Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Colour Profiles / Colour Space 
Author Message
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:17 am
Posts: 5550
Location: Nottingham
Reply with quote
Without going into great detail and frying my brain can someone explain colour profiles to me. From what I understand the camera, monitor, PS software and printer can be set. Are these supposed to match? At the moment it's set as:

Camera: Adobe1998
Monitor: iMac
PS: North America General Purpose 2 / sRGB IEC61966-2.1 (preserve embedded profiles)
Printer: no idea

So when I upload a photo from the DSLR to the iMac (and want to send it for printing at a later date hopefully coming back looking the same) do I need to adjust these profiles? e.g. set them all to Adobe1998 to match the camera?

As you can tell I havent got a bleeding clue. On the PC it was so messed up a photo would look amazing on the screen yet print out muddy and dark.

Also when opening in PS do I preserve the embedded profile and/or save with the profile?

_________________
Twitter
Blog
flickr


Mon May 16, 2011 4:58 pm
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
And, so, you enter the bewildering world that is colour management. It’s confusing, and it’s taken two luminaries to explain bits of it to set up a system which I use. One of these being Heather K.

First off, your colour work flow must be logical and your image should gain a colour profile that matches your display pretty soon. Photoshop will want to use a profile to display your image on your screen.

So, step 1 - calibrate your display. No point going any further without a calibrated screen. Use a hardware device, not your eyes. You’ll get it wrong.

Next - set up your copy of Photoshop to use your screen profile. This is how mine’s been set up for years:

Image

You will notice that the RGB space in Working Spaces is set to use my monitor’s own colour profile - that which was create when the screen was calibrated. Whenever I open an image, and the colour profiles mismatch, Photoshop will ask if I want to convert it, which I do.

OK, so Photoshop is set up. What you also need to do if you want to be totally thorough is to calibrate your printer and (if you have one) your scanner. More hardware needed. This is something I have not done. Usually this involves printing a test sheet, and scanning it back in. The calibration software works out how the colours shift and rebalances the system accordingly.

However, check your print dialogue in Photoshop as it has options for printing using PPD files for the printer and paper used. When printing something that matters, I let Photoshop colour manage the process, and select the paper being used. When the print information is sent to the OS print dialogue, I switch colour management off. You don’t want it to happen twice.

As you can imagine, colour management is complex, and there are companies out there who charge a lot to get your system set up right.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon May 16, 2011 5:17 pm
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm
Posts: 12143
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
My camera shoots in sRGB, my Mac uses the Colour LCD profile, I export images from Lr in AdobeRGB (1998), unless I'm sending them to Blurb to print a book, in which case I export as sRGB (as that's what they recommend).
I haven't ever had any problems between a printed image looking any different to the way it appears on the screen. Having said that, I've always had a proof copy just to make sure.
When I've printed images myself (to some A3 Epson Photo printer) the image again looked just like they did on screen.
Hmm, just a thought but when I do my book exports I use my Apple Cinema Display, and I don't know what colour profile that uses (it's not connected right now so can't check).
If your printer is any way half decent it should tell you what settings to use for photo printing.
I think as long as you get a proof copy looking as good as the image on screen you'll be good to go.

Mark

_________________
okenobi wrote:
All I know so far is that Mark, Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker use Nikon and everybody else seems to use Canon.
ShockWaffle wrote:
Well you obviously. You're a one man vortex of despair.


Mon May 16, 2011 5:18 pm
Profile WWW
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Here, but not all there.
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
One of these being Heather K.


Who has forgotten most of what she once knew. :oops:

_________________
My Flickr | Snaptophobic Bloggage
Heather Kay: modelling details that matter.
"Let my windows be open to receive new ideas but let me also be strong enough not to be blown away by them." - Mahatma Gandhi.


Mon May 16, 2011 6:23 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
Struggling to get an Epson 2800 (IIRC) set up to give accurate colour.
We have no hardware colour calibration, so I've been doing my best with letting Adobe handle the colour until we get to the printer.
If I let Adobe handle the colour at that point, everything's a good few stops too bright or too dark.
Now I've got the printer handling colour, I'd estimate it's within 10%-20% of the displayed image - an improvement but not perfect. Certainly haven't had to deal with any angry students lately.
I'm going to order a calibrater shortly, once my £500 film scanner request's forgotten about...

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Mon May 16, 2011 7:07 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
HeatherKay wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
One of these being Heather K.


Who has forgotten most of what she once knew. :oops:

Keith Martin wrote a good article in MacUser about this.

EDIT- just found it

http://www.macuser.co.uk/447-picking-yo ... -minefield

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Last edited by paulzolo on Mon May 16, 2011 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Mon May 16, 2011 8:59 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
ProfessorF wrote:
Struggling to get an Epson 2800 (IIRC) set up to give accurate colour.
We have no hardware colour calibration, so I've been doing my best with letting Adobe handle the colour until we get to the printer.
If I let Adobe handle the colour at that point, everything's a good few stops too bright or too dark.
Now I've got the printer handling colour, I'd estimate it's within 10%-20% of the displayed image - an improvement but not perfect. Certainly haven't had to deal with any angry students lately.
I'm going to order a calibrater shortly, once my £500 film scanner request's forgotten about...


Are you using the correct PPDs for the paper stock? Your printer supplier should have downloads (Epson do). That will make a difference. Also, inkjet printers tend to operate on an RGB model, so you may get better results using that.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon May 16, 2011 9:01 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
Are you using the correct PPDs for the paper stock? Your printer supplier should have downloads (Epson do). That will make a difference. Also, inkjet printers tend to operate on an RGB model, so you may get better results using that.


Yeah we do make sure the correct PPD is in use.
When I get half a moment, I'll actually get in there and spend a morning be more methodical. Haven't had the time to really get into the many and varied options, so while it's not right, it's just about good enough.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Mon May 16, 2011 9:07 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:17 am
Posts: 5550
Location: Nottingham
Reply with quote
Ok I think I'm starting to grasp it. As I cannot calibrate the monitor using anything other than my eyes right now I looked at the matching profiles for my monitor (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) and applied the same to Photoshop. My camera will be set to output sRGB too but I've set imported images in PS to use the working colour space i.e. sRGB IEC61966-2.1 anyway. I'm hoping that if I set my printer to the same the prints will look there or thereabouts.

More importantly with the colour space embedded in saved photos when I send the book off to print it should come back looking something like it did on the screen.

Hopefully.

Or am I massively over simplifying it :lol:

_________________
Twitter
Blog
flickr


Thu May 19, 2011 7:43 pm
Profile WWW
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Here, but not all there.
Reply with quote
Bear in mind that SRGB is intended mainly for on-screen use.

To be honest, I doubt you'll have any issues, but if you got into printing in a big way you'd be better working in Adobe RGB throughout.

_________________
My Flickr | Snaptophobic Bloggage
Heather Kay: modelling details that matter.
"Let my windows be open to receive new ideas but let me also be strong enough not to be blown away by them." - Mahatma Gandhi.


Thu May 19, 2011 8:58 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 10 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.