Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Color Mgmt in Photoshop

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
March 2, 2005 12:17:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I'm kind of new to color management, but I'm running in to some issues
with some files I'm trying to process.

Here's my setup:
Canon G2 camera, shooting RAW & JPG, mostly raw, no profile assigned to
RAW files? sRGB to JPG
Samsung 17" LCD 710N Analog monitor, using manufacturer provided
profile
Photoshop CS, Adobe RGB (1998) working space
Windows XP

Here's the problem:
Starting with JPG's (because it's more consistent, white balance is
already set, etc), when I view the images in the 'Windows Picture and
Fax Viewer', which I assume uses the monitor's profile, the images are
a little bit cool, but for the most part look relatively as I expected
they should. However, when I open the images in Photoshop, they are far
warmer in appearance. When I use the View->Proof Setup->Monitor RGB
then I get the cool colors again. Obviously this causes significant
problems when setting white balance in RAW files because the images
look one way in PS (warmer) and completely different when not in PS. If
I turn off color management for a particular image it looks much more
similar to the non-PS view.

I would like to know what else I should be looking at, etc, in order to
begin working on this issue. I feel like I'm probably mis-setting the
white balance for all my RAW files and I'd like to get this figured out
before I continue.

Anyway, thanks in advance...!

Brian

More about : color mgmt photoshop

Anonymous
March 2, 2005 12:51:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>when I view the images in the 'Windows Picture and
>Fax Viewer', which I assume uses the monitor's profile ...

Actually this program is NOT color managed so it ignores your monitor
profile.

>the images are a little bit cool, but for the most part look
relatively
>as I expected they should. However, when I open the images
>in Photoshop, they are far warmer in appearance. When I use the
>View->Proof Setup->Monitor RGB then I get the cool colors again.

This means your monitor ICC profile is inaccurate, for whatever reason.
When you do View->Proof Setup->Monitor RGB what you're actually doing
is telling Photoshop to ignore the ICC profile and show you what the
image would look like if the profile were skipped (like in non-color
managed programs). This is a dead give-away that the profile is hosed
up.

>I would like to know what else I should be looking at, etc, in order
> to begin working on this issue.

Where did you get your monitor profile, from Adobe Gamma or from a
hardware solution like the Spyder or ?? I've helped a dozen or so
people with problems like this (I'm an "Adobe Certified Expert" in
Photoshop) and every time it was a bad monitor ICC profile. If the
profile is good you would typically see only a slight change in the
image (mostly in highly saturated colors) when turning on/off Proof
Setup->Monitor RGB.

> Samsung 17" LCD 710N Analog monitor, using manufacturer
> provided profile

Ahh, just saw this as I was re-reading your post ... I'd run the free
Adobe Gamma utility and see if the profile generated from this doesn't
solve your problem. The manufacturer's ICC profiles are basically just
starting points and are almost never accurate enough for critical color
work. Let us know if Gamma fixes the problem ...

Bill
March 2, 2005 5:55:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Brian wrote:

> I'm kind of new to color management, but I'm running in to some issues
> with some files I'm trying to process.
>
> Here's my setup:
> Canon G2 camera, shooting RAW & JPG, mostly raw, no profile assigned to
> RAW files? sRGB to JPG
> Samsung 17" LCD 710N Analog monitor, using manufacturer provided
> profile
> Photoshop CS, Adobe RGB (1998) working space
> Windows XP
>


Well first off, I wouldn't use aRGB as the working space for sRGB files,
especially if you aren't =converting= them from sRGB to aRGB. (see below)
For most stuff it's not worth doing anyway as very few printers can print
outside of sRGB and most monitors can't see this part of the color space
either. Then for web use you'd have to recovert to sRGB etc. It's much
safer, at least at first, to just do -everything- in sRGB. Make sure you
have all the ask for mismatch and ask for missing profile checkboxes marked
in color preferences. Also you need to know what color space the RAW files
realy are and then assign (don't convert) to the correct color space on
opening the files. I got lost at first with a RAW converter that wasn't
assigning a color space and I didn't understand the difference between
assign and convert (or even exactly what color space the RAW converter was
putting the image into). If it's a sRGB (most likely) you'd want to assign
it as sRGB then then change it from sRGB to aRGB if you really feel you
need to use aRGB. I don't see much point since the image isn't originally
from the larger aRGB color space.

Also as someone else sugested, at least try using Adobe gama and use that as
a monitor profile as well.

My guess is somehow your sRGB files are being opening in PS =assigned= to
aRGB but not =converted= to aRGB so are really still the unconverted sRGB
"color number" files but are being displayed as aRGB. If this sounds
confusing, just stop using aRGB as your working color space, set it to sRGB
in color preferences and see if this fixes the problem. I bet it does.

A good easy to read book on color managment is color confidence by Tim Grey,
got my copy from Amazon used for $5. WELL worth reading. I convinced my to
buy a custom printer profile and buy a hardware monitor profiler and I'm
amazed, especially with the custom printer profile, at how much better my
prints are. Just FYI I got my printer profile from Cathy's profiles on the
web.
--

Stacey
Related resources
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 11:25:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Also you need to know what color space the RAW files
>realy are

RAW files do not have a color space per se. You assign one when you do
the conversion.

> If it's a sRGB (most likely)

Most decent dSLRs capture colors much wider than even AdobeRGB's gamut,
much less the severely restricted gamut of sRGB. Photoshop ACR offers
ProPhoto RGB for wide gamut images, for example. If your camera's RAW
files have a gamut similar to sRGB you must have a really poor camera.

>For most stuff it's not worth doing anyway as very few printers can
print
>outside of sRGB and most monitors can't see this part of the color
space
>either.

This is pretty much the lowest common denominator approach ...
certainly anyone with a high end Canon or HP or Epson inkjet or someone
printing on a good laser like the Chromira or LightJet is throwing away
millions of possible tonal gradations using sRGB, and if you have a
good monitor calibrated with a colorimeter you'll also be able to view
most of the AdobeRGB colors on the screen. sRGB is used mostly for the
web (where images are non-color managed and monitors are assumed to be
non-calibrated) or for printing at the Fuji Frontier type places, where
the process has been dumbed down for the masses sending in jpegs.

Bill
March 2, 2005 11:55:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RAW files do not have a color space per se. You assign one when you
do
the conversion. "

Is this something that has to be done manually or will it always ask
when opening the file because the color space (none) is different than
the working space (currently aRGB)...?

Thanks for the updated information! I have a G2 right now, but
hopefully either a 20D or something similar within 6 or so months...:) 
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 2:52:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>> Bill wrote ...
>>
>> RAW files do not have a color space per se. You assign one
>> when you do the conversion

> Brian wrote ...
>
>Is this something that has to be done manually ...

There's a place to set this in the RAW converter software. It's
confusing because you can assign a working space like sRGB or AdobeRGB
in the camera menu, BUT this is only used for jpegs (which are
basically a RAW conversion done in-camera to a fixed set of
parameters). If you do the RAW conversion yourself then the in-camera
setting is irrelevant since the actual profile assignment isn't done
until you convert and you can pick the working space to convert to.
For example, Canon's DPP has three choices (sRGB, AdobeRGB and wide
gamut), Adobe CS RAW has four choices and the pro conversion program I
use lets you assign ANY profile.

Bill
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 2:58:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>1. I calibrated the monitor using Adobe Gamma and it is much closer to

>what photoshop is displaying now. There only a very slight difference


Good, glad to help. This problem comes up a couple of times a month on
the Photoshop NG and it's ALWAYS a bad monitor profile :) 

>2. Does anyone know what color space ACR assigns to the images when
it
>converts them?

It's up to you .... when you have the conversion window open look in
the bottom left corner for "Space" and there are four choices in the
drop-down menu ... sRGB and AdobeRGB you already know about ...
Colorsync is used mostly by Mac people, ProPhoto RGB is an ultra wide
gamut space used sparingly, typically with saturated colors that would
clip in AdobeRGB. Stick with AdobeRGB or sRGB for the most part. Note
that whatever in-camera profile you've assigned is ignored here where
the actual conversion takes place, as I said in the other post.

Bill
March 2, 2005 4:28:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks Bill!

Brian
March 3, 2005 2:37:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill Hilton wrote:

>>Also you need to know what color space the RAW files
>>realy are
>
> RAW files do not have a color space per se. You assign one when you do
> the conversion.

Depends on the RAW software. Some just "default" to sRGB, don't give a
choice or even tell you they are doing this and then don't even tag the
files at to the color space. Used with their own printing/editing software,
it's not an issue. If you use it in other color aware software, it creates
a nightmare.

>
>> If it's a sRGB (most likely)
>
> Most decent dSLRs capture colors much wider than even AdobeRGB's gamut,
> much less the severely restricted gamut of sRGB.

Sure but is the OP talking about a dSLR? And if he's going to use it for web
output, sRGB is the best way to display it.

> Photoshop ACR offers
> ProPhoto RGB for wide gamut images, for example. If your camera's RAW
> files have a gamut similar to sRGB you must have a really poor camera.

Sure but does the camera output anything other than sRGB?

>
>>For most stuff it's not worth doing anyway as very few printers can
> print
>>outside of sRGB and most monitors can't see this part of the color
> space
>>either.
>
> This is pretty much the lowest common denominator approach ...

Yes and for someone starting out in this, it's a lot less confusing. And
reread his post, Raw with no profile assigned and jpegs are sRGB. I bet the
RAW's are sRGB as well.

> certainly anyone with a high end Canon or HP or Epson inkjet or someone
> printing on a good laser like the Chromira or LightJet is throwing away
> millions of possible tonal gradations using sRGB,

Then again how much of a difference this makes is subjective. A wide gamut
file printed with whacked colors because the user is confused about color
managment is going to look a lot worse than a correct sRGB one! ;-)

That said, I convert RAWs to aRGB, work and print in aRGB and only convert
to sRGB if needed. I just thought for the OP using sRGB throughout might
solve his problem.

--

Stacey
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 4:02:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill Hilton <bhilton665@aol.com> wrote:

> if you have a
> good monitor calibrated with a colorimeter you'll also be able to view
> most of the AdobeRGB colors on the screen.

I don't think that is quite true. The gamut of a monitor is
restricted by the phosphors it uses, and the green primary of Adobe
RGB is not usually realizable.

Andrew.
March 7, 2005 1:48:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Has anyone ever tried the Samsung MagicTune "set to sRGB" setting?

Update: My friend changed the monitor settings because it was "too
green" and now I'm not able to get the color back where I had it. As
it stands now, the photoshop preview looks warmer than usual and the
preview looks much cooler (again). The CMYK proof setting (I don't
even know if I should be using it) looks horrible - the blacks turn
almost green resulting in an extremely cloudy and low contrast image.

Tonight I'm going to try resetting the monitor to its defaults and then
using both Adobe Gamma and MagicTune to see if I can get back to what I
had before.

Ugh - this *is* frustrating!

Bill Hilton wrote:
> >1. I calibrated the monitor using Adobe Gamma and it is much closer
to
>
> >what photoshop is displaying now. There only a very slight
difference
>
>
> Good, glad to help. This problem comes up a couple of times a month
on
> the Photoshop NG and it's ALWAYS a bad monitor profile :) 
>
> >2. Does anyone know what color space ACR assigns to the images when
> it
> >converts them?
>
> It's up to you .... when you have the conversion window open look in
> the bottom left corner for "Space" and there are four choices in the
> drop-down menu ... sRGB and AdobeRGB you already know about ...
> Colorsync is used mostly by Mac people, ProPhoto RGB is an ultra wide
> gamut space used sparingly, typically with saturated colors that
would
> clip in AdobeRGB. Stick with AdobeRGB or sRGB for the most part.
Note
> that whatever in-camera profile you've assigned is ignored here where
> the actual conversion takes place, as I said in the other post.
>
> Bill
Anonymous
March 7, 2005 4:22:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Brian writes ...
>
>My friend changed the monitor settings because it was "too
>green" and now I'm not able to get the color back where I had it.

When you generate a profile (like with Adobe Gamma) it's a two step
process ... basically you set the monitor up to a known good state
("calibration") and then the calibration tool generates a profile based
on these settings and how things appear on the screen
("characterization"). If you change the brightness or contrast or
color settings you need to run both steps again since the
characterization is no longer valid.

This is no doubt why your original factory profile didn't give good
results, they generated it using different settings than what you're
using with your monitor. Probably even a different white balance point
since the screen gets warmer/cooler when you turn the profile on/off.

>Tonight I'm going to try resetting the monitor to its defaults and
then
>using both Adobe Gamma and MagicTune to see if I can get back to what
I
>had before.

You should rely on one or the other (whatever MagicTune is) but not
both. Note that when you run Gamma it puts a program in your Startup
file (Start > All Programs > Startup) that loads the Adobe Gamma
settings into your video card LUTs so if you use something else for
monitor calibration you need to delete Gamma from Startup.

>Ugh - this *is* frustrating!

If you can't get Adobe Gamma to work right maybe it's time to buy one
of the colorimeter packages from ColorVision or similar, you can get a
good basic one for $200. Gamma should work, more or less.

Bill
March 7, 2005 9:18:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hey Bill,

One more question...should other programs (real rhapsody, etc) have
really muddy blacks when the monitor is profiled correctly? I have it
reset to the point you described before - the main difference between
photoshop editing and proofing with the monitor rgb is in the highly
saturated colors, but everything else looks weird now - wow this is
confusing!!

Thanks in advance!

Bill Hilton wrote:
> >1. I calibrated the monitor using Adobe Gamma and it is much closer
to
>
> >what photoshop is displaying now. There only a very slight
difference
>
>
> Good, glad to help. This problem comes up a couple of times a month
on
> the Photoshop NG and it's ALWAYS a bad monitor profile :) 
>
> >2. Does anyone know what color space ACR assigns to the images when
> it
> >converts them?
>
> It's up to you .... when you have the conversion window open look in
> the bottom left corner for "Space" and there are four choices in the
> drop-down menu ... sRGB and AdobeRGB you already know about ...
> Colorsync is used mostly by Mac people, ProPhoto RGB is an ultra wide
> gamut space used sparingly, typically with saturated colors that
would
> clip in AdobeRGB. Stick with AdobeRGB or sRGB for the most part.
Note
> that whatever in-camera profile you've assigned is ignored here where
> the actual conversion takes place, as I said in the other post.
>
> Bill
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 12:30:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>Brian writes ...
>
>My friend changed the monitor settings because it was "too
>green" and now I'm not able to get the color back where I had it.

There are two separate steps when you generate the monitor profile.
First you adjust the brightness and contrast to set the black point and
overall brightness, then you define a target white balance. This is
"calibration", bringing the monitor to a known good state. The next
phase is measuring actual colors (if you have a hardware solution) and
generating the ICC profile, known as "characterization".

Once any of the color controls or brightness or contrast controls are
changed your profile is no longer accurate, so you have to go thru the
steps again. This is probably why your original Samsung-provided
profile was so far off, they likely didn't use the same settings and
probably assumed a different white balance, ie, 5000K vs 6500K or 9300K
if using pre-sets.

>Tonight I'm going to try resetting the monitor to its defaults and
then
>using both Adobe Gamma and MagicTune

Just a heads up on mixing these ... Adobe Gamma creates an executable
file that resides in your Startup directory (Start > All Programs >
Startup) and will load values into your video card's LUTs when the
computer is turned on. If you are using a different program (whatever
MagicTune is) then you should delete the Gamma executable from the
Startup folder.

Bill
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 12:38:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>should other programs (real rhapsody, etc) have
>really muddy blacks when the monitor is profiled correctly?

As mentioned in the previous post, with the first steps in Gamma you
set the correct black point, brightness etc. All programs should
benefit from this "calibration". The second phase, generating the ICC
profile for accurately viewing colors, is taken advantage of only by
programs which are "color managed" in the ICC sense, and probably
Photoshop is the only such program you're using right now.

>the main difference between
>photoshop editing and proofing with the monitor rgb is in the highly
>saturated colors, but everything else looks weird now

When I turn my monitor profile on/off while viewing a test pattern with
bright colors I just see a slight expansion in saturated colors. Email
me if you wish and I'll send you a test pattern that shows this. If
colors are radically shifting then the most common cause is a bad ICC
monitor profile. It's also possible your monitor is too old or broken,
but on a newer monitor it's usually the profile. Maybe time to buy one
of the hardware monitor calibrators like the Spyder or Eye-One? Email
me if you wish, I have some profile analysis tools that can plot the
gamut of a monitor profile and compare it to others.

Bill
!