Soft Proofing (beginner's question)

[luiztakei]

I have recently started trying to print some photos by myself. I am using a Canon Pro-100 with Ilford Smooth Pearl. I used LR4 to process my photo, then clicked on "Soft Proofing" (with "Simulate Paper & Ink" selected) and made more adjustments so that the image resembled the processed one as much as possible (following the LR4 tutorial video found here on LuLa). I then printed it and realized it was much greener than the screen version (under "Soft Proofing"). I then decided to print the master version (processed one but without soft proofing adjustments) and it turned out much closer to the screen image.

Can someone give me some hints as to why that happens?

I do have to say I am not a professional and, thus, I am using a laptop screen that was calibrated using QuickGamma (not an external piece of hardware).

Thanks a lot!

[Mark D Segal]

It can be very frustrating trying to implement a colour-managed workflow from a laptop display - and all the more so without proper external display profiling hardware and software.

[luiztakei]

Hi Mark. Thanks for the reply!

Do you know what would be an acceptable monitor that I can buy for not too much money?

[Mark D Segal]

How much do you want to spend?

[luiztakei]

As little as possible to achieve an "acceptable" result for an amateur.

(I know this is very subjective but I really shouldn't spend too much...)

[Mark D Segal]

The main things you need to look for in a display are the ability to calibrate it (set brightness, gamma and white point) and to profile it decently. The makes I have in mind that can do this and provide what I would consider adequate and reliable photographic renditions cost upward of USD 1000. You probably would like to spend much less than this, and not having been active in that market, I simply don't know what specific brand and model to recommend that would meet the basic minimum requirements for decent colour management. Hope others can step in and help here.

[luiztakei]

Wow! USD 1000 is certainly way more than I would be willing to spend... Thanks for the tip though.

Does anyone else have any ideas for a cheap alternative?

[Alan Klein]

What happens when you let the printer handle the print adjustments?

[digitaldog]

I do have to say I am not a professional and, thus, I am using a laptop screen that was calibrated using QuickGamma (not an external piece of hardware).

You need a real colorimeter to calibrate the display properly then follow this:
Why are my prints too dark?
A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013


In this 24 minute video, I'll cover:


Are your prints really too dark?
Display calibration and WYSIWYG
Proper print viewing conditions
Trouble shooting to get a match
Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem


High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4
Low resolution: https://youtu.be/iS6sjZmxjY4

[Brad P]

Even with just a laptop with a bad monitor (assuming you can update its color ICC profile - check to be sure) you likely will get a lot closer screen/print relationship by using a display color calibrator like X-Rite's i1, Colormonki, or Colormonki Smile. I have the higher end version and can't vouch for the accuracy of the lower end ones but I imagine they're pretty good depending upon what you're willing to spend and quality you find acceptable.  You would likely want such a device anyway even if you got a new monitor, so I would start there and see if the results are satisfactory to you. 

The next step on the road to upping color accuracy would be a new monitor.  I have heard some old Apple 30" monitors and the Dell Ultrasharps are pretty good photo enthusiast models you might want to google before stepping into the Eizo/NEC world.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Colormunki Display is $164. I use it on my iMac, no issues. Do not know how well it works on laptops though.

[Mark D Segal]

The problem with a laptop is that every time you even slightly change the angle between the screen and the viewer line of sight the colours and luminance change. This is unreliable for any colour-critical work. I use a high quality MacBook Pro in the field whenever I am on a workshop or remote photoshoot, but only for downloading, checking and preliminary edits. The rest waits.

[pslocum]

BenQ SW2700PT Photo Monitor Front
BenQ SW2700PT 27" Color Accurate Monitor for Photography - Refurbished

Quality assured and tested for resale. View your images with the same stunning color precision an...

Be the first to write a review>

Reg Price $649.99
$447.00
http://www.benqdirect.com/benq-outlet/refurbished-monitors.html?p=3
You can check out a review here http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/monitor/benq-sw2700.html

[Brad P]

The problem with a laptop is that every time you even slightly change the angle between the screen and the viewer line of sight the colours and luminance change. This is unreliable for any colour-critical work. I use a high quality MacBook Pro in the field whenever I am on a workshop or remote photoshoot, but only for downloading, checking and preliminary edits. The rest waits.

Agree completely.  I'd really recommend the NEC PA301W (which I love). 

It all depends on what luiztakei wants to accomplish and how much he's willing to spend.  $1K seems way to much, he asked for a cheaper alternative, and his tools so far listed are a laptop and $400 desktop printer.  Given that and the awful color balance (made for entertainment and video games) that laptops typically have, I'd still start with a X-rite device.  I know calibrating my MacBook Pro made a huge difference for casual or preliminary development on the road.

[luiztakei]

Thanks everyone for the great input. I will try to print a few more photos and see how acceptable they really are and see where to go from there.

One thing that came to my mind is that the monitors you suggested are all fairly big. I was wondering if there are good quality (for photography) monitors that are smaller (maybe closer to 14") and, thus, cheaper.

[tarzan1234]

If you don't want to spend much on a large monitor, you can have a decent 22-23" for less than 200 bucks. Spend another 100 on a colorimeter and you should get a combo better than almost any laptop (the X-rite Colormunki often goes on sale for less than 100 dollars).
Please take a look at those Ultrasharp monitors from Dell (those with model number begins with U). If you are willing to go with Refurbished, you can get one for even less. I used to have one for a few years (until I got myself an NEC PA about a year ago) and it worked great.

[Brad P]

Agree with Tarzan on the best bang for least bucks monitor.  I see a refurbished 24" one on Amazon for $218.  It will be better than your laptop for sure, but once you try the Colormunki you'll see why I keep bringing it up!  Most non-pro computer monitors out of the factory that I've used are terrible.  The Ultrasharp is one of the better consumer monitors that some very good photographers use.

[luiztakei]

I am really annoyed by those greenish photos... So I decided to try the dell ultrasharp monitors suggested by Brad and Tarzan. I checked their refurbished options and saw two at a good price: U2212HM and U2312HM. The problem is I read some reviews that mention an unpleasant anti-glare hard coat that shows some grain-like spots on the screen. I wonder if I should worry about that. Would it affect my post-processing?

[GrahamBy]

I'm surprised that the soft-proofing image should look so different to the regular LR image: if your screen calibration was a problem, it would effect both.

Are you using the Canon plug-in to do the soft proofing? Under File->Plug-in Extras ? A simple sanity check would be to use that and click the "print a black and white photo" box (halfway down the column of settings on the RHS). On my pro100, that results in a perfectly neutral grey-scale print.

You might also want to re-install your drivers from the web: I had some weird colour issues that went away after a re-install, presumably due to better profiles in the latter download.

[AFairley]

You want a monitor that has an IPS type screen (most laptops and the cheap desktops are TFT) and preferably with close to Adobe RGB color gamut (most cheap monitors only display sRGB).  I believe TomsHardware forum has a good monitor FAQ that is updated regularly with recommendations.