither have a 'no color management' option. It's faster, easier and produces less documents to apply color management to the source color space data while printing.

Andrew, I'm a bit confused about what you wrote. My knowledge is that you can export an image with the output profile embedded only when using "print to Jpeg" function in the Print module. If you export a VC, you should only have the usual options of exporting to sRGB, AdobeRGb or ProPhoto. Am I wrong?

Luca