soft proofing strong lightening of shadows

[myotis]

I have a PSD Prophoto 16bit process recipe as my default process recipe and a 16bit TIFF + epson paper profile as my soft proofing/output recipe.

If I select  a shadow area of an image in the Prophoto colourspace in C1 I get an RGB readout of 13,14, 13.

If I soft proof it with the .icc paper profile process recipe in C1, this reading changes to 61,48,31, with obvious changes in colour across the image.

If I send this image as a  16 bit PSD to Photoshop (ProPhoto colourspace), the same (approximate) shadow area gives a reading of 19,18, 15
Softproofing in PS with the same paper profile as used in C1 still gives a reading of 19,18,15 with only minor changes in colour across the image.

Has anyone any idea why I am seeing such a big difference in C1 (version 11 on a Mac).

I noticed it first because soft proofing with the paper profile in C1  made it impossible to get a shadow warning, regardless of how I tried to darken the image.

Is there something about the way C1 should be set up that I'm not understanding?

Thanks,

Graham

[digitaldog]

IF I understand you, the numbers differ when soft proofing in C1 (on or off) but that's not the way Photoshop works. When you soft proof in PS, the preview changes but the numbers do not. Perhaps in C1 (like Lightroom), when you soft proof, the numbers represent what new soft proof'ed profile.
IF you actually convert in PS using the profile, not soft proof, do the numbers become much closer to C1?

[myotis]

IF I understand you, the numbers differ when soft proofing in C1 (on or off) but that's not the way Photoshop works. When you soft proof in PS, the preview changes but the numbers do not. Perhaps in C1 (like Lightroom), when you soft proof, the numbers represent what new soft proof'ed profile.
IF you actually convert in PS using the profile, not soft proof, do the numbers become much closer to C1?

Ah, thanks, that explains a lot, I imagine this is what might be happening in C1.

I will explore this further, now that I realise this about the numbers, and do as you suggest, I could also try in LR.   Having said that, the C1 version doesn't look all that much like the PS version, but I haven't been paying too much attention beyond the numbers.

I'll come back once I've had another look.

Cheers,
Graham

[digitaldog]

I should add/clarify that you CAN see soft proof values in Photoshop if you set the info palette for this:

[myotis]

I should add/clarify that you CAN see soft proof values in Photoshop if you set the info palette for this:

That solved it, the numbers are near enough the same in both C1 and PS now.

They still "look" more different than I expected, but I now that it seems there isn't actually a "problem", I can put my mind to the details of what is going on.

So, many thanks for that, it was really helpful.

Cheers,

Graham