Which colour profile should I use on a MacBook Pro?

[Ahnaf Akeef]

Hello everyone.

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

Thank you.

 

[PerTulip]

Hello everyone.

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

Thank you.

 

[graybalanced]

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Color LCD is the factory profile for that model. It should make good results, but generating a profile for your specific panel will yield even more accurate results.

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

The main factor is: Was it generated on your specific panel? Since there are factory variations in manufacturing, if you download a MacBook Pro profile made by someone else, it might not match your unit. This is why it is best to buy or borrow a profiling instrument and use it on your own computer to generate your own customized profile.

The other factor is, does the profile match your type of output? The Color LCD profile was generated based on some standard Apple used at the factory. But it might not match what you use your MacBook Pro for. The other advantage of generating your own profile is you can customize the calibration target for your purposes. If you are preparing photos for a D50 printing standard at 100cdm luminance, the Color LCD profile will be off,. but a custom profile generated for your screen at those specifications will be very good.

 

[Ahnaf Akeef]

Hello everyone.

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

Thank you.

 

[mostlylost]

But from a photography perspective, shouldn't I be using the sRGB profile (found under Display settings in System Preferences) to maintain consistency with my camera and LR's sRGB settings?

You are about to fall down the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole

sRGB is a Color Space, not a Color Profile. These are two distinctly different items with distinctly different uses. Check out this article .

For instance, if you are selecting on your camera to produce out-of-camera jpegs, you might select the color space of sRGB. Likewise, in your editing program, you might work in the sRGB color space. Or maybe not You really need to read the linked articles.

On the other hand, you would calibrate and profile your monitor as steps in implementing a color managed workflow.

Profiling your monitor requires a device such as the excellent x-rite i1Display Pro or the ColorMunik. Check out B & H for pricing.

Pending further research, set your monitor for it's default of Color LCD and press on. It's close enough for government work, and it's free

Google these terms and look at some of the articles. It's complex and not something that is easily explained in a web post. I also recommend Mr Rodney's site at Digital Dog .

This stuff ain't light reading

--
But to be honest, it's probably the unicorns.

 

[PerTulip]

...This is where my concern is - which one do I use to achieve the highest level of color consistency across different displays (when viewed by my audience)?

Thank you...

That is only achieved with monitor calibration and using that profile. As another user already answered: that's the color profile, not the color space.

So, look at the calibration tools out there (Spyder, X-Rite,..) and get one that suits your needs, if the "highest level of color consistency" is what you need. I use a Spyder with DisplayCAL.

 

[digidog]

Hello everyone.

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

Thank you.

 

[digidog]

But from a photography perspective, shouldn't I be using the sRGB profile (found under Display settings in System Preferences) to maintain consistency with my camera and LR's sRGB settings?

You are about to fall down the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole

sRGB is a Color Space, not a Color Profile.

It IS both.

These are two distinctly different items with distinctly different uses. Check out this article .

For instance, if you are selecting on your camera to produce out-of-camera jpegs, you might select the color space of sRGB.

Don't.

Likewise, in your editing program, you might work in the sRGB color space. Or maybe not

Not unless you're posting to the web and mobile devices that may not support color management in which case, what you and other's see is a crap shoot.

sRGB urban legend & myths Part 2

In this 17 minute video, I'll discuss some more sRGB misinformation and cover:

When to use sRGB and what to expect on the web and mobile devices

How sRGB doesn't insure a visual match without color management, how to check

The downsides of an all sRGB workflow

sRGB's color gamut vs. "professional" output devices

The future of sRGB and wide gamut display technology

Photo print labs that demand sRGB for output

High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/sRGBMythsPart2.mp4

Low resolution on YouTube:

You really need to read the linked articles.

On the other hand, you would calibrate and profile your monitor as steps in implementing a color managed workflow.

Profiling your monitor requires a device such as the excellent x-rite i1Display Pro or the ColorMunik. Check out B & H for pricing.

Pending further research, set your monitor for it's default of Color LCD and press on. It's close enough for government work, and it's free

Google these terms and look at some of the articles. It's complex and not something that is easily explained in a web post. I also recommend Mr Rodney's site at Digital Dog .

This stuff ain't light reading

--
But to be honest, it's probably the unicorns.

--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog
http://www.digitaldog.net

 

[lightandaprayer]

The color profile on my MacBook is set to Color LCD by default. Does this provide the most accurate colors for processing photos? If not, which one do you recommend I use?

Color LCD is the factory profile for that model. It should make good results, but generating a profile for your specific panel will yield even more accurate results.

Also, what factors should I consider when selecting a color profile?

The main factor is: Was it generated on your specific panel? Since there are factory variations in manufacturing, if you download a MacBook Pro profile made by someone else, it might not match your unit. This is why it is best to buy or borrow a profiling instrument and use it on your own computer to generate your own customized profile.

The other factor is, does the profile match your type of output? The Color LCD profile was generated based on some standard Apple used at the factory. But it might not match what you use your MacBook Pro for. The other advantage of generating your own profile is you can customize the calibration target for your purposes. If you are preparing photos for a D50 printing standard at 100cdm luminance, the Color LCD profile will be off,. but a custom profile generated for your screen at those specifications will be very good.

I think that the accuracy of the factory profile proably varies depending on the source. When I got my NEC display, I decided to give the factory profile a try. I've been using it ever since. . . I didn't have the same experience with Apple and Sony profiles.

 

[graybalanced]

But from a photography perspective, shouldn't I be using the sRGB profile (found under Display settings in System Preferences) to maintain consistency with my camera and LR's sRGB settings?

you choose sRGB for the display if the display produces exact sRGB, because the Display profile is supposed to tell the system what the display is actually showing. If the display is not exactly sRGB but you apply the sRGB profile, you have given the system incorrect information about the display and the colors will be incorrect.

If you open Apple ColorSync Utility and overlay Color LCD and sRGB, you'll see they are not the same, so Apple's profile says the Mac display is not exact sRGB. Therefore applying the sRGB profile is wrong.

That is why the best profile for the display is a custom one. You have to tell the system exactly what the display is showing.

LR provides sRGB as an option for exporting. But internally, Lightroom is not using sRGB but a larger color space.

There is a common misconception that all profiles should be the same. But device, document, and application color spaces are usually different and should be, so that each of them gives the system the proper information to compensate for each device/application's colors correctly.

Also, Color LCD produces very unsaturated colors compared to sRGB, and the two profiles produce very different versions of the same photo. This is where my concern is - which one do I use to achieve the highest level of color consistency across different displays (when viewed by my audience)?

Saturation is not the only measure. Do you know that the high saturation is correct? It might be exaggerating. Calibration takes out the guesswork. It measures the display so when your photo program says Red 125, the display puts out Red 125. If you see Red 150 and it's more saturated, that would be incorrect if it's supposed to be showing you 125.

You might want to do more study about how color management works and what the role of each profile is. There is another poster in this thread, digidog, who is a known authority and has a website with a lot of good information about it.

 

[PerTulip]

Make it simple: if you have no idea what all this is about, just leave at sRGB it until you learn more about color management, profiling, and calibration.

 

[graybalanced]

Actually the monitor should be left at Color LCD, not sRGB, if there is not a better profile. But yes, other settings like export can be set to sRGB.

 

[PerTulip]

Actually the monitor should be left at Color LCD, not sRGB, if there is not a better profile. But yes, other settings like export can be set to sRGB.

Oh, yes, of course! My mistake.

 

[digidog]

Actually the monitor should be left at Color LCD, not sRGB, if there is not a better profile. But yes, other settings like export can be set to sRGB.

Exactly!

 

[SaltyPeanut]

you choose sRGB for the display if the display produces exact sRGB, because the Display profile is supposed to tell the system what the display is actually showing. If the display is not exactly sRGB but you apply the sRGB profile, you have given the system incorrect information about the display and the colors will be incorrect.

If you open Apple ColorSync Utility and overlay Color LCD and sRGB, you'll see they are not the same, so Apple's profile says the Mac display is not exact sRGB. Therefore applying the sRGB profile is wrong.

That is why the best profile for the display is a custom one. You have to tell the system exactly what the display is showing.

When you do a custom profile (calibrate it), is it limited to the screen's native gamut limits, or can you do several profiles to known gamuts, like sRGB and aRGB?

If you can do custom calibrations to known gamuts like sRGB, but the screen's display cannot display all colors within that gamut, then even that calibration/profile will be somewhat incorrect when displayed on that screen, no?

Or is it that you simply calibrate your screen for its best accuracy within its gamut limits, and then softproof via software like LR to approximate other non-native gamuts (which will only be displayed within the limits of the screen gamut itself, i.e. 88% sRGB, etc.)?

This just for a mpb, not a dedicated monitor like an NEC, which does have options to display other gamuts built-in by pushing a button. I assume it does this because its native gamut is wide enough to cover multiple known gamuts/color spaces, therefore you can switch profiles and accurately reproduce that color space on screen, vs a mpb that can only reproduce say 80% of sRGB (pure guess for example purposes, I have no idea how much of sRGB the new mbp's cover).

Apologies in advance if I got some terms mixed up. Still studying color management.

 

[digidog]

you choose sRGB for the display if the display produces exact sRGB, because the Display profile is supposed to tell the system what the display is actually showing. If the display is not exactly sRGB but you apply the sRGB profile, you have given the system incorrect information about the display and the colors will be incorrect.

If you open Apple ColorSync Utility and overlay Color LCD and sRGB, you'll see they are not the same, so Apple's profile says the Mac display is not exact sRGB. Therefore applying the sRGB profile is wrong.

That is why the best profile for the display is a custom one. You have to tell the system exactly what the display is showing.

When you do a custom profile (calibrate it), is it limited to the screen's native gamut limits, or can you do several profiles to known gamuts, like sRGB and aRGB?

The gamut is a limitation to all displays.

If you can do custom calibrations to known gamuts like sRGB, but the screen's display cannot display all colors within that gamut, then even that calibration/profile will be somewhat incorrect when displayed on that screen, no?

Out of gamut is out of gamut.

Or is it that you simply calibrate your screen for its best accuracy within its gamut limits, and then softproof via software like LR to approximate other non-native gamuts (which will only be displayed within the limits of the screen gamut itself, i.e. 88% sRGB, etc.)?

Less than full gamut is possible.

This just for a mpb, not a dedicated monitor like an NEC, which does have options to display other gamuts built-in by pushing a button. I assume it does this because its native gamut is wide enough to cover multiple known gamuts/color spaces, therefore you can switch profiles and accurately reproduce that color space on screen, vs a mpb that can only reproduce say 80% of sRGB (pure guess for example purposes, I have no idea how much of sRGB the new mbp's cover).

Gamuts and colorspace!

Apologies in advance if I got some terms mixed up. Still studying color management.

 

[CovertVideo]

But from a photography perspective, shouldn't I be using the sRGB profile (found under Display settings in System Preferences) to maintain consistency with my camera and LR's sRGB settings?

You are about to fall down the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole

sRGB is a Color Space, not a Color Profile. These are two distinctly different items with distinctly different uses. Check out this article .

For instance, if you are selecting on your camera to produce out-of-camera jpegs, you might select the color space of sRGB. Likewise, in your editing program, you might work in the sRGB color space. Or maybe not You really need to read the linked articles.

On the other hand, you would calibrate and profile your monitor as steps in implementing a color managed workflow.

Profiling your monitor requires a device such as the excellent x-rite i1Display Pro or the ColorMunik. Check out B & H for pricing.

Pending further research, set your monitor for it's default of Color LCD and press on. It's close enough for government work, and it's free

Google these terms and look at some of the articles. It's complex and not something that is easily explained in a web post. I also recommend Mr Rodney's site at Digital Dog .

This stuff ain't light reading

 

[Ghislain35]

Hi there,

I've never wrote nor asked any question on a forum before. So this is a first! Even though I was very close to get an answer to my question reading through this thread, I feel like I'm still not quite sure about one thing...

Here is my issue as well as my question:

I'm an amateur photographer, and I work on a MacBookPro. I recently bought a printer, calibrated my screen with an "Xrite I1 DisplayPro" and got pretty good color accuracy between my screen and my print using that ICC profile I created.

But then I kept on editing images, and exported one to my phone, still using that ICC profile. The result was quite different from the edit I had on my laptop screen. I guess it make sense since I edited the picture on a calibrated screen, and exported it to look at it on a non calibrated screen in srgb.

So the question is: Do I have to edit all the images I know will be posted on the web using "LCD color" profile to have greater color accuracy when exported in SRGB, and use my own ICC calibrated profile only when I know I'll be printing? Does it mean I'll always have to re-edit an image depending on what I'll do with it, posting it on the web or printing it?

I hope someone can help me clarify this!

Thanks in advance!

 

[AndyGordon]

Hi Ghislain,

I am definitely not an expert on colour management, but as far as I am aware you edit images in the widest possible colour space to retain all the info you can and export/print using a profile that matches your intended use.

So, for web posting I believe that is sRGB, so when creating the jpeg from your editing software you export it with the sRGB profile, if printing then you print using the appropriate printer profile for your printer, paper and ink

I’m sure if I’ve got this wrong someone will correct me

Andy

 

[Ron206]

In the OP the question amounted to .... what can I do to give my audience the best view of my images? .

Yup, calibration is key and should be a first step for any display that you use. But ....

You have no control of what the user has as a display and no idea of what he may have done to "optimize" the display. I have visited tech savvy friends to be shocked at the over saturated garish "optimized" setting used it their equipment. Needless to say, my images looked like junk. There is simply no way to control or anticipate those issues.

The best you can do is to calibrate your equipment such that you are not the guilty party. (factory setting are usually good enough)

Even in doing that, if you really want and need supper accurate prints (for example), you would need to go back and forth with a couple of rounds of test prints to tweak your system to match the details of your print vendors system. And even then (as has already been discussed) ambient lighting, paper quality, aging, light intensity, room color, etc. will change the "perception" of the image.

Ron