Monitor profiling - Should I see difference in PS and Picasa?

[Fredrik F]

I've recently read up on color management and have now calibrated and profiled my monitor. The calibrator is a xrite Eye-One Display 2 and the display is a Samsung SyncMaster 713N. I'm quite confident that I've set up Windows and PS correctly for color management but there's something that's annoying me:

When comparing a (sRGB) picture shown in a color-aware and non-color-aware software, I expect I should see at least a little difference. For example, if I show a file in PS and Picasa (which I believe is not color-aware), I thought I would se a difference. The only explanations I can think of are:

1. After calibration, the display is so well adjusted that the profile doesn't do very much other than indicating the extent of the gamut. This I find unlikely since the display isn't that good.

2. I'm looking at pictures that are "too easy". Maybe I should compare pictures with more saturated colors to see the difference between software using the monitor ICC profile and not? Actually I've used a jpeg verision of a GretagMacbeth ColorChecker chart.

3. My eyes aren't good enough to distinguish subtle differences in color. Most likely alternative, me thinks.

So my questions are:

1. Do you think it is likely that I don't see any difference between pics shown in color-aware and non-color-aware SW?
2. What kind of pic should I use to provoke differences?

3. Is there some kind of editor or viewer in which I can see how much the monitor profile needs to alter the rgb values to get the correct color?

Thankful for any ideas!

Fred

 

[ianR]

A non colour aware program assumes that the file is in sRGB by default so it should display it correctly if it's in that format and you shouldn't see a difference.

Try conveting a file to AdobeRGB in Photoshop and it should display perfectly (it should look identical), but taking it into a non colour aware program it will assume it's sRGB and it will appear washed out and lifeless.

I've never used Picasa so don't know if it's colour aware. Windows picture viewer is colour aware by the way although Windows isn't natively.

If you're not sure open them in a browser like IE or Firefox and you'll see the difference.
Ian

 

[Fredrik F]

Hmm, so what does the monitor profile do then?

IMHO, the calibration takes the display to a desired state by adjusting brightness, contrast, gamma, and white point. This might be seen as a coarse adjustment, but it does not guarantee that all colors are displayed correctly. The profiling then takes care of the fine tuning by measuring the gamut, or the color space the display is capable of, and also measuring the displayed color for a given input rgb value. The latter information can then be used by a color-aware SW to correct for the display's inaccuracies. This is why I expected Picasa and PS to show sligthly differnt versions of the same image since PS uses the monitor profile.

Is my understaning not correct? If not, please help me understand!

 

[ianR]

Hmm, so what does the monitor profile do then?

IMHO, the calibration takes the display to a desired state by
adjusting brightness, contrast, gamma, and white point. This might be
seen as a coarse adjustment, but it does not guarantee that all
colors are displayed correctly. The profiling then takes care of the
fine tuning by measuring the gamut, or the color space the display is
capable of, and also measuring the displayed color for a given input
rgb value. The latter information can then be used by a color-aware
SW to correct for the display's inaccuracies. This is why I expected
Picasa and PS to show sligthly differnt versions of the same image
since PS uses the monitor profile.

Is my understaning not correct? If not, please help me understand!

Well surely whatever your monitor is adjusted to it's going to look the same on any sRGB file no matter what program sends it. The data is identical in each case the adjustment is the same in each case.

If you want Photoshop to display a difference between a raw sRGB file and what your calibrated monitor sees then set Photoshop so that its displayed profile is 'monitor', otherwise it won't. I think that's what you want.
Ian

 

[ianR]

Sorry, that should read, set Photoshop so its displayed WORKSPACE is monitor.
Ian

 

[Fredrik F]

Well surely whatever your monitor is adjusted to it's going to look
the same on any sRGB file no matter what program sends it. The data
is identical in each case the adjustment is the same in each case.

Well, that depends on where the adjustment is made, doesn't it? If the adjustment is in the displaying SW (e.g., PS) the adjustment needen't be the same. If the adjustment is in HW, e.g., graphics card or monitor, then, yes, the adjustment is the same. My understanding is that the calibration affects HW and the profiling CAN affect SW.

If you want Photoshop to display a difference between a raw sRGB file
and what your calibrated monitor sees then set Photoshop so that
its displayed profile is 'monitor', otherwise it won't. I think
that's what you want.

Yepp, that's what I wanted. It seems like PS ignores the monitor profile in this case. But this would mean that your first statement is incorrect.

Fred

 

[ianR]

The point of the display Photoshop makes is to be able to get consistent colour on external systems. That is, get your printer output or another computer to look the same as your monitor.

If your workspace is sRGB then it's going to ignore your monitor calibration and show you what it looks like on an uncalibrated system so you can see how oher people will see it. So it should look the same as a non colour aware program . If you choose a special printer profile for example it will give youo an idea of how your printer sees it and if you choose the monitor profile and it looks different then your monitor isn't calibrated correctly. If it looks the same then it is and that looks what you have here which is an end to it.

If you 're really looking to prove someone wrong each time and prove your own point of view I'm not really interested in contributing.
Ian

 

[Fredrik F]

Ian, I'm not trying to prove anybody wrong and I apologize if I came across that way. But your understanding of color management is just very far from mine. I think it would be useful if someone else could comment.

 

[Mark Smith145430]

When you calibrate your monitor, you get a profile this profile is loaded into your LUT when your computer starts up.

This profile is for your monitor ONLY and is used by Photoshop to display the source profile correctly, it does this by 'proofing' the source profile into your calibrated monitor profile using its conversion engine (ACE)

You should never use the monitor profile as your workspace, as this effectively turns off colour management.

Non colour aware programs do not 'default to sRGB' they just send the raw colour numbers to the monitor (which happens to be similar to sRGB).
Here is an easy explanation of CMS
http://www.gballard.net/psd/cmstheory.html
Mark
--
http://www.photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

 

[John down under]

I've recently read up on color management and have now calibrated and
profiled my monitor. The calibrator is a xrite Eye-One Display 2 and
the display is a Samsung SyncMaster 713N. I'm quite confident that
I've set up Windows and PS correctly for color management but there's
something that's annoying me:

When comparing a (sRGB) picture shown in a color-aware and
non-color-aware software, I expect I should see at least a little
difference. For example, if I show a file in PS and Picasa (which I
believe is not color-aware), I thought I would se a difference. The
only explanations I can think of are:
1. After calibration, the display is so well adjusted that the
profile doesn't do very much other than indicating the extent of the
gamut. This I find unlikely since the display isn't that good.
2. I'm looking at pictures that are "too easy". Maybe I should
compare pictures with more saturated colors to see the difference
between software using the monitor ICC profile and not? Actually I've
used a jpeg verision of a GretagMacbeth ColorChecker chart.
3. My eyes aren't good enough to distinguish subtle differences in
color. Most likely alternative, me thinks.

So my questions are:
1. Do you think it is likely that I don't see any difference between
pics shown in color-aware and non-color-aware SW?
2. What kind of pic should I use to provoke differences?
3. Is there some kind of editor or viewer in which I can see how much
the monitor profile needs to alter the rgb values to get the correct
color?

Thankful for any ideas!

Fred

Hi Fred. Good questions. Ian doesn't fully understand how it works, but Mark has explained it better.

I agree that it sounds odd you don't see a difference in your sRGB image display between Photoshop and Picasa, if Picasa is indeed a non-colour managed app.

Is your monitor LCD or CRT? CRT native response is much more likely to be closer to an sRGB response than LCD, although as you say, you'd expect to see some difference. Proper calibration and profiling only gets non-colour managed output so far to correct, with colours still likely to be wrong, just as you've said.

Gotta go now, but will check back tomorrow.

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[Ednaz]

I don't know the specs on your monitor, but I know them on the ones I own, so I'll use that as an example.

Monitors that say they can show 72% of NTSC, like almost any monitor older than a year old or less than a thousand dollars in price, are pretty much sRGB monitors only. You can see adjustments from color management in the monitor - for example, on my CRT monitors, when my color management profile loads, there's a distinct change in the way my background image on the screen looks. But in general there's a lot more going on in any Adobe RGB image than a 72% of NTSC monitor can show you. You leave the monitor's gamut way before you leave the gamut of most good photo printers. But the basic is, a lot of images will look the same whether you're using a color managed application or not because the differences are outside the visible range of the monitor.

I couldn't find any info on Samsung's site about your monitor's gamut.

The newer monitors, with 92% or more of NTSC, show a lot, lot more of Adobe RGB color space. The differences I see in my newest monitors between color managed apps and the images I'd see in a browser on the web, are huge.

The other factor I've noticed is that Windows' color management capability seems to operate very well, and other than what I see through browsers, keeps everything looking the same no matter what app I use, with only one or two exceptions. One exception for sure is the panorama stitching app I use, which appears to cancel out Windows' color management. Meaning that the image viewed in windows file explorer look the same as viewed in lightroom, but load that image into the pano app and it looks like garbage. If you have Windows' color management active, it may be helping you out here. When I turn Windows' color management off, my Adobe apps are accurate to my print colors, but some other apps are not.

The last is that some video cards are relentlessly sRGB even though they say they aren't. I noticed when I looked up the Samsung monitor you mention and looked at their color management info, they have a list of cards that it'll work with, suggesting it WON'T work with others. I've got a lot of PCs around the house and can tell you that on some pcs there's not much value in color profiling because of the limitations of the video card.

 

[Fredrik F]

Thank you for ypur replies.

Instead of trying to compare the image between two different apps, I've used Ian's tip and used the proofing function in PS. I set the proofing to "Monitor RGB" and hit ctrl-y to switch between the two versions of the image. I guess I also could have used the custom setup, chosen any profile and checked the "Preserve Color Numbers". I interpret this as disabling any profile conversion and simply sending the image's rgb numbers to the monitor. This way, it is much easier to see differences. With color management colors are less saturated and I get more detail in the shadows. There's also slight differences for some colors.

I've looked at my (LCD) monitors gamut in Microsofts Color applet, and the monitor is essentially sRGB. It slightly smaller for some colors and slightly larger for some.

So, there are differences before and after profiling but they are difficult to spot for my untrained eyes. Since I spent some time reading up on color management I really wanted to see some difference. This would be the reward for time spent reading!

Fred

 

[John down under]

Thank you for ypur replies.

Instead of trying to compare the image between two different apps,
I've used Ian's tip and used the proofing function in PS. I set the
proofing to "Monitor RGB" and hit ctrl-y to switch between the two
versions of the image.

Hi Fred. You (and Ian) mention Monitor RGB for soft proofing monitor non-colour managed monitor display. Do you have a profile choice called 'Monitor RGB'? It doesn't exist in my profile list when I'm soft proofing.

I guess I also could have used the custom
setup, chosen any profile and checked the "Preserve Color Numbers". I
interpret this as disabling any profile conversion and simply sending
the image's rgb numbers to the monitor.

That's not how it works. Yes, it preserves the RGB values of your image, but it shows you what those unconverted RGB values from your source image would look like if sent to the device corresponding to the selected profile. If that device is your monitor, then you will get a non-colour managed soft proof view. If not, it will show you something irrelevant, unless, for example, you intend printing with unconverted RGB values, which you wouldn't want to do.

Soft proofing with the profile of your monitor while preserving RGB values will show you what a non-colour managed monitor display will look like. If I understand correctly, if there's a Monitor RGB profile you can use for soft proofing, that will show you the same thing (but I don't have that option).

As I said in another reply, another way to view the non-coour managed monitor response is to assign your monitor to the image. You can use preview on and off to see the difference, then you can cancel without assigning so you don't actually assign a different profile.

There's often more than one way to do things in Photoshop, so you can choose what works best for you.

I hope this all makes sense to you. From what you've said in this thread, I assume it will as you are thinking logically about it all and wanting to understand how it works. Obviously sing out if you want further clarification or you disagree with any of the logic. I'm a big fan of understanding rather than blindly following instructions.

This way, it is much easier
to see differences. With color management colors are less saturated
and I get more detail in the shadows. There's also slight differences
for some colors.

I've looked at my (LCD) monitors gamut in Microsofts Color applet,
and the monitor is essentially sRGB. It slightly smaller for some
colors and slightly larger for some.

So, there are differences before and after profiling but they are
difficult to spot for my untrained eyes. Since I spent some time
reading up on color management I really wanted to see some
difference. This would be the reward for time spent reading!

Didn't you really just want confidence that colour was being managed properly?

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[John down under]

I guess I also could have used the custom
setup, chosen any profile and checked the "Preserve Color Numbers". I
interpret this as disabling any profile conversion and simply sending
the image's rgb numbers to the monitor.

That's not how it works. Yes, it preserves the RGB values of your
image, but it shows you what those unconverted RGB values from your
source image would look like if sent to the device corresponding to
the selected profile. If that device is your monitor, then you will
get a non-colour managed soft proof view.

What I meant to say is that it will give you a non-colour managed soft proof view of your monitor display, which is what your thread is about.

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[John down under]

I don't know the specs on your monitor, but I know them on the ones I
own, so I'll use that as an example.

Monitors that say they can show 72% of NTSC, like almost any monitor
older than a year old or less than a thousand dollars in price, are
pretty much sRGB monitors only. You can see adjustments from color
management in the monitor - for example, on my CRT monitors, when my
color management profile loads, there's a distinct change in the way
my background image on the screen looks.

Yes, that's from the gamma and white point values being loaded, but not the full set of colour corrections, which need to be done by colour managed apps.

But in general there's a
lot more going on in any Adobe RGB image than a 72% of NTSC monitor
can show you.

True, but it's OT for Fred's question about viewing sRGB images in colour managed vs non-colour managed apps.

You leave the monitor's gamut way before you leave the
gamut of most good photo printers.

Not necessarily true. My monitor (which is a great Eizo monitor with a S-IPS panel, but not aRGB) can show way more colours than my Epson Stylus Pro 4800 can print. Many other lesser monitors aren't so different in their gamut, but more in their consistency of luminance and colour and perhaps usable angle of view. Maybe you have other good photo printers or other monitors in mind. It's not a subtle difference. Full on primary colours, even for sRGB images, are noticeably muted when I print, whether I use perceptual or relative colorimetric rendering intent. Don't get me wrong. The printed images still look great, but it's just that some of the colours are nowhere near as bright and saturated as what I can see on my monitor.

But the basic is, a lot of images
will look the same whether you're using a color managed application
or not because the differences are outside the visible range of the
monitor.

Also not true. It's not just the difference in gamut that can be displayed but also the native mapping of RGB values with respect to the colour space in question, most relevantly sRGB for most monitors.

I couldn't find any info on Samsung's site about your monitor's gamut.

The newer monitors, with 92% or more of NTSC, show a lot, lot more of
Adobe RGB color space. The differences I see in my newest monitors
between color managed apps and the images I'd see in a browser on the
web, are huge.

Do you mean sRGB images? If you're talking about the diffence between viewing an aRGB image in a colour managed app and a non-colour manged sRG image, then, depending on how much of the colour space gamut is being used by the image, of course there will be a large difference. Maybe I've missed the point about what you're comparing.

The other factor I've noticed is that Windows' color management
capability seems to operate very well, and other than what I see
through browsers, keeps everything looking the same no matter what
app I use, with only one or two exceptions.

Yes, colour manged images should look the same if colour management is implemented properly in different applications (in conjunciion with the OS).

One exception for sure
is the panorama stitching app I use, which appears to cancel out
Windows' color management. Meaning that the image viewed in windows
file explorer look the same as viewed in lightroom,

For sRGB images maybe, and probably only if you have Windows RAW Image Viewer loaded. I'm not certain about that as I have the RAW Image viewer loaded and I can still see differences, but others report that the Windows Explorer view is colour managed if the RAW Image Viewere is loaded.

but load that
image into the pano app and it looks like garbage.

Probably not colour managed and possibly not good at rendering either?

If you have
Windows' color management active, it may be helping you out here.
When I turn Windows' color management off, my Adobe apps are accurate
to my print colors, but some other apps are not.

Where do you turn Windows colour management on and off?

The last is that some video cards are relentlessly sRGB even though
they say they aren't.

What do you mean?

I noticed when I looked up the Samsung monitor
you mention and looked at their color management info, they have a
list of cards that it'll work with, suggesting it WON'T work with
others. I've got a lot of PCs around the house and can tell you that
on some pcs there's not much value in color profiling because of the
limitations of the video card.

For those where you don't see much difference, it might be because the native response is closer to sRGB than for some other video systems to start with. Sure the video system gamut may be limited (video card + monitor), but that doesn't mean calibrating and profiling isn't worthwhile to make sure you're getting a display as accurate as possible for those images within the gamut of the video system and, within the limitations of the rendering intent being used, as accurate as possible for those images that include colours outside the gamut of the video system.

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[Fredrik F]

Thank you for ypur replies.

Instead of trying to compare the image between two different apps,
I've used Ian's tip and used the proofing function in PS. I set the
proofing to "Monitor RGB" and hit ctrl-y to switch between the two
versions of the image.

Hi Fred. You (and Ian) mention Monitor RGB for soft proofing
monitor non-colour managed monitor display. Do you have a profile
choice called 'Monitor RGB'? It doesn't exist in my profile list
when I'm soft proofing.

I use PS 7 and here it's not a among the other profiles (selectable under Custom) but simply further down the list below Custom.

I guess I also could have used the custom
setup, chosen any profile and checked the "Preserve Color Numbers". I
interpret this as disabling any profile conversion and simply sending
the image's rgb numbers to the monitor.

That's not how it works. Yes, it preserves the RGB values of your
image, but it shows you what those unconverted RGB values from your
source image would look like if sent to the device corresponding to
the selected profile. If that device is your monitor, then you will
get a non-colour managed soft proof view. If not, it will show you
something irrelevant, unless, for example, you intend printing with
unconverted RGB values, which you wouldn't want to do.

Soft proofing with the profile of your monitor while preserving RGB
values will show you what a non-colour managed monitor display will
look like. If I understand correctly, if there's a Monitor RGB
profile you can use for soft proofing, that will show you the same
thing (but I don't have that option).

That's an important clarification! So when selecting Preserve RGB Numbers the color management engine, e.g. ACE, calculates, using the destination profile, which colors the image's rgb values correspond to for the destination device? Then these colors are converted to rgb numbers using the monitor profile to display correctly on your monitor. If I deselect Preserve RGB Numbers ACE would instead convert the rgb numbers so that the image's colors are preserved on to the destination device. Then again through the monitor profile, of course. The only differences in color here would arise from mapping out-of-gamut colors and the characteristics of the paper (in case of printer). I arrive at this by regarding a profile as a mapping between device-dependent rgb numbers and device-independent (standardized) colors, and vice versa. You can thus do the mapping in two directions: color -> rgb and rgb -> color. Am I correct in my understanding?

As I said in another reply, another way to view the non-coour managed
monitor response is to assign your monitor to the image. You can use
preview on and off to see the difference, then you can cancel without
assigning so you don't actually assign a different profile.

There's often more than one way to do things in Photoshop, so you can
choose what works best for you.

I hope this all makes sense to you.

Yes it does. Thanks!

From what you've said in this
thread, I assume it will as you are thinking logically about it all
and wanting to understand how it works. Obviously sing out if you
want further clarification or you disagree with any of the logic.

I'm a big fan of understanding rather than blindly following
instructions.

Dito.

This way, it is much easier
to see differences. With color management colors are less saturated
and I get more detail in the shadows. There's also slight differences
for some colors.

I've looked at my (LCD) monitors gamut in Microsofts Color applet,
and the monitor is essentially sRGB. It slightly smaller for some
colors and slightly larger for some.

So, there are differences before and after profiling but they are
difficult to spot for my untrained eyes. Since I spent some time
reading up on color management I really wanted to see some
difference. This would be the reward for time spent reading!

Didn't you really just want confidence that colour was being managed
properly?

Yes. And to make sure I have understood things correctly. I was at first quite sure I had set things up properly but when I didn't see a difference I began to doubt. Using PS to validate is much easier than using two apps side by side as I did at first.

Fred

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[Ednaz]

John, if the statement you make below is true, you have a printer problem of some sort. With my Epson 4000 I get prints with colors well outside the color space of my older, 72% monitors. Same with my Epson 1800, and my 2400, although each gets outside in its own way and in its own colors, depending on paper. What papers are you using? On Arches Infinity, Epson Ultrasmooth, Somerset Velvet, and Crane Silver Rag, particularly on Silver Rag, I get print detail and color that my older screens can't produce. The difference is striking in the difference between my older LaCie LCD and newer one - the older is 72%, the newer is 92% of NTSC, which is almost out to Adobe RGB. My extreme prints are somewhere in between the two.

Even some commercially printed coated publications get outside the 72% space, which is what has driven the creation of the current generation of monitors.

You leave the monitor's gamut way before you leave the
gamut of most good photo printers.

Not necessarily true. My monitor (which is a great Eizo monitor with
a S-IPS panel, but not aRGB) can show way more colours than my Epson
Stylus Pro 4800 can print. Many other lesser monitors aren't so
different in their gamut, but more in their consistency of luminance
and colour and perhaps usable angle of view. Maybe you have other
good photo printers or other monitors in mind. It's not a subtle
difference. Full on primary colours, even for sRGB images, are
noticeably muted when I print, whether I use perceptual or relative
colorimetric rendering intent. Don't get me wrong. The printed
images still look great, but it's just that some of the colours are
nowhere near as bright and saturated as what I can see on my monitor.

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[Brian Miller]

Ednaz wrote:
With my Epson 4000 I get prints with colors

well outside the color space of my older, 72% monitors. Same with my
Epson 1800, and my 2400, although each gets outside in its own way
and in its own colors, depending on paper.

Dry Creek's gamut modeler seems to confirm this:
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/tools/printer_gamuts/gamutmodel.html

Why does Adobe:
http://learn.adobe.com/wiki/display/LR/Set+print+color+management+-+Basics

say this?

"Note: The printer's color space will generally be smaller then the image's color space, often resulting in colors that can't be reproduced. The rendering intent you choose attempts to compensate for these out-of-gamut colors."

Are they talking about extended gamut color spaces?

 

[John down under]

John, if the statement you make below is true, you have a printer
problem of some sort. With my Epson 4000 I get prints with colors
well outside the color space of my older, 72% monitors. Same with my
Epson 1800, and my 2400, although each gets outside in its own way
and in its own colors, depending on paper. What papers are you
using? On Arches Infinity, Epson Ultrasmooth, Somerset Velvet, and
Crane Silver Rag, particularly on Silver Rag, I get print detail and
color that my older screens can't produce. The difference is
striking in the difference between my older LaCie LCD and newer one -
the older is 72%, the newer is 92% of NTSC, which is almost out to
Adobe RGB. My extreme prints are somewhere in between the two.

Even some commercially printed coated publications get outside the
72% space, which is what has driven the creation of the current
generation of monitors.

Hi Ed(?). Thanks for your reply. I didn't mean that my monitor (Eizo L985EX) is better than my printer (Epson 4800) with all colours, but certainly with some of them, including the primaries (R, G and B), even for sRGB. Maybe my monitor gamut is better than I thought it was. :^) A wider than sRGB gamut for my monitor would account for at least some of the differences between colour managed and non-colour managed viewing on my monitor.

I'm pretty sure my printer is working properly. It's my 2nd 4800 (warranty replacement for reasons other than colour) and they've both printed the same. If I printed on glossy paper, I realise I'd get a wider gamut response, but the results with the silk finish paper I use are still pretty good, noticeably better than with Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper.

You leave the monitor's gamut way before you leave the
gamut of most good photo printers.

Not necessarily true. My monitor (which is a great Eizo monitor with
a S-IPS panel, but not aRGB) can show way more colours than my Epson
Stylus Pro 4800 can print. Many other lesser monitors aren't so
different in their gamut, but more in their consistency of luminance
and colour and perhaps usable angle of view. Maybe you have other
good photo printers or other monitors in mind. It's not a subtle
difference. Full on primary colours, even for sRGB images, are
noticeably muted when I print, whether I use perceptual or relative
colorimetric rendering intent. Don't get me wrong. The printed
images still look great, but it's just that some of the colours are
nowhere near as bright and saturated as what I can see on my monitor.

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10

 

[John down under]

Thank you for ypur replies.

Instead of trying to compare the image between two different apps,
I've used Ian's tip and used the proofing function in PS. I set the
proofing to "Monitor RGB" and hit ctrl-y to switch between the two
versions of the image.

Hi Fred. You (and Ian) mention Monitor RGB for soft proofing
monitor non-colour managed monitor display. Do you have a profile
choice called 'Monitor RGB'? It doesn't exist in my profile list
when I'm soft proofing.

I use PS 7 and here it's not a among the other profiles (selectable
under Custom) but simply further down the list below Custom.

Gotcha. Thanks Fred. I couldn't see the wood for the trees! LOL

I guess I also could have used the custom
setup, chosen any profile and checked the "Preserve Color Numbers". I
interpret this as disabling any profile conversion and simply sending
the image's rgb numbers to the monitor.

That's not how it works. Yes, it preserves the RGB values of your
image, but it shows you what those unconverted RGB values from your
source image would look like if sent to the device corresponding to
the selected profile. If that device is your monitor, then you will
get a non-colour managed soft proof view. If not, it will show you
something irrelevant, unless, for example, you intend printing with
unconverted RGB values, which you wouldn't want to do.

Soft proofing with the profile of your monitor while preserving RGB
values will show you what a non-colour managed monitor display will
look like. If I understand correctly, if there's a Monitor RGB
profile you can use for soft proofing, that will show you the same
thing (but I don't have that option).

That's an important clarification! So when selecting Preserve RGB
Numbers the color management engine, e.g. ACE, calculates, using the
destination profile, which colors the image's rgb values correspond
to for the destination device? Then these colors are converted to rgb
numbers using the monitor profile to display correctly on your
monitor.

Exactly. Of course, there's always the effect of the available gamuts represented by the source and destination profiles and the rendering intents used, but that's unavoidable.

If I deselect Preserve RGB Numbers ACE would instead convert
the rgb numbers so that the image's colors are preserved on to the
destination device.

Yes, within the limitations of the respective gamuts (from the profiles) and the rendering intent(s) used.

Then again through the monitor profile, of
course. The only differences in color here would arise from mapping
out-of-gamut colors and the characteristics of the paper (in case of
printer).

Yes.

I arrive at this by regarding a profile as a mapping
between device-dependent rgb numbers and device-independent
(standardized) colors, and vice versa. You can thus do the mapping in
two directions: color -> rgb and rgb -> color. Am I correct in my
understanding?

Yes.

As I said in another reply, another way to view the non-coour managed
monitor response is to assign your monitor to the image. You can use
preview on and off to see the difference, then you can cancel without
assigning so you don't actually assign a different profile.

However, soft proofing with 'Moniitor RGB' does look like a simpler and more flexible solution.

There's often more than one way to do things in Photoshop, so you can
choose what works best for you.

I hope this all makes sense to you.

Yes it does. Thanks!

From what you've said in this
thread, I assume it will as you are thinking logically about it all
and wanting to understand how it works. Obviously sing out if you
want further clarification or you disagree with any of the logic.

I'm a big fan of understanding rather than blindly following
instructions.

Dito.

:^)

--
Cheers from John from Adelaide, South Australia
John Harvey Photography http://johnharvey.com.au
Canon 40D, Canon 20D & Fuji F10