Convert to Profile in LR?

[walter.sk]

I've been softproofing and printing for many years, but I have a new situation (I'm using Photoshop CC 2018 and Lightroom Classic, on a Windows 10 machine).

My wife wants to have some prints made at Costco, and I downloaded and installed the appropriate Costco profile for their Fuji Frontier and Luster paper.  No problem softproofing with the profile, and making the "after" image a "Proof Copy," optimized to look as close to the original as possible.  For myself, I would then export the Proof Copy to Qimage and print with my printer not color managing.

I think I am supposed to upload to Costco images already converted to their profile.  Is there any way to do this in Lightroom? Or should I export the Proof Copy to Photoshop and convert to the Costco profile there?

Also, Costco prints full-bleed, and apparently increases the size of the image by  one or two percent.  Should I simply crop the image to the 11x14 size she and Costco want, but increase the canvas size by a couple of percent?

[digitaldog]

I've been softproofing and printing for many years, but I have a new situation (I'm using Photoshop CC 2018 and Lightroom Classic, on a Windows 10 machine).

My wife wants to have some prints made at Costco, and I downloaded and installed the appropriate Costco profile for their Fuji Frontier and Luster paper.  No problem softproofing with the profile, and making the "after" image a "Proof Copy," optimized to look as close to the original as possible.  For myself, I would then export the Proof Copy to Qimage and print with my printer not color managing.

I think I am supposed to upload to Costco images already converted to their profile.  Is there any way to do this in Lightroom?

You can do so in the Print Module by saving out a JPEG. Be nice if you were not forced to use just JPEG but for printing, should be fine. And there was a recent series of posts here about JPEG for output to print vs. TIFF and it seems that when the rubber meets the road, JPEG should be fine. But anyway yes, check out the Print Module where you save out a JPEG.

[walter.sk]

Thanks, Andrew.

[steve18ken@gmail.com]

If you are sending the files to Costco, there is a place on the web site where you can tell them to turn off the auto correct function.  Do that or all your editing will be for naught.  If you are bringing your files to a Costco store, there must be a way to have them turn off the auto correct function but, I've never brought files to a store...

I have not used Costco for several years, but when I did, I was very happy with their work.  I exported to hi rez jpg files in LR and got excellent results up to 20X30

[Rand47]

This brings up an interesting issue.  Some labs who provide ICC profiles for soft proofing also provide instructions to use the profile to soft proof, but specifically NOT use that profile when exporting a file for printing (e.g. Simply Color):

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.

 Dry Creek photo (makers of the ICC profiles for Costco) provide the following in their instructions:

Save the file as an RGB jpeg or tiff. ◦Jpeg images saved at maximum quality provide identical print quality to tiff images. Because of the smaller file size, they print much faster.
◦If using tiffs, they must be RGB format, 8-bit, uncompressed, and have no layers or alpha channels. Many photo labs either do not support printing tiff images, or at least not for online submissions. In this case, as noted above, a maximum quality jpeg will give visually identical results for
◦Embedding the profile in the image is optional. It is convenient for viewing the profiles later, as you do not need to manually assign the correct profile to see accurate colors. A drawback is that this adds 2MB to the size of each image. We previously recommended against embedding profiles because of incompatibility with the front-end drivers used by photo lab printers. All reasonably up-to-date printer drivers now accept images with embedded profiles, so this is no longer a concern.

Help me understand this, please.  Is this a difference in their color management scheme?  I teach basic color management at a local camera club (I'm far from an expert, but my grasp greatly exceeds the average club member who uses photo labs for printing) and I'd like better to understand, if I can. Obviously, I present both of these folk's instructions/recommendations as examples of "what to look for and what you should follow in your file preparation" - but I'd like to understand the "why they are different" if I can.

Rand

[digitaldog]

Help me understand this, please.  Is this a difference in their color management scheme?  I teach basic color management at a local camera club (I'm far from an expert, but my grasp greatly exceeds the average club member who uses photo labs for printing) and I'd like better to understand, if I can. Obviously, I present both of these folk's instructions/recommendations as examples of "what to look for and what you should follow in your file preparation" - but I'd like to understand the "why they are different" if I can.

Rand

Big difference; one is a fully color managed path, the other is a kludge and an attempt to convince customers it's a color managed path!
Soft proofing with a profile you can't use for conversion, a profile you may not even know, defines the output conditions (if it did, you could use it), can't control the rendering intent per image, or black point compensation, and being forced to send ONE (or three) RGB working space like sRGB is a color management kludge and a hack! It's an attempt to get unsuspecting customers to believe the shop is using a full color managed path. They are not. Either they should force you to send sRGB and forget anything to do with output profiles OR they should provide an actual color manage path.

[Rand47]

Big difference; one is a fully color managed path, the other is a kludge and an attempt to convince customers it's a color managed path!
Soft proofing with a profile you can't use for conversion, a profile you may not even know, defines the output conditions (if it did, you could use it), can't control the rendering intent per image, or black point compensation, and being forced to send ONE (or three) RGB working space like sRGB is a color management kludge and a hack! It's an attempt to get unsuspecting customers to believe the shop is using a full color managed path. They are not. Either they should force you to send sRGB and forget anything to do with output profiles OR they should provide an actual color manage path.

Andrew,

Thanks.... so just to make sure this has penetrated my thick skull - when sending to a reputable lab, after using their ICC profile for soft proofing, that soft proofed file should then be exported with that same ICC profile? 

Rand

[digitaldog]

Thanks.... so just to make sure this has penetrated my thick skull - when sending to a reputable lab, after using their ICC profile for soft proofing, that soft proofed file should then be exported with that same ICC profile? 

The image should be converted, with that profile, with that RI as you desire. Then output 'as is'. In an output color space you provided.

[Rand47]

The image should be converted, with that profile, with that RI as you desire. Then output 'as is'. In an output color space you provided.

Andrew,

Once again, many thanks for your help!

Rand