Color management with Bay Photo

[digitaldog]

Even when the customer is highly knowledgeable about color managed workflows and knows exactly what to do with a supplied ICC profile,  inevitably a more lengthy discussion must still take place between that customer and the lab staff.

I've got zero problem with a 'budget' lab saying: we don't provide the profiles and further, you must send us sRGB for all output. I really have no problem at all with that.
I've got zero problem with a 'budget' lab saying: we will provide the profiles but the print fee's raise to (fill in the blank). I really have no problem at all with that.
I'm not expecting a lab that would normally do a $1 print to do so for 50 cents. Lab's should make a good profit and if as a service business they expect compensation for further service, great.

I have a problem with lab's that say: here's a profile and you can only use it for soft proofing and further send us sRGB for all output.
Then that lab sends a single profile that we're supposed to believe defines all their processes which it doesn't. That's just a big fat color management lie!

The OP asked a very specific question and now he's got perhaps a lab or two here that can assist him. The pricing is between the OP and the lab.

IF a lab can supply a true output profile and allow customers to use it, and if they want to charge a bit more, I suspect a fair number of LuLa subscribers would pay for that additional service.

[brinked]

I am relatively new compared to most on here in regards to ICC profiles.  I understand the basics and have created my own through my rip software but here is what I know.  If this is not whats being talked about in this thread then forgive me, as I said I still have a lot to learn about managing color spaces.

The profiles we use in the lab when printing on metal are 100% useless for the consumer.  These profiles are created specifically for printing on aluminum.  When we first print the image on transfer paper, it does not match the image that we see on our monitor.  It looks very faded and nobody would pay for this.

Its not until it gets pressed into the metal that you see how accurate it is.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for any metal printing lab to get as accurate prints as printing directly onto high quality paper because 1 degree difference, 1 second longer pressing time everything makes the colors different.  Most of this goes un-noticed to the human eye.  For example pressing a 16 x 20 aluminum panel requires about half the pressing time than a 60 x 40 would require.  I doubt companies have profiles made for every single size.

The ICC profiles that are made for aluminum sublimation if you applied them to an image on your monitor would look like crap.  When you send your photo to a metal printing lab ready to print...meaning they take that exact file you sent them ran it through the rip software, printed it then pressed it....their ICC profile are designed to match what you sent...so I see no need for any consumer to be able to have access to an ICC profile.

The only thing I can possibly see is ordering a small proof sample to see exactly how your photo looks on metal at that particular lab.

[hugowolf]

...so I see no need for any consumer to be able to have access to an ICC profile.

And being able to see if anything is out of gamut, how much is out of gamut, and where (if there are any) the out of gamut areas lie - that wouldn't be useful?

Brian A

[MHMG]

I have a problem with lab's that say: here's a profile and you can only use it for soft proofing and further send us sRGB for all output.
Then that lab sends a single profile that we're supposed to believe defines all their processes which it doesn't. That's just a big fat color management lie!

I do know plenty of labs that insist on sRGB files only.  Specifiying sRGB keeps it simple for them and holds off a lot of customer handholding about why the customer should or shouldn't choose different color models for jpeg output from his/her dSLR, and what it all means.... Never encountered a lab that will give out a profile but then insist it only be used for soft proofing.  Would seem to me that labs willing to give out profiles would have workflows in place that recognize an embedded profile, so if I convert my image with my own choice of rendering intent to device output profile rather than keeping the file in a working color space like sRGB, the lab has no additional work to do, and no conversion errors would be introduced.

FWIW, the" keep it simple" sRGB approach works not only for labs, but for folks like me who are sometimes asked by non color savvy clients to repurpose their custom edited image files and email to some offset print provider I've never worked with before.  I typically send an sRGB converted file.  I figure if that print shop doesn't know how to print sRGB images with it's own secret sauce CMYK workflow or whatever, then it will be clear to my client where disappointment with the final printed output lies.  Obviously, if my conversation to sRGB produces a significant hit on colorfulness of key image colors, i'll run it by the client first, but that rarely happens. Most images are reasonably within sRGB color space. People are much more tolerant of less vibrant color as long as hues  haven't shifted dramatically and overall color balance and tonality are good. (I learned that while I was developing the I* color and tonal accuracy metric).

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imagng.com

[PeterAit]

Thanks for the explanation of how metal printing works. However, I don't understand why ICC profiles are impossible for metal printing. A profile connects a digital image rendered on my computer to final physical print, and whether that final print in on paper, canvas, or metal should not make a difference (at least as I see it).  What's stopping someone from printing an ICC test target onto metal and then measuring the squares with a spectrophotometer (or whatever it is) to generate a profile?

[digitaldog]

The profiles we use in the lab when printing on metal are 100% useless for the consumer.  These profiles are created specifically for printing on aluminum.  When we first print the image on transfer paper, it does not match the image that we see on our monitor.  It looks very faded and nobody would pay for this.
Its not until it gets pressed into the metal that you see how accurate it is.

You're wrong about just about everything written above. I just built a profile for a lab that creates Metal Prints using the sublimation process. The profile process has absolutely nothing to do with the steps to produce a print until the transfer is complete, and that is what I measured, the final metal print! I had to supply a special target so I could read the patches using a handheld Spectrophotometer, the metal is far too thick to be measured with the iSis Spectrophotometer. The soft proof looks perfectly fine as seen here:

It is IMPOSSIBLE for any metal printing lab to get as accurate prints as printing directly onto high quality paper because 1 degree difference, 1 second longer pressing time everything makes the colors different.  Most of this goes un-noticed to the human eye.

If it's invisible to the human eye, then the profile will be equally fine and usable! No printer is totally immune from slight differences and if you are correct and the deltaE values are less than 1 (invisible to the eye), you're doing far better than a heck of a lot of output devices!

The ICC profiles that are made for aluminum sublimation if you applied them to an image on your monitor would look like crap.

 
The soft proof above looks just fine. Maybe you need the assistance of someone who has a better ideal how to build then use said ICC profiles.

I don't understand why ICC profiles are impossible for metal printing.

It's not impossible, the lab I built the profile for was ecstatic with the results. What you're being told about the impossibility is submited by someone who also wrote:I am relatively new compared to most on here in regards to ICC profiles.  I understand the basics and have created my own through my rip software but here is what I know.  If this is not whats being talked about in this thread then forgive me, as I said I still have a lot to learn about managing color spaces.
Going on after that, saying this or that is impossible should be taken with a grain of salt.

[digitaldog]

Specifiying sRGB keeps it simple for them and holds off a lot of customer handholding about why the customer should or shouldn't choose different color models for jpeg output from his/her dSLR, and what it all means.... Never encountered a lab that will give out a profile but then insist it only be used for soft proofing.  

First off yes, it is totally about making it easier for them. It's all about them <g>. There are customers who expect and will pay for better but that's another story.

I've seen dozens and dozens of posts over the years from people who have a lab supply a profile only for soft proofing and not for final output. They are told they can soft proof but can only use the profile for that use, data must be sent in sRGB. Here's one example from a pretty big lab:
http://www.whcc.com/resources/downloads

Get the best possible screen to print match by soft proofing with our output profiles on a properly calibrated monitor. Output profiles for our Kodak Professional Supra Endura VC papers are available below. Do not embed these profiles in your files. Only use them with Photoshop's "Soft Proofing" function.

A non RGB lab that does this is Blurb. They supply a generic CMYK profile for all their processes. I suppose they could just go from that to a device link. Not ideal.

[digitaldog]

One more Mark (as I said, this behavior is rather prevalent):
http://simplycolorlab.com/soft-proofing-profiles.html

This will show you how it will look when printed with our ink , spray, canvas or paper type.You can toggle this on and off with the view colors dialog.These profiles are for viewing for accurate adjustments only. Image files should not be embedded or converted to these profiles.Please leave your files embedded with the native color space profile.Acceptable color spaces are sRGB, Adobe RGB 1998 and Pro Photo

Great. A single profile that defines all their print processes but only for soft proofing. Anyone want to by a bridge too?
At least they accept Adobe RGB and ProPhoto. Color management progress to some degree.

[brinked]

I dont know why im being attacked here.  I specifically stated how what I was saying might be wrong as I have limited experience as far as color profiles go.  There is no need to be a Mr know it all.  I am simply repeating things based on my training with the same experts that have trained major photo labs.

I would like to understand what it is that customers want.  That is why I am getting myself involved in this thread.  There is no other ICC profile other than the ICC profile that we have from the ink supplier or the company that you work with.

In order for a lab to get access to that ICC profile, you need to be a consumer of that product.  They are VERY strict that you can not distribute that ICC profile to anyone.

I personally have calibrated my own ICC profile based on that very icc profile to calibrate my own specific process.  This took hours to create and I will not simply give it away.  This is the only profile that is being used in the process.  I am trying to understand why the consumer would need to have access to it.  I asked this very question to both wasatch (rip software company) and sawgrass (sublimation ink supplier) and they both said the same exact thing that I just said.  Thats all I was simply repeating.

I would think these 2 big players in this industry would have a better understanding than I would.

Again, I am not pretending to be a knowledgeable person when it comes to ICC profiles.  I stated that before replying. 

[digitaldog]

I dont know why im being attacked here.  

I'm not trying to attack you, sorry if you feel this way. What you wrote doesn't jive, that's all. Saying something is impossible that isn't needs to be corrected.

In order for a lab to get access to that ICC profile, you need to be a consumer of that product.  They are VERY strict that you can not distribute that ICC profile to anyone.

That totally depends on the profile manufacturer. For example, Epson has no problems distributing their profiles. The two labs below that provide profiles for soft proofing have no such issue. Pictopia didn't have any such issue. That's a straw man argument.    

This took hours to create and I will not simply give it away.

That's silly, it's of no use to anyone but you and your customers.

I asked this very question to both wasatch (rip software company) and sawgrass (sublimation ink supplier) and they both said the same exact thing that I just said.

OK then, all three of you are wrong.

[brinked]

I am not wrong.  I can not be wrong if I am keeping my mind open and trying to understand the reasoning behind a customer having access to the ICC profile.

I never said I was right...I don't know how many times I have to state that I only know what I was told by these companies.

I think there is probably a very small number of photographers who are interested in having access to the ICC profile.  That doesn't mean I dont want to offer the absolute best service to my customers.  So if offering up my ICC profile to a client is going to help my business then that's exactly what I need to consider.

This is the first time I have heard of a customer wanting access to an ICC profile so its something I would like to be prepared for in the future.

The thing is...as far as I can understand the ICC profile I am using for example is a combination of things.  There is an ICM file and then there are other files that hold the calibration curves and other things that alter the icc profile.  These files are only readable by the RIP software as far as I know.

What I am having hard time making sense of is how a customer would be able to even make sense of these files.  They would need to buy a license for a $1500 RIP software to read it.

[digitaldog]

I am not wrong.  I can not be wrong if I am keeping my mind open and trying to understand the reasoning behind a customer having access to the ICC profile.P software to read it.

If you wrote the following, it's wrong:

The profiles we use in the lab when printing on metal are 100% useless for the consumer. 
It looks very faded and nobody would pay for this.
The ICC profiles that are made for aluminum sublimation if you applied them to an image on your monitor would look like crap.

I've got the profile and soft proof that illustrates that's incorrect. Sorry. If pointing out a statement as incorrect is attacking you, I'm again sorry. You're welcome to your opinions but not your own facts.

I think there is probably a very small number of photographers who are interested in having access to the ICC profile. 

Over the years I've built custom profiles for hundreds of photographers and there are others just on this list that provide such services. Are all these people an anomaly?
Photoshop has provided the ability to use ICC output profiles for soft proofing since 1998! Lightroom has provided it since version 3. Adobe is providing this functionality because it's useful to their customers. If you want to know how many photographers might want an ICC profile for a process, simply search the forums here, there happens to be a dedicated forum just for color management and there's a heck of a lot of photographers here* that build their own profiles, buy profiles or just use manufacturer supplied profiles. You'll see in just this set of posts alone, two labs that supply ICC profiles for soft proofing (not that they are worth anything. It does illustrate some lab's are aware customers want them). Epson, Canon, HP and a slew of paper manufacturers supply ICC Profiles with their products. Based on these facts, I don't know how you can say a very small number of photographers are interested in having access to the ICC profiles! What data points do you have to backup that claim? You've got the profile, if someone asks for it, why not provide it?

This is the first time I have heard of a customer wanting access to an ICC profile so its something I would like to be prepared for in the future.

This is probably the first time you've heard a number of facts about color management and ICC profiles so don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just because you can't soft proof with your metal profile doesn't mean it can't be done, it most certainly can. Peter asked you a question about why you can't profile your process, can you explain to him why this is impossible? Because my experience indicates it is not only possible, like other good ICC output profiles, it's quite useful.

What I am having hard time making sense of is how a customer would be able to even make sense of these files.

Do you believe that many photographers calibrate their displays and that is a good idea? IF yes (and that's the correct answer), why? The same reasons are why they want and need an ICC profile for an output process. To see what they will get. To control the rendering intent which is image specific. To post edit after conversion if they desire.

hey would need to buy a license for a $1500 RIP software to read it.

Absoutly not the case. We can go there if you wish. But you have other areas of color management to first understand, namely what an ICC profile provides outside your shop. Perhaps then you'll refrain from statements like: This took hours to create and I will not simply give it away, to this took hours to create and I will give it away as it is useful to my customers and no one else.

*Lula currently has more than 1.1 million unique readers each month; 3.5 million page views from some 50,000 people a day. This is a larger circulation that any print photographic magazine in the world and exceeded on the web only by some of the dedicated camera review sites.

[brinked]

digitaldog you are missing the entire point completely.  I think you are far too concerned with making sure everyone knows you're right rather than trying to present your arguments in a way we can understand.  Yes, you are the superior color management person here.  Heck you could be the best at what you do in the world for all I know.

The statements I made came with a disclaimer that pretty much said "I know nothing, simply repeating what I was taught from industry experts".  So am I wrong?  I never claimed to be right about anything.  I am not concerned about right or wrong.  I am concerned about learning and understanding.  Something that you are not doing a very good job at.

Remember now, professionals on this forum probably are an anomaly.  The very fact that there are professionals here sharing information is a testament to how much they are wanting to continue and expand their trade.  I don't think the average professional on here represents the average person who orders from the common photo lab.

What is being talked about here is something that is an additional service and will require more customer handling.  Maybe the best photo labs should and do have a special department for handling customers that are requesting this type of service.

However these labs set prices and try to remain competitive.  They have a very specific scope of service that they offer with the prices.  To go out of that price range I would assume a client would have to be placing a significant order or be an ongoing customer who does a lot of business.  If that is the case I do not see any way a lab will not want to accommodate a customer like that.  But those are special circumstances that have to be worked out with that particular lab.  I doubt any lab is going to just start offering up additional services and files for someone about to place a $50 order.

In order to get that profile into the customers hands, it will need to be directed to someone in the company who has the capacity to deal with something like that.

[digitaldog]

Remember now, professionals on this forum probably are an anomaly.

How did you come to that conclusion?

[Jim Kasson]

Some people on this thread are saying that providing ICC profiles to the user so that she can enjoy a color-managed workflow is expensive to support, and not appropriate for cost-sensitive environments. As a counterexample, I'd like to give a nod to Modern Postcard, which operates in a very price-sensitive part of the printing market. If you go to their website:

https://www.modernpostcard.com/downloads

You can download their printer profiles. When you open up the zipped file, here's what you see:



There are three profiles, for three different printing regimes, CMYK color, CMYK B&W, and K B&W. There are instructions for installing and using the profiles.

I haven't used Modern in a couple of years, but when I did use them, the actual printed copy was what I expected. No soft-proofing regime is perfect, but theirs seemed to be perfectly adequate. They provide a proof for an extra charge if you're not feeling lucky.

So here's someone that can't afford to spend a lot of time with each customer, who takes many orders every day, who can make this work.

Why can't it work for a company like Bay Photo? I can think of two reasons. They may not have their process totally under control, so a standard profile might be off because their process has drifted.Or maybe, they haven't educated their staff in how to properly support a color-managed workflow.

If the customers' results are going to come close to what they see on their monitor, they're going to need a calibrated monitor whether they're sending sRGB files to the print shop and guessing on the gamut (and not being able to use the part of the printer's gamut that's outside sRGB's gamut), or sending files in the printer's color space (or an RGB translation of it).

Jim

[digitaldog]

Why can't it work for a company like Bay Photo? I can think of two reasons. They may not have their process totally under control, so a standard profile might be off because their process has drifted.

I suspect that's it too. It's pretty easy to track this too if you have the equipment like an iSis and sent the lab a target say every couple weeks.

[Jim Kasson]

https://www.modernpostcard.com/about/terms-conditions
Gang-run service. in one sentence they guarantee 85-90% accuracy, in the next sentence, they accept no responsibility for color. They gave you the profile, but that's really about it.

Lawyers! Don't confuse the weasel-words with what 's really going on.

If you have your process under control, there's nothing wrong with "gang-run". It just means that everybody gets the same {hopefully time-invariant) process. The "neighboring image ink requirements" phrase is worrisome, and implies that they might tweak the process dependent on what else is going on on the web. 

I've never seen any enforceable guarantees from a printer. Either you accept the results or you're into a negotiation.

That said, this thread is not about the T's&C's; it's about where you -- if you're a printer -- want your relationship with your customer's file to start. With a generic file, or one that's got a chance of being optimized for your printer?

Jim

[Jim Kasson]

They print on one device, mostly one stock, and one inkset, which is simple to provide. Most big shops have multiple devices, several stocks, and product offerings, which compounds the whole thing to support.

I think this is a "pay me now or pay me later" situation. If you have many different devices and stocks, do you want your customer going through the process of finding out what's best for him by trying on different profiles and soft-proofing, or sending files to you, telling you to print them on different devices and different stocks, getting back the physical proofs, and seeing what works? What's going to make your customer happier? What's going to cost you less in the long run?

Jim

[MHMG]

I've seen dozens and dozens of posts over the years from people who have a lab supply a profile only for soft proofing and not for final output. They are told they can soft proof but can only use the profile for that use, data must be sent in sRGB. Here's one example from a pretty big lab:
http://www.whcc.com/resources/downloads

Wow, Andrew, I stand corrected. I have visited the whcc website within the last couple of years and never saw any policy like this. Thiings appear to have changed dramatically in recent years. So, perhaps this "soft proof only" policy is a newer trend, but nonetheless a particularly disturbing one. Indeed, this entire thread just convinces me that printing my own work on my own printers in house makes far more sense than trying to develop a good long term relationship with an outside lab. The traditional photographic print is under siege from a lot of different technological innovations these days, but print providers shouldn't be stepping all over themselves to be killing off their own customer base.

thanks for the heads up.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[digitaldog]

True, they provided the profile and educated.

The profile is worthless if the output conditions don't produce what the profile predicted (within reason, let's say an avg dE 2000 value of 5 or less on say an ECI2002 target). Color management demands good process control or there's nothing to manage from a wavering device.

A perfect color managed workflow still needs on-the-fly adjustments due to variances in press conditions.

Yes, to reflect the target values expected and defined by that ICC profile.